Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39765188›Full record

ReviewESMO open2025

A taxonomy of the factors contributing to the overtreatment of cancer patients at the end of life. What is the problem? Why does it happen? How can it be addressed?

N I Cherny, N Nortjé, R Kelly, C Zimmermann, K Jordan, G Kreye, N-S Le, K B Adelson

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in ESMO open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. What is the role of common sense oncology in the Western Pacific?The Lancet regional health. Western Pacific · 2025
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

N I ChernyDepartments Medical Oncology and Palliative Care, Helmsley Cancer Center, Shaare Zedek Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel. Electronic address: Nathan@Cherny.org.
N NortjéCenter for Clinical Ethics in Cancer Care and Department of Critical Care Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA.
R KellyDepartment Medical Oncology, Paula Fox Melanoma and Cancer Center, The Alfred, Melbourne, Australia.
C ZimmermannDepartment Palliative Medicine and Supportive Care, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, Canada.
K JordanDepartment of Haematology, Oncology and Palliative Medicine, Ernst von Bergmann Hospital Potsdam, Potsdam, Germany; Department of Hematology, Oncology and Rheumatology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
G KreyeDepartment of Internal Medicine, Division of Palliative Care, University Hospital Krems, Karl Landsteiner University of Health Sciences, Krems, Austria.
N-S LeDepartment of Internal Medicine, University Hospital Krems, Karl Landsteiner University of Health Sciences, Krems, Austria.
K B AdelsonOffice of Quality and Value, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Many patients with cancer approaching the end of life (EOL) continue to receive treatments that are unlikely to provide meaningful clinical benefit, potentially causing more harm than good. This is called overtreatment at the EOL. Overtreatment harms patients by causing side-effects, increasing health care costs, delaying important discussions about and preparation for EOL care, and occasionally accelerating death. Overtreatment can also strain health care resources, reducing those available for palliative care services, and cause moral distress for clinicians and treatment teams. This article reviews the factors contributing to the overtreatment of patients with cancer at the EOL. It addresses the complex range of social, psychological, and cognitive factors affecting oncologists, patients, and patients' family members that contribute to this phenomenon. This intricate and complex dynamic complicates the task of reducing overtreatment. Addressing these driving factors requires a cooperative approach involving oncologists, oncology nurses, professional societies, public policy, and public education. We therefore discuss approaches and strategies to mitigate cultural and professional influences driving overtreatment, reduce the seduction of new technologies, improve clinician-patient communication regarding therapeutic options for patients approaching the EOL, and address cognitive biases that can contribute to overtreatment at the EOL.

Indexed as

NeoplasmsOvertreatmentTerminal CareHumansPalliative Careadvanced cancercommunicationend-of-life careinformed consentovertreatmentpalliative care

Identifiers

PMID39765188
PMCPMC11758828

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.