ArticlePsycho-oncology2025
Patient and Family Caregiver Perspectives on Therapy De-Escalation in Cancer: A Scoping Review.
Article in Psycho-oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Understanding the patient journey: Barriers, facilitators, and expectations in joining a chemotherapy de-escalation trial among premenopausal patients with breast cancer.Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland) · 2026Article
- Lack of De-Intensification Models for Female Head and Neck Cancer Patients With Favorable Prognosis.Cancer medicine · 2026Article
- Profiles of research waste in randomized clinical trials comparing de-escalation and escalation strategies for breast cancer treatment.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Patient and Family Caregiver Perspectives on Therapy De-Escalation in Cancer: A Scoping Review.Psycho-oncology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCancer therapy de-escalation aims to reduce treatment intensity, minimizing the burden of short- and long-term toxicities on patients and family caregivers while maintaining current survival rates. While this approach holds potential benefits, it comes at a risk of worse patient health outcomes or treatment failure. An understanding of patient and family caregiver perspectives regarding cancer therapy de-escalation is required to design successful patient-and-caregiver-informed clinical trials, and optimally provide related patient-centered care.
aimTo identify and synthesize the literature about patient and family caregiver perspectives of cancer therapy de-escalation to guide clinical care, research, decision-support resources, and education.
methodsFollowing the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology, a systematic literature search was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and CINAHL. We included quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-methods studies involving patients of all ages and cancer diagnoses and their family caregivers that focused on perceptions of cancer therapy de-escalation. Extracted data were organized according to the Framework for De-implementation in Cancer Care Delivery. Study quality was appraised.
resultsTwenty studies were included. De-escalation perspectives varied between patients and family caregivers, with factors including clinician trust and desire to improve quality of life noted as influential in de-escalation decisions. The decision-making process could be better supported through the provision of timely patient and family caregiver information and clinician communication training.
conclusionCancer therapy de-escalation decisions are complex and multifactorial. Future research exploring which factors influence patient and family decision-making may offer insight into the design of optimal informational and supportive interventions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.