A double-edged sword: Should stage IV non-small cell lung cancer patients be informed of their cancer diagnosis?

Information disclosure to cancer patients in Mainland China: A meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to systematically examine Chinese cancer patients' and families' preferences for information disclosure to the patient, patient awareness, and predictors of patient awareness.

METHODS

The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed. Web of Science, Scopus, Proquest, Taylor & Francis Online, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure were searched in April 2022 and Chinese Biomedical Literature Database in July 2022 for quantitative studies. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool was used for quality assessment.

RESULTS

A total of 22 studies were included, and the average quality score was 0.65/1. Meta-analyses showed that 89.6% and 81.8% of cancer patients wanted to know their diagnosis and prognosis, respectively. Meanwhile, 50.0% and 32.4% of families prefer diagnosis disclosure and prognosis disclosure to the patient, respectively. Significantly more patients than families favored disclosure to the patient. In reality, only 59.3% of cancer patients know their diagnosis, and 19.9% know their prognosis. For predictors, while patients' gender, cancer type (breast cancer or not), treatment method (operation or other), or complications (yes or no) do not influence diagnosis awareness, being younger, being married, having higher educational attainment, having early-stage rather than late-stage cancer, and being in a higher-grade hospital all predict better chances of knowing a diagnosis. No study explored predictors of patients' prognosis awareness. The findings did not vary according to publication time or sample size.

CONCLUSIONS

Chinese cancer patients are eager to know their diagnosis and prognosis, but families are hesitant about disclosure to the patient, and patients' awareness is low. While cultural, legal, and medical backgrounds lay the foundation for information disclosure in Mainland China, case-by-case practical factors also make a difference.

Prognostic Awareness in Terminally Ill Cancer Patients: A Narrative Literature Review of the Processes Involved

High prognostic awareness (PA) is seen by many as a threat to terminal patients' psychological well-being. Whether this concern is supported by evidence or not is still a matter of discussion, given the heterogeneity of existing findings. This ambiguity points to the importance of considering contextual processes involved in the relationship between high PA and psychological outcomes, as a possible mediator and moderator mechanism. Aiming to capture a holistic image of the relationship between PA and the psychological experiences of patients, we adapted a narrative method to synthesize and discusses patient-related (physical symptoms, coping strategy, spirituality) and external (family support, received medical care) processes as potential explaining mechanisms.

Association between prognostic awareness and quality of life in patients with advanced cancer

PURPOSE

Despite the current guidelines supporting open communication about serious news, the evidence about the impact of prognostic awareness on the quality of life in cancer patients is not clear. The aim of this study was to assess the association between quality of life and prognostic awareness in patients with advanced cancer.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional study which involved patients (n = 129) with incurable advanced cancer (estimated by oncologist using 12-month surprise question). Data were collected at oncology departments at 3 hospitals using structured interview in which patients were asked about their quality of life (using Integrated Palliative Outcome Scale-IPOS and a single-item global measure), prognostic awareness, information needs and demographics.

RESULTS

Only 16% of the sample was completely aware of prognosis and 57% was partially aware. Accurate prognostic awareness was significantly associated (p = 0.02) with lower level of quality of life between (when measured by both the IPOS and the single-item scale) patients with accurate prognostic awareness (M = 37.1; 10.4) and partially aware (M = 31.9; 9.1) and unaware patients (M = 30; 7.4). Detailed analysis showed that significant difference between groups was found only for physical symptoms subscales (p = 0.002), not for emotional and communication subscales.

CONCLUSION

Prognostic awareness was found to be negatively associated with physical domain of quality of life, but not with emotional and communication domains. More research is needed on personality factors that might influence the development of prognostic awareness and quality of life.

Patients' Awareness of Advanced Disease Status, Psychological Distress and Quality of Life Among Patients With Advanced Cancer: Results From the APPROACH Study, India

BACKGROUND

Prognostic disclosure to patients with advanced cancer facilitates treatment decisions and goals of care discussions. However, the perspectives of patients, families and physicians differ in this regard across different cultures. Non-disclosure of cancer diagnosis or prognosis is commonly observed in family-centric cultures such as India.

AIM

To assess the prevalence of and factors associated with cancer patients' awareness of advanced disease status; and its with quality of life and psychological distress.

METHODS

Patients for this cross-sectional questionnaire-based survey were recruited from oncology and palliative medicine clinics at a tertiary cancer hospital in India from January 2017 to June 2018. Patients aged ≥ 21 years, aware of cancer diagnosis and receiving oncology treatment for Stage IV solid cancer were included in the study after obtaining written informed consent.

RESULTS

Two hundred patients were enrolled, of which 146 (73%) were not aware of the stage of their malignancy and 9 (4.5%) believed that their disease was at stage I, II or III. Those who were aware of their advanced cancer stage had more years of education (9.9 years vs 8.1 years, p = .05) and had poorer spiritual wellbeing in the faith domain (adjusted difference -1.6, 95% confidence interval -3.1 to -0.1, p = .03) compared to those who were unaware.

CONCLUSION

It is recommended that future studies may explore prognostic understanding in Indian patients according to their socio-cultural, spiritual and educational background.

Optimal communication associated with lower risk of acute traumatic stress after lung cancer diagnosis

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to assess the role of the patient's background and perceived healthcare-related factors in symptoms of acute stress after lung cancer diagnosis.

METHODS

The study population consisted of 89 individuals referred for diagnostic work-up at Landspitali National University Hospital in Iceland and subsequently diagnosed with lung cancer. Before diagnosis, the patients completed questionnaires on sociodemographic characteristics, pre-diagnostic distress (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale), social support, and resilience. At a median of 16 days after diagnosis, the patients reported symptoms of acute stress on the Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R) and experience of communication and support from healthcare professionals and family during the diagnostic period.

RESULTS

Patients were on average 68 years and 52% reported high levels of post-diagnostic acute stress (IES-R > 23) while 24% reported symptoms suggestive of clinical significance (IES-R > 32). Prior history of cancer (β = 6.7, 95% CI: 0.1 to 13.3) and pre-diagnostic distress were associated with higher levels of post-diagnostic acute stress (β = 8.8, 95% CI: 2.7 to 14.9), while high educational level (β = - 7.9, 95% CI: - 14.8 to - 1.1) was associated with lower levels. Controlling for the abovementioned factors, the patients' perception of optimal doctor-patient (β = - 9.1, 95% CI: - 14.9 to - 3.3) and family communication (β = - 8.6, 95% CI: - 14.3 to - 2.9) was inversely associated with levels of post-diagnostic acute stress after lung cancer diagnosis.

CONCLUSIONS

A high proportion of patients with newly diagnosed lung cancer experience high levels of acute traumatic stress of potential clinical significance. Efforts to improve doctor-patient and family communication may mitigate the risk of these adverse symptoms.

Association between early informed diagnosis and survival time in patients with lung cancer

OBJECTIVE

As a malignant tumor with high mortality, lung cancer (LC) often causes great trauma to patients, and a series of negative emotions and a heavy psychological burden accompanies poor prognosis. Whether or not to inform the patients of their condition has always been a controversial topic in the medical community. This retrospective cohort study investigated the association between early informed diagnosis and survival time in patients with LC.

METHODS

A total of 29 825 patients with LC were enrolled between October 2002 and December 2016. The potential factors influencing LC survival were registered, including knowing their cancer diagnosis status, age, gender, pathological type, clinical stage, surgical history, hospital grade, and patient occupation. All participants were followed up every 6 months until June 2017.

RESULTS

In June 2017, 23.1% of the participants still survived. Their median survival time (MST) was 11.20 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 10.98-11.43). Generally, patients that knew their cancer diagnosis had longer MST than those who did not (18.33 months vs 8.77 months, P < .001). By stratified analysis, patients that knew their cancer diagnosis had longer survival time in each subgroup (P < .001, all subgroups). Cox regression analysis showed that knowing their cancer diagnosis was an independent influencing factor for survival in patients with LC (hazard ratio, 0.826; 95% CI, 0.802-0.851; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Knowing their cancer diagnosis contributed to longer survival time in patients with LC, providing clear evidence that medical staff and patients' families should fully disclose cancer diagnoses to patients.

Implementation of the milestones communication approach for patients with limited prognosis: evaluation of intervention fidelity

Background

Despite improvements in diagnostics and therapy, the majority of lung tumours are diagnosed at advanced stage IV with a poor prognosis. Due to the nature of an incurable disease, patients need to engage in shared decision making on advance care planning. To implement this in clinical practice, effective communication between patients, caregivers and healthcare professionals is essential. The Heidelberg Milestones Communication Approach (MCA) is delivered by a specifically trained interprofessional tandem and consists of four milestone conversations (MCs) at pivotal times in the disease trajectory. MC 1 (Diagnosis): i.e. prognosis; MC 2 (Stable disease): i.e. prognostic awareness; MC 3 (Progression): i.e. reassessment; MC 4 (Best supportive care): i.e. end of treatment. In between MCs, follow-up calls are carried out to sustain communication. This study aimed to assess to what extent the MCA was implemented as planned and consolidated in specialized oncology practice.

Methods

A prospective observational process evaluation study was conducted, which focused on the implementation fidelity of the MCA. All MCs during two assessment periods were included. We analysed all written records of the conversations, which are part of the routine documentation during MCs and follow-up calls. Adherence to key aspects of the manual was documented on structured checklists at the beginning of the implementation of the MCA and after 6 months. The analysis was descriptive. Differences between the two assessment periods are analysed with chi-square tests.

Results

A total of 133 MCs and 54 follow-up-calls (t1) and of 172 MCs and 92 follow-up calls (t2) were analysed. MC 2 were the most frequently completed conversations (n = 51 and n = 47). Advance care planning was discussed in 26 and 13% of MC 2 in the respective assessment periods; in 31 and 47% of MC 2, prognostic awareness was recorded. The most frequently documented topic in the follow-up calls was the physical condition in patients (82 and 83%).

Conclusion

The implementation of a trajectory-specific communication concept was largely successful. Additional studies are needed to understand how fidelity could be further improved.

Trial registration

DRKS00013469 / Date of registration: 22.12.2017.

Prognostic Understanding and Quality of Life in Patients With Advanced Lung Cancer: A Multicenter Study

INTRODUCTION

Communication about the palliative setting remains a barrier for many physicians because they are afraid to harm the patient by giving bad news. We sought to determine whether this a valid concern; the influence of prognostic understanding on patients' quality of life (QoL); and which factors influence this relationship.

METHODS

The present multicenter, cross-sectional study used a questionnaire to measure patients' prognostic understanding, QoL, mood, and coping strategy.

RESULTS

We surveyed 125 patients with advanced lung cancer. Prognostic understanding correlated significantly with emotional well-being (r = -0.20; P = .01) and pain (r = 0.43; P = .00) but not with anxiety (r = 0.12, P = .12) or depression (r = 0.05; P = .29). Patients with anxiety (r = -0.23; P = .01) and patients with depressive feelings (r = -0.63; P = .00) experienced poorer QoL. Four in 10 patients reported feelings of anxiety and/or depression. Positive reframing as a coping strategy was associated with a better QoL (r = 0.25; P = .00).

CONCLUSION

Prognostic understanding was related to poorer emotional well-being and more pain but does not affect mood. Four in 10 patients reported feelings of anxiety and/or depression, which were associated with a poorer QoL. A holistic approach seems necessary when physicians communicate about the palliative setting.

Associations between understanding of current treatment intent, communication with healthcare providers, preferences for invasive life-sustaining interventions and decisional conflict: results from a survey of patients with advanced heart failure in Singapore

OBJECTIVES

To make informed choices about use of future invasive life-sustaining interventions (ILSI), patients with congestive heart failure (CHF) need to correctly understand the intent of their current treatments. However, healthcare providers may be wary of having these discussions due to fear of distressing patients. In this study, we assessed whether patients who understand their treatment intent are less willing to undergo ILSI and are indeed more psychologically distressed.

DESIGN, PARTICIPANTS AND OUTCOMES

As part of a cross-sectional survey conducted prior to randomising patients for a trial, we asked 282 patients with advanced CHF (New York Heart Association Class III and IV) whether they believe their existing treatments would cure their heart condition, their willingness to undergo ILSI and assessed their anxiety and depression using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale.

RESULTS

Approximately half of patients reported a willingness to undergo ILSI if needed. Only 22% knew that their current treatments were not curative. These patients were far less willing to undergo ILSI (OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.56) and were not at a greater risk of having clinically significant anxiety (OR 0.72, 0.34 to 1.54) and depression (OR 0.70, 0.33 to 1.47) compared with those who did not understand their current treatment intent.

CONCLUSIONS

Improving patients' understanding of the intent of their current treatments can help patients make informed choices about ILSI.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02299180; Pre-results.