Relationship Between Perceptions of Treatment Goals and Psychological Distress in Patients With Advanced Cancer

To be aware or not to be aware of the prognosis in the terminal stage of cancer? A systematic review of the associations between prognostic awareness with anxiety, depression, and quality of life according to cancer stage

Prognostic awareness (PA) has an important role in promoting informed care planning in cancer patients. However, studies in the literature showed discordant results regarding the impact of PA on psychological and quality of life outcomes. The present systematic review aimed to investigate the associations between PA with anxiety, depression, and quality of life in oncological patients according to early, advanced, and terminal cancer stages. The review adhered to PRISMA guidelines and was registered on PROSPERO. The research identified 42.357 studies, of which 54 were included. The main result showed that the associations of PA with anxiety, depression, and quality of life varied according to the cancer stage. In studies with early and advanced cancer patients, 0 % and 9 %, respectively, showed favourable associations, while in those with terminal cancer patients, 53 % showed favourable associations. In terminal stage cancer, the associations were favourable when patients were enrolled in hospice, had a mean survival time shorter than 60 days, and a mean age older than 65 years. These findings suggest that it could be important within psychological interventions for patients to consider the impact of PA at different stages of cancer. While in the early and advanced stages of cancer, patients might benefit most from interventions focused on implementing psychological resources to face the illness and maintaining a hopeful outlook, in the terminal stage of cancer, it could be important to promote the process of becoming aware of their prognosis.

Survival and risk factors for metastatic colorectal cancer patients with a history of prior malignancy

Given concerns about treatment, there is uncertainty surrounding the effect of prior malignancy on the survival of individuals with metastatic colorectal cancer. This study sought to evaluate how prior malignancy impacts the survival of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Patients diagnosed with stage IV mCRC (per the American Joint Committee on Cancer [AJCC] 6th edition) between 2004 and 2015 were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. Those without a prior history of malignancy were assigned to the control group, whereas those with a prior history of malignancy were assigned to the research group. Propensity score matching (PSM) was utilized to ensure that the baseline characteristics were balanced. The Kaplan‒Meier method was used for survival analysis, as were the multivariate Cox proportional hazard model and multivariate competing risk model. The PSM analysis included 54365 eligible patients with mCRC. Among them, 4,845 (8.9%) had a history of prior malignancy. A history of prior malignancy was associated with a greater cancer-specific survival rate (adjusted hazard ratio (AHR) ) = 0.49; 95% CI [0.47-0.51]). Subgroup analyses revealed that a prior diagnosis of a skin tumour (AHR = 1.37; 95% CI [1.11-1.69]) and a history of prior malignancy of more than five years (AHR = 1.39; 95% CI [1.23-1.57]) had adverse effects on the clinical outcomes of patients with mCRC. Our findings suggest that patients with a prior malignancy diagnosis may experience prolonged survival. Subgroup analysis indicated that a malignancy diagnosed more than 5 years ago may adversely impact the clinical outcomes of patients with mCRC. Therefore, we advocate for active standardized treatment for these patients and propose expanding the range of prior malignancies included in clinical trials based on publication timelines, primary tumour locations, and genetic testing results. The objective is to facilitate timely and proactive treatment for patients following the disclosure of results, thereby instilling confidence in the management of mCRC.

Prognostic Communication, Symptom Burden, Psychological Distress, and Quality of Life Among Patients With Decompensated Cirrhosis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Timely prognostic communication is a critical component of care for patients with decompensated cirrhosis (DC). However, few studies have examined the association of prognostic communication with symptoms, mood, and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in this population.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional study of 218 outpatients with DC, we assessed their self-reported health status (terminally ill vs not terminally ill), their prognostic communication with their hepatologists (Prognosis and Treatment Preferences Questionnaire), symptom burden (Revised Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale), psychological distress (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale), and HRQOL (Short-Form Liver Disease Quality of Life scale). We used linear regression to examine associations among patients' self-reported health status and prognostic communication with their symptom burden, psychological distress, and HRQOL.

RESULTS

Over 75% of patients reported that prognostic communication was helpful for making treatment decisions, maintaining hope, and coping with their disease. However, 81% had never discussed their end-of-life care wishes with their hepatologists. Overall, 36% self-reported a terminally ill health status, which was associated with higher symptom burden (B = 8.33; P = .003), anxiety (B = 1.97; P = .001), and depression (B = 2.01; P = .001) and lower HRQOL (B = -7.22; P = .002). Patients who wished they had more information on their prognosis reported higher symptom burden (B = 7.14; P = .010), anxiety (B = 1.63; P = .005), and depression (B = 1.50; P = .010) and lower HRQOL (B = -7.65; P = .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Although most patients with DC highly valued prognostic communication, the majority reported never discussing their end-of-life care preferences with their hepatologists. Self-reported terminally ill health status and inadequate prognostic communication were associated with poorer symptoms, mood, and HRQOL. Interventions to improve prognostic communication while simultaneously providing adequate supportive care are warranted.

Measuring prognostic awareness in patients with advanced cancer: a scoping review and interpretive synthesis of the impact of hope

BACKGROUND

Assessment of prognostic awareness (PA) in patients with advanced cancer is challenging because patient responses often indicate their hopes. The objectives of this scoping review were to summarize studies that measured PA in patients with advanced cancer and to synthesize data about how PA was measured and whether hope was incorporated into the measurement.

METHODS

MEDLINE and Embase databases were searched from inception to December 14, 2021. Data regarding the impact of hope on assessment of PA were extracted when studies reported on patients' beliefs about prognosis and patients' beliefs about their doctor's opinion about prognosis. An interpretive synthesis approach was used to analyze the data and to generate a theory regarding the incorporation of hope into the assessment of PA.

RESULTS

In total, 52 studies representing 23 766 patients were included. Most were conducted in high-income countries and measured PA based on the goal of treatment (curable vs incurable). Five studies incorporated hope into the assessment of PA and reported that among patients who responded that their treatment goal was a cure, an average of 30% also acknowledged that their doctors were treating them with palliative intent. Interpretive synthesis of the evidence generated a trinary conceptualization of PA patients who are aware and accepting of their prognosis; aware and not accepting; and truly unaware. Each of these groups will benefit from different types of interventions to support their evolving PA.

CONCLUSION

The trinary conceptualization of PA may promote understanding of the impact of hope in the assessment of PA and guide future research.

Perceptions of prognosis and end-of-life care outcomes in patients with advanced lung and gastrointestinal cancer

BACKGROUND

Many patients with advanced cancer have misperceptions of their prognosis, which may impact end-of-life decision-making. Data regarding associations between prognostic perceptions over time and end-of-life care outcomes are lacking.

AIM

To describe patients' perceptions of their prognosis with advanced cancer and examine associations between these perceptions and end-of-life care outcomes.

DESIGN

Secondary analysis of longitudinal data from a randomized controlled trial of a palliative care intervention for patients with newly diagnosed incurable cancer.

SETTING/PARTICIPANTS

Conducted at an outpatient cancer center in the northeastern United States and patients were within 8 weeks of a diagnosis with incurable lung or non-colorectal gastrointestinal cancer.

RESULTS

We enrolled 350 patients in the parent trial, of which 80.5% (281/350) died during the study period. Overall, 59.4% (164/276) of patients reported they were terminally ill, and 66.1% (154/233) reported that their cancer was likely curable at the assessment closest to death. Patient acknowledgment of terminal illness was only associated with lower risk of hospitalizations in the last 30 days of life (OR = 0.52, p = 0.025). Patients who reported their cancer as likely curable were less likely to utilize hospice (OR = 0.25, p = 0.002) or die at home (OR = 0.56, p = 0.043), and they were more likely to be hospitalized in the last 30 days of life (OR = 2.28, p = 0.011).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients' perceptions of their prognosis are associated with important end-of-life care outcomes. Interventions are needed to enhance patients' perceptions of their prognosis and optimize their end-of-life care.

Prognostic awareness and its association with health outcomes in the last year of life

BACKGROUND

Little research has examined changes in prognostic awareness (PA) in the last year of life and the extent PA change was associated with anxiety, depression, and spiritual well-being among metastatic cancer patients.

METHODS

Two surveys were administered in the last year of life to 176 conveniently sampled Singaporean patients with stage 4 solid cancers. PA was assessed by asking patients whether they were aware that their treatments were unlikely to cure their cancer. Multivariable linear regression models were used to investigate the association of PA change with anxiety, depression, and spiritual well-being.

RESULTS

The proportion of patients with accurate PA increased (39.2%-45.5%; p < 0.05) from the second-last assessment to the last assessment before death. Those with inaccurate PA decreased (26.1%-20.4%; p < 0.05) while a third of patients remained uncertain at both assessments (34.7% and 34.1%). Compared to patients with inaccurate PA at both assessments, patients who reported accurate PA at both assessments reported worsened anxiety (β = 2.08), depression (β = 3.87), and spiritual well-being (β = -4.45) while patients who reported being uncertain about their prognosis at both assessments reported worsened spiritual well-being (β = - 6.30) at the last assessment before death (p < 0.05 for all).

CONCLUSIONS

Interventions should dually focus on decreasing prognostic uncertainty at the end-of-life while minimising the psychological and spiritual sequelae associated with being prognostically aware. More research is needed to clarify the causes of prognostic uncertainty.

A qualitative study of interactions with oncologists among patients with advanced lung cancer

INTRODUCTION

To support the care of lung cancer patients, oncologists have needed to stay current on treatment advancements and build relationships with a new group of survivors in an era where lung cancer survivorship has been re-defined. The objectives of the study were to (1) understand the perspectives of advanced lung cancer patients whose tumors have oncogenic alterations about their care experiences with their oncologist(s) and (2) describe the perceptions of advanced lung cancer patients about seeking second opinions and navigating care decisions.

METHODS

In this qualitative study, patients with advanced lung cancer (n = 25) on targeted therapies were interviewed to discuss their ongoing experience with their oncologists. We used deductive and inductive qualitative approaches in the coding of the data. We organized the data using the self-determination framework.

RESULTS

Patients described both positive and negative aspects of their care as related to autonomy, provider competency, and connectedness. Patients sought second opinions for three primary reasons: expertise, authoritative advice, and access to clinical trial opportunities. When there is disagreement in the treatment plan between the primary oncologist and the specialist, there can be confusion and tension, and patients have to make difficult choices about their path forward.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients value interactions that support their autonomy, demonstrate the competency of their providers, and foster connectedness. To ensure that patients receive quality and goal-concordant care, developing decision aids and education materials that help patients negotiate recommendations from two providers is an area that deserves further attention.

Quality of life, psychological distress, and prognostic perceptions in caregivers of patients with multiple myeloma

Although caregivers of patients with multiple myeloma (MM) play a critical role in supporting their loved ones throughout the illness course, studies examining caregiver quality of life (QOL), psychological distress, and prognostic awareness are lacking. We conducted a cross-sectional, multisite study of patients undergoing treatment with MM and their caregivers. Eligible caregivers were enrolled to 1 of 3 cohorts based on lines of therapy. Caregivers completed validated questionnaires to assess their QOL, psychological distress, and perceptions of prognosis. We enrolled 127 caregivers of patients with MM (newly diagnosed [n = 43], 2-3 lines of therapy [n = 40], and ≥4 lines of therapy [n = 44]). Caregiver QOL and psychological distress did not differ by line of therapy. The rate of clinically significant anxiety, depression, and posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms were 44.1% (56/127), 15.8% (20/127), and 24.4% (31/127), respectively. When examined in dyads, caregivers reported higher rates of clinically significant anxiety (44.4% [55/124] vs 22.5% [28/124]) compared with patients with MM. Most caregivers (84.2%, 101/120) reported that the oncologist had informed them that the patient's cancer was incurable; however, only 50.9% (58/114) and 53.6% (59/110) of caregivers acknowledged the patient's cancer was terminal and incurable, respectively. Caregivers of patients undergoing treatment for MM experience substantial psychological distress across the disease continuum, particularly anxiety. The majority of caregivers of patients with MM report that knowing the patient's prognosis is extremely important and report that the oncologist told them that the patient was incurable. Nevertheless, a significant portion of caregivers believe that the patient's MM is curable.

Quality of life, psychological distress, and prognostic perceptions in patients with multiple myeloma

BACKGROUND

Multiple myeloma (MM) is an incurable hematologic malignancy requiring long-term, continuous therapy. Despite its chronic and unrelenting course, studies examining quality of life (QOL), psychological distress, and perceptions of prognosis by line of therapy are lacking.

METHODS

The authors conducted a cross-sectional, multisite study of patients undergoing treatment for MM (excluding maintenance) between June 2020 and January 2021. The authors conducted purposeful sampling and recruited patients to 3 cohorts based on lines of therapy: 1) newly diagnosed receiving first-line therapy; 2) 2 to 3 lines; and 3) 4 or more lines. Patients completed validated questionnaires to assess their QOL, fatigue, psychological distress, and perceptions of prognosis.

RESULTS

A total of 180 patients with MM were enrolled (newly diagnosed [n = 60], 2 to 3 lines [n = 60], and ≥4 lines of therapy [n = 60]). QOL, symptom burden, and fatigue scores did not differ by lines of therapy. There were no statistically significant differences in psychological distress by line of therapy. The rates of clinically significant depression, anxiety, and post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms were 23.9% (43 of 180), 23.9% (43 of 180), and 24.4% (44 of 180), respectively. Most patients (84.7%, 149 of 176) reported that their oncologist told them their cancer was incurable, but only 30.6% (53 of 173) acknowledged that they were terminally ill, and 42.0% (73 of 174) reported that they thought their cancer was incurable.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with MM undergoing treatment experience impaired QOL and elevated psychological distress across the disease continuum, regardless of line of therapy. A substantial proportion of patients with MM have significant misperceptions about their prognosis and the curability of their illness despite reporting being informed of the prognosis by their oncologist.

LAY SUMMARY

This study discusses 180 patients with MM (newly diagnosed [n = 60], 2-3 lines [n = 60], and ≥4 lines of therapy [n = 60]). Quality of life, symptom burden, and fatigue scores do not differ by lines of therapy. There are also no statistically significant differences in psychological distress by line of therapy. The rates of clinically significant depression, anxiety, and post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms are 23.9%, 23.9%, and 24.4%, respectively. Most patients (84.7%) report that their oncologist told them their cancer was incurable, but only 30.6% acknowledge that they are terminally ill, and 42.0% report that they thought their cancer was incurable.

Helping Patients Communicate With Oncologists When Cancer Treatment Resistance Occurs to Develop, Test, and Implement a Patient Communication Aid: Sequential Collaborative Mixed Methods Study

BACKGROUND

Most cancer-related deaths result from disseminated diseases that develop resistance to anticancer treatments. Inappropriate communication in this challenging situation may result in unmet patient information and support needs. Patient communication aids such as question prompt lists (QPLs) may help.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to develop and pilot-test a specific QPL in the following two contrasting clinical contexts in France after cancer resistance has developed: triple-negative and luminal B metastatic breast cancer (MBC) and metastatic uveal melanoma (MUM).

METHODS

A sequential study design with a mixed methods collaborative approach will be applied. The first step aims to build a specific QPL. Step 1a will explore oncologist-patient communication issues from oncology professionals' interviews (n=20 approximately). Step 1b will appraise information and support needs experienced by patients with MBC or MUM both quantitatively (n=80) and qualitatively (n=40 approximately). These data will be used to develop and pilot-test a QPL specific to patients with cancer experiencing initial or acquired resistance to treatment. We expect to obtain a core QPL that comprises questions and concerns commonly expressed by patients with resistant cancer and is complemented by specific issues for either MBC or MUM cancer sites. In step 1c, 2 focus groups of patients with any type of metastatic cancer (n=4) and health care professionals (n=4) will be conducted to revise the content of a preliminary QPL and elaborate an acceptable and feasible clinical implementation. In step 1d, the content of the QPL version 1 and implementation guidance will be validated using a Delphi process. Step 2 will pilot-test the QPL version 1 in real practice with patients with MBC or MUM (n=80). Clinical utility will be assessed by comparing responses to questionnaires administered in step 1b (QPL-naive historical control group) and step 2 (QPL intervention group).

RESULTS

This study received grants in March and December 2019 and was approved by the French national ethics committee in July 2019. As of October 2021, interviews with oncology professionals have been conducted and analyzed (N=26 to reach saturation), and 39 and 27 patients with MBC and MUM, respectively, have been recruited.

CONCLUSIONS

A clinically and culturally tailored QPL is expected to facilitate patients' participation in consultations, improve oncologists' responses to patients' information and support needs, and thus foster patients' psychological adjustment to the diagnosis and follow-up of cancer resistance to treatment.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04118062; http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04118062.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

DERR1-10.2196/26414.

Development of a Prognostic Awareness Impact Scale for Patients with Advanced Cancer

Background: No reliable instruments exist to measure prognostic awareness and its psychological and behavioral impacts for patients with advanced cancer. Methods: We developed the Prognostic Awareness Impact Scale (PAIS) using a qualitative approach. During phase 1, we convened a working group with a transdisciplinary team of clinicians from oncology (n = 2), psychology (n = 2), psychiatry (n = 1), palliative care (n = 3), and survey development (n = 1) to identify key domains of PAIS. Using a consensus-driven process, the team generated an item bank for each domain. During phase 2, we conducted cognitive interviews with 39 patients with advanced cancer to assess the understandability of the PAIS. Results: The working group developed a conceptual framework for PAIS, identifying three domains: (1) cognitive understanding of prognosis (capacity to understand intellectually one's prognosis), (2) emotional coping (capacity to process prognostic uncertainty and terminal prognosis), and (3) adaptive response (capacity to use prognostic awareness to inform life decisions). Cognitive interviews revealed that patients had an accurate understanding of most PAIS items. Patients reported difficulty with binary response options for questions pertaining to emotional coping. They expressed difficulty answering numerous questions regarding their cognitive understanding of their prognosis. We revised the PAIS by (1) replacing binary response options with ordinal agreement scales; and (2) reducing the number of items focused on cognitive understanding of prognosis. Conclusion: We developed a conceptual framework to capture prognostic awareness and its psychological and behavioral impacts for patients with advanced cancer using the PAIS. Future work should focus on validating the PAIS by testing its psychometric properties.

NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Palliative Care, Version 2.2021

Palliative care has evolved to be an integral part of comprehensive cancer care with the goal of early intervention to improve quality of life and patient outcomes. The NCCN Guidelines for Palliative Care provide recommendations to help the primary oncology team promote the best quality of life possible throughout the illness trajectory for each patient with cancer. The NCCN Palliative Care Panel meets annually to evaluate and update recommendations based on panel members' clinical expertise and emerging scientific data. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize the panel's recent discussions and highlights updates on the importance of fostering adaptive coping strategies for patients and families, and on the role of pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic interventions to optimize symptom management.

Existential distress in patients with advanced cancer and their caregivers: study protocol of a longitudinal cohort study

INTRODUCTION

At the end of life, patients with advanced cancer and their informal caregivers may confront multiple existential concerns. Despite the strong potential to alleviate existential distress through psychosocial interventions, existential distress and its impact on healthcare outcomes have not yet been studied systematically. We aim to investigate the frequency, longitudinal trajectory and predictive impact of existential distress on end-of-life outcomes. We further aim to determine patients' and caregivers' specific need for and utilisation of psychosocial support for existential distress.

METHODS

This longitudinal cohort study will consecutively recruit 500 patients with advanced cancer and 500 caregivers from oncological outpatient and inpatient clinics. Participants will complete self-report questionnaires (sociodemographic and disease-related characteristics, existential distress, end-of-life outcomes, resources and support needs) at five points of assessment (at baseline and after 3, 6, 9 and 12 months). At baseline and 6-month follow-up, we will conduct structured diagnostic interviews to assess mental disorders. Statistical analyses will include descriptive statistics to determine the prevalence of existential distress, mental disorders and end-of-life outcomes; multiple linear and logistic regression analyses to calculate the predictive impact of existential distress on end-of-life outcomes; and growth mixture models to analyse longitudinal trajectories of existential distress.

DISCUSSION

This study will provide comprehensive knowledge about patients' and caregivers' existential concerns. The longitudinal empirical data will allow for conclusions concerning the frequency and course of existential distress throughout 1 year. This important extension of existing cross-sectional research will contribute to further develop targeted psychosocial interventions. Profiles of existential distress may be applied by clinicians from multiple professions and help to address existential concerns effectively.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study was approved by the institutional research ethics committee (reference number LPEK-0177). Results will be presented at scientific conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals. Other forms of dissemination will include sharing results on the psychometric properties of the structured demoralisation interview with international research groups and communication with healthcare professionals providing psychosocial treatment for patients and caregivers. Following scientific standards, our progress will be regularly updated on ClinicalTrials.gov.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04600206.

Patient Perceptions of Treatment Benefit and Toxicity in Advanced Cancer: A Prospective Cross-Sectional Study

PURPOSE

Prior studies show that many patients receiving palliative cancer therapies misperceive likelihood of cure. Patients' understanding of treatment benefits and risks beyond cure is unknown. We explore patient perceptions of palliative treatment in the novel therapeutic era.

METHODS

We surveyed patients with advanced solid cancers and their oncologists regarding benefits and risks of palliative therapies. We assessed perceived likelihood of tumor response, survival benefit, symptom palliation, and side effects. We used generalized estimating equations to calculate least squares means of misperception (patient-assessed minus physician-assessed likelihood of benefit), accounting for clustering by physician, and compared the degree of misperception by participant characteristics.

RESULTS

Of the 119 patients enrolled, median age was 65 years (range, 59-73 years), 55% were male, and 56% had prior treatment. Treatments included chemotherapy (60%), immunotherapy (24%), and targeted therapy (15%). Compared with their oncologists, patients overestimate curability (median misperception, 20%; interquartile range [IQR], 0 to 60), chances of tumor response (median, 20%; IQR, 0 to 40), symptom palliation (median, 10%; IQR, -10 to 30), and survival benefit (median, 20%; IQR, 0 to 40). Toxicity was relatively accurately estimated (median, 0.5%; IQR, -20 to 20). Immunotherapy was associated with higher risk of misperception of tumor response and toxicity. Misperceptions of tumor response and curability did not correlate (r = 0.13, P = .15).

CONCLUSION

Compared with their oncologists, patients overestimated chances of tumor response, symptom palliation, and survival benefit, but accurately perceived likelihood of toxicity. There was no strong correlation between perception of curability and other goals of therapy. Communication focused on treatment goals alongside risks may reduce misperceptions and facilitate informed choices by patients.

Prognostic Awareness in Caregivers of Patients with Incurable Cancer

Background: Little is known about how patients with incurable cancer and caregivers differ in their prognostic awareness, and the relationship between caregiver prognostic awareness and their psychological distress. Objective: To investigate prognostic awareness in caregivers of patients with incurable cancer and prognostic discordance in patient-caregiver dyads and its association with psychological distress. Design: This is a cross-sectional study. Setting/Subjects: In total, subjects were 390 caregivers of adults with incurable lung, gastrointestinal, and brain cancers at a cancer center in the northeastern United States. Measurements: The Prognosis and Treatment Perceptions Questionnaire was used to assess prognostic awareness and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale to assess psychological distress. Results: In total, 39.7% (n = 147/370) and 17.3% (n = 64/370) caregivers reported clinically significant anxiety and depression symptoms. And 53.7% of caregivers reported the patients' cancer as "curable" and 44.1% reported the cancer was "not terminal." Caregivers' report of curability was not associated with their anxiety (odds ratio [OR] = 0.99, p = 0.93) or depression (OR = 1.05, p = 0.32) symptoms. Among 42.5% (124/292) and 26.0% (76/292) of dyads (n = 292), both patients and their caregivers agreed in their perception of the cancer as curable and incurable, respectively. In 19.9% of dyads (n = 58), patients reported their cancer as curable, while their caregivers reported it as incurable. In 11.6% of dyads (n = 34), patients reported the cancer as incurable while caregivers reported it as curable. Conclusions: More than half of caregivers have misperceptions about the patients' likelihood of cure, and one-third of patient-caregiver dyads have discordant perceptions. Supportive care interventions may facilitate conversations and enhance prognostic understanding in patients with incurable cancer and their caregivers.