Enrolment in paediatric oncology early-phase clinical trials: The health-care professionals' perspective

Communicating with families of young people with hard-to-treat cancers: Healthcare professionals' perspectives on challenges, skills, and training

OBJECTIVES

Hard-to-treat childhood cancers are those where standard treatment options do not exist and the prognosis is poor. Healthcare professionals (HCPs) are responsible for communicating with families about prognosis and complex experimental treatments. We aimed to identify HCPs' key challenges and skills required when communicating with families about hard-to-treat cancers and their perceptions of communication-related training.

METHODS

We interviewed Australian HCPs who had direct responsibilities in managing children/adolescents with hard-to-treat cancer within the past 24 months. Interviews were analyzed using qualitative content analysis.

RESULTS

We interviewed 10 oncologists, 7 nurses, and 3 social workers. HCPs identified several challenges for communication with families including: balancing information provision while maintaining realistic hope; managing their own uncertainty; and nurses and social workers being underutilized during conversations with families, despite widespread preferences for multidisciplinary teamwork. HCPs perceived that making themselves available to families, empowering them to ask questions, and repeating information helped to establish and maintain trusting relationships with families. Half the HCPs reported receiving no formal training for communicating prognosis and treatment options with families of children with hard-to-treat cancers. Nurses, social workers, and less experienced oncologists supported the development of communication training resources, more so than more experienced oncologists.

SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS

Resources are needed which support HCPs to communicate with families of children with hard-to-treat cancers. Such resources may be particularly beneficial for junior oncologists and other HCPs during their training, and they should aim to prepare them for common challenges and foster greater multidisciplinary collaboration.

Parents' experiences of being involved in medical decision-making for their child with a life-limiting condition: A systematic review with narrative synthesis

BACKGROUND

Parental involvement in the decision-making processes about medical treatment for children with life-limiting conditions is recognised as good practice. Previous research highlighted factors affecting the decision-making process, but little is known about how parents experience their participation.

AIM

To explore how parents experience their participation in the process of decision-making about treatment and future care for their children with life-limiting conditions.

DESIGN

A systematically constructed review using narrative synthesis. The PRISMA guidelines were followed to report the findings. Databases Medline, EMBASE, SCOPUS, CINAHL and PsycINFO were searched up to December 2023. The study protocol was registered at PROSPERO (RN CRD42021215863).

RESULTS

From the initial 2512 citations identified, 28 papers met the inclusion criteria and were included in the review. A wide range of medical decisions was identified; stopping general or life-sustaining treatment was most frequent. Narrative synthesis revealed six themes: (1) Temporal aspects affecting the experience with decision-making; (2) Losing control of the situation; (3) Transferring the power to decide to doctors; (4) To be a 'good' parent and protect the child; (5) The emotional state of parents and (6) Sources of support to alleviate the parental experience.

CONCLUSIONS

Parental experiences with decision-making are complex and multifactorial. Parents' ability to effectively participate in the process is limited, as they are not empowered to do so and the circumstances in which the decisions are taking place are challenging. Healthcare professionals need to support parental involvement in an effective way instead of just formally asking them to participate.

Multilevel barriers and facilitators of communication in pediatric oncology: A systematic review

Multiple factors can facilitate or impede the fulfillment of communication functions in pediatric cancer. In this systematic review, we evaluated 109 studies from the preceding 20 years that presented qualitative or quantitative evidence of barriers or facilitators to communication in pediatric cancer. Using a multilevel framework developed in our prior study, we then analyzed and categorized the levels of barriers and facilitators identified in included studies. The vast majority of studies focused on individual-level barriers, rather than team, organization/system, collaborating hospital, community, or policy-level barriers. Future studies should explore the full range of factors that affect communication.

End-of-Life Childhood Cancer Research: A Systematic Review

CONTEXT

Children with incurable cancer may participate in research studies at the end of life (EOL). These studies create knowledge that can improve the care of future patients.

OBJECTIVE

To describe stakeholder perspectives regarding research studies involving children with cancer at the EOL by conduct of a systematic review.

DATA SOURCES

We used the following data sources: Ovid Medline, Embase, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and ProQuest (inception until August 2020).

STUDY SELECTION

We selected 24 articles published in English that examined perceptions or experiences of research participation for children with cancer at the EOL from the perspectives of children, parents, and health professionals (HPs).

DATA EXTRACTION

Two authors independently extracted data, assessed study quality, and performed thematic analysis and synthesis.

RESULTS

Eight themes were identified: (1) seeking control; (2) faith, hope, and uncertainty; (3) being a good parent; (4) helping others; (5) barriers and facilitators; (6) information and understanding; (7) the role of HPs in consent and beyond; and (8) involvement of the child in decision-making.

LIMITATIONS

Study designs were heterogeneous. Only one study discussed palliative care research.

CONCLUSIONS

Some families participate in EOL research seeking to gain control and sustain hope, despite uncertainty. Other families choose against research, prioritizing quality of life. Parents may perceive research participation as the role of a "good parent" and hope to help others. HPs have positive views of EOL research but fear that parents lack understanding of the purpose of studies and the likelihood of benefit. We identified barriers to research participation and informed consent.

Stakeholder perspectives on clinical research related to therapies for rare diseases: therapeutic misconception and the value of research

Background

For many rare diseases, few treatments are supported by strong evidence. Patients, family members, health care providers, and policy-makers thus have to consider whether to accept, recommend, or fund treatments with uncertain clinical effectiveness. They must also consider whether and how to contribute to clinical research that may involve receiving or providing the therapy being evaluated.

Objective

To understand why and how patients and families with rare metabolic diseases, specialist metabolic physicians, and health policy advisors choose whether to participate in studies and how they use and value research.

Methods

We conducted separate focus group interviews with each stakeholder group (three groups in total); two groups were conducted by telephone and the third was held in-person. Participants were recruited using purposive sampling. We analyzed each interview transcript sequentially using a qualitative description approach to inductively identify key themes. Several strategies to ensure credibility and trustworthiness were used including debriefing sessions after each focus group and having multiple team members review transcripts.

Results

Four patients/caregivers, six physicians, and three policy advisors participated. Our findings did not support conventional perspectives that therapeutic misconception (gaining access to treatment) is the main motivating factor for patients/caregivers to participate in clinical research. Rather, patients’/caregivers’ expressed reasons for participating in research included advancing science for the next generation and having an opportunity to share their experiences. Patients/caregivers and physicians described the difficulties in weighing risks versus benefits of accepting treatments not well-supported by evidence. Physicians also reported feeling conflicted in their dual role as patient advisor/advocate and evaluator of the evidence. Policy advisors were primarily focused on critically appraising the evidence to make recommendations for the health system.

Conclusions

Stakeholders differ in their perspectives on rare disease research but share concerns about the risks versus benefits of therapies when making individual- and population-level decisions.

Parent recommendation to bank sperm among at-risk adolescent and young adult males with cancer

BACKGROUND

Adolescent and young adult (AYA) males newly diagnosed with cancer are often faced with making quick decisions about whether to cryopreserve ("bank") sperm prior to treatment initiation. Given that parental influence is crucial among young patients, the present study examines the prevalence of and factors associated with parent recommendation to bank sperm.

PROCEDURE

Parents of 13- to 21-year-old males newly diagnosed with cancer and at risk for infertility secondary to impending gonadotoxic treatment completed questionnaires typically within one week of treatment initiation. Medical and sociodemographic data, communication factors, and psychological factors were considered in a logistic regression model of parent report of parental recommendation to bank sperm (yes/no).

RESULTS

Surveys from 138 parents (70.3% female) of 117 AYA males (mean age = 16.1 years, SD = 2.0) were analyzed. Over half of parents recommended banking to their sons (N = 82; 59.4%). Parents who received a provider recommendation to bank sperm (odds ratio [OR] = 18.44, 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.20-81.01, P < 0.001) or who believed in the benefits of banking (OR = 1.22, 95% CI, 1.02-1.47, P = 0.03) were significantly more likely to recommend sperm banking.

CONCLUSIONS

Given parents' role in influencing sperm banking outcomes, provider recommendation and promotion of banking benefits may influence parents and empower initiation of these sensitive discussions with their sons. Utilization of this approach should yield beneficial outcomes regardless of the banking decision.

"Balancing Expectations with Actual Realities": Conversations with Clinicians and Scientists in the First Year of a High-Risk Childhood Cancer Precision Medicine Trial

Precision medicine is changing cancer care and placing new demands on oncology professionals. Precision medicine trials for high-risk childhood cancer exemplify these complexities. We assessed clinicians' (n = 39) and scientists' (n = 15) experiences in the first year of the PRecISion Medicine for Children with Cancer (PRISM) trial for children and adolescents with high-risk cancers, through an in-depth semi-structured interview. We thematically analysed participants' responses regarding their professional challenges, and measured oncologists' knowledge of genetics and confidence with somatic and germline molecular test results. Both groups described positive early experiences with PRISM but were cognisant of managing parents' expectations. Key challenges for clinicians included understanding and communicating genomic results, balancing biopsy risks, and drug access. Most oncologists rated 'good' knowledge of genetics, but a minority were 'very confident' in interpreting (25%), explaining (34.4%) and making treatment recommendations (18.8%) based on somatic genetic test results. Challenges for scientists included greater emotional impact of their work and balancing translational outputs with academic productivity. Continued tracking of these challenges across the course of the trial, while assessing the perspectives of a wider range of stakeholders, is critical to drive the ongoing development of a workforce equipped to manage the demands of paediatric precision medicine.