ArticlePloS one2026
Integration of palliative care into phase I oncology trials: A qualitative interview study with patients, informal caregivers, and healthcare providers.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatients with advanced cancer participating in phase I clinical trials often face limited survival while experiencing significant symptom burden. Despite evidence supporting early palliative care integration alongside active cancer treatment to improve quality of life, the role of palliative care in phase I trials remains unclear.
objectiveTo explore perspectives of patients, informal caregivers, and healthcare providers on quality of life and palliative care in phase I oncology trials, including perceived benefits, barriers, and integration strategies.
methodsWe conducted a multi-perspective qualitative interview study across three Belgian university hospitals from September 2022 to July 2024, using convenience and snowball sampling. The semi-structured interviews were analyzed using qualitative content analysis. Ethical approval was gained from the relevant institutions.
resultsParticipants included sixteen patients, five informal caregivers, twelve phase I staff, six oncologists, five palliative care specialists, and four general practitioners. Patients generally reported positive experiences with trial participation, often viewing it as a final opportunity that provided hope and structure. However, quality of life support was inconsistently addressed and largely reactive. While patients reported feeling supported, non-trial providers and caregivers noted limited person-centered care. No systematic approach for introducing palliative care was in place. Palliative care was rarely discussed, hindered by misconceptions such as equating palliative care with terminal care, reluctance from patients and clinicians, and lack of communication between providers. Participants suggested the introduction of routine yet flexible palliative care conversations, as well as improved communication between providers, as strategies towards integration.
conclusionDespite recognized care needs, palliative care is not systematically integrated in phase I oncological trials. Quality of life remains a secondary concern. Integrating palliative care in a structured yet flexible manner could support more holistic, patient-centered care. These findings underscore the need to normalize palliative care as a complementary component of phase I oncological trials.
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.