Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42785913›Full record

ReviewESMO open2026

Hope and despair in cancer and other illnesses: a clinical framework for adaptive hope across the illness trajectory.

N I Cherny, H M Chochinov, L Emanuel, C Lethborg, N Coyle, B W Corn

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in ESMO open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

6 authors.

N I ChernyNorman Levan Center for Humanistic Medicine, Helmsley Cancer Center, Shaare Zedek Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel; Hebrew University, Jerusalem, Israel. Electronic address: Nathan@cherny.org.
H M ChochinovCancerCare Manitoba Research Institute, University of Manitoba, Manitoba, Canada.
L EmanuelFeinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, USA.
C LethborgDepartment of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia; Department of Oncology, St. Vincent's Hospital, Melbourne, Australia.
N CoyleSupportive Care Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA.
B W CornHebrew University, Jerusalem, Israel.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Hope and despair are central and often coexisting dimensions of the experience of cancer and other serious illnesses. Hope profoundly shapes how patients understand prognosis, engage with treatment, and make decisions across the illness trajectory. When poorly managed, hope may contribute to prognostic misunderstanding, burdensome overtreatment, erosion of trust, and clinician distress. This narrative review synthesizes empirical and conceptual literature on hope and despair in oncology and serious illness, examining their determinants, clinical manifestations, and implications for communication and decision making. Hope is presented as a dynamic, multidimensional construct that evolves over time. Although initially oriented toward cure or remission, hope often recalibrates toward achievable goals such as symptom control, maintenance of function, relational connection, meaning, dignity, reconciliation, and spiritual peace. Hope and despair are shaped by physical symptoms, psychological state, social context, cultural frameworks, spirituality, and existential concerns. Hope for exceptional outcomes or miracles is common and may coexist with realistic planning and adaptive coping. However, when hope becomes rigid or reality-incongruent, it may impair informed decision making and delay emotional and practical preparation for decline and death. Effective clinical care requires the capacity to sustain adaptive, reality-congruent hope through honest, compassionate, and relationally grounded communication. The review examines psychospiritual, relational, and interdisciplinary approaches that support adaptive hope, including empathic communication, symptom management, meaning-centered interventions, dignity-conserving care, spiritual support, and structured hope-enhancing strategies. The role of clinicians' own reflective and emotional capacities in sustaining hope-supportive care is also explored. Fostering adaptive hope is presented as a core clinical competency in oncology and serious illness care. Integrating communication training, interdisciplinary collaboration, and existentially informed care may improve patient-centered decision making, reduce distress, and enhance the quality of care across the illness trajectory.

Indexed as

HopeNeoplasmsAdaptation, PsychologicalCommunicationDecision MakingHumansadvanced cancercommunicationdistresshopemiraclesserious illness

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.