Lea J Jabbarian1, Renee C Maciejewski2, Paul K Maciejewski2, Judith A C Rietjens3, Ida J Korfage3, Agnes van der Heide3, Johannes J M van Delden4, Holly G Prigerson2. 1. Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC University Medical Centre Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. Electronic address: l.jabbarian@erasmusmc.nl. 2. Cornell Center for Research on End-of-Life Care, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, New York, USA; Division of Geriatrics and Palliative Medicine, Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, New York, USA. 3. Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC University Medical Centre Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. 4. Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, Medical School of Utrecht University, The Netherlands.
Abstract
CONTEXT: Stability of patients' treatment preferences has important implications for decisions about concurrent and future treatment. OBJECTIVES: To examine the stability of treatment preferences and correlates among patients with advanced cancer. METHODS: In this cohort, 104 patients with metastatic cancer, progression after at least one chemotherapy regimen, and an oncologist-estimated life expectancy of six or fewer months participated in structured interviews after clinical visits in which patients' recent scan results were discussed. Interviews were repeated in three monthly follow-ups. At baseline, patients' age, education, sex, race, marital status, insurance status, and type of cancer were documented. At each assessment, patients reported their treatment preferences (i.e., prioritizing life-prolonging vs. comfort), quality of life, and current health status. RESULTS: At baseline (n = 104), 55 (53%) patients preferred life-prolonging care and 49 (47%) preferred comfort care. Patients were followed up for one (n = 104), two (n = 74), or three months (n = 44). Between baseline and Month 1, 84 patients (81%) had stable preferences. During follow-up, preferences of 71 patients (68%) remained stable (equally divided between a consistent preference for life-prolonging and comfort care). Treatment preferences of 33 (32%) patients changed at least once during follow-up. Direction of change was inconsistent. Patients' preferences at baseline strongly predicted preferences at Month 1 (odds ratio = 17.8; confidence interval = 6.7-47.3; P < .001). Description of the current health status at baseline was the only variable significantly associated with stability of preferences at Month 1. CONCLUSION: Two-thirds of patients with advanced cancer had stable preferences. Changes of preferences were often inconsistent and unpredictable. Our findings suggest potential benefits of ongoing communication about preferences.
CONTEXT: Stability of patients' treatment preferences has important implications for decisions about concurrent and future treatment. OBJECTIVES: To examine the stability of treatment preferences and correlates among patients with advanced cancer. METHODS: In this cohort, 104 patients with metastatic cancer, progression after at least one chemotherapy regimen, and an oncologist-estimated life expectancy of six or fewer months participated in structured interviews after clinical visits in which patients' recent scan results were discussed. Interviews were repeated in three monthly follow-ups. At baseline, patients' age, education, sex, race, marital status, insurance status, and type of cancer were documented. At each assessment, patients reported their treatment preferences (i.e., prioritizing life-prolonging vs. comfort), quality of life, and current health status. RESULTS: At baseline (n = 104), 55 (53%) patients preferred life-prolonging care and 49 (47%) preferred comfort care. Patients were followed up for one (n = 104), two (n = 74), or three months (n = 44). Between baseline and Month 1, 84 patients (81%) had stable preferences. During follow-up, preferences of 71 patients (68%) remained stable (equally divided between a consistent preference for life-prolonging and comfort care). Treatment preferences of 33 (32%) patients changed at least once during follow-up. Direction of change was inconsistent. Patients' preferences at baseline strongly predicted preferences at Month 1 (odds ratio = 17.8; confidence interval = 6.7-47.3; P < .001). Description of the current health status at baseline was the only variable significantly associated with stability of preferences at Month 1. CONCLUSION: Two-thirds of patients with advanced cancer had stable preferences. Changes of preferences were often inconsistent and unpredictable. Our findings suggest potential benefits of ongoing communication about preferences.
Authors: Judith A C Rietjens; Agnes van der Heide; Elsbeth Voogt; Bregje D Onwuteaka-Philipsen; Paul J van der Maas; Gerrit van der Wal Journal: Patient Educ Couns Date: 2004-12-08
Authors: Elsbeth Voogt; Agnes van der Heide; Judith A C Rietjens; Anna F van Leeuwen; Adriaan P Visser; Carin C D van der Rijt; Paul J van der Maas Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2005-03-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Craig C Earle; Mary Beth Landrum; Jeffrey M Souza; Bridget A Neville; Jane C Weeks; John Z Ayanian Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-08-10 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Nancy L Keating; Mary Beth Landrum; Selwyn O Rogers; Susan K Baum; Beth A Virnig; Haiden A Huskamp; Craig C Earle; Katherine L Kahn Journal: Cancer Date: 2010-02-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Ida J Korfage; Giulia Carreras; Caroline M Arnfeldt Christensen; Pascalle Billekens; Louise Bramley; Linda Briggs; Francesco Bulli; Glenys Caswell; Branka Červ; Johannes J M van Delden; Luc Deliens; Lesley Dunleavy; Kim Eecloo; Giuseppe Gorini; Mogens Groenvold; Bud Hammes; Francesca Ingravallo; Lea J Jabbarian; Marijke C Kars; Hana Kodba-Čeh; Urska Lunder; Guido Miccinesi; Alenka Mimić; Polona Ozbič; Sheila A Payne; Suzanne Polinder; Kristian Pollock; Nancy J Preston; Jane Seymour; Anja Simonič; Anna Thit Johnsen; Alessandro Toccafondi; Mariëtte N Verkissen; Andrew Wilcock; Marieke Zwakman; Agnes van der Heide; Judith A C Rietjens Journal: PLoS Med Date: 2020-11-13 Impact factor: 11.069
Authors: Jennifer Susan Needle; Sarah Friebert; Jessica D Thompkins; Daniel H Grossoehme; Justin N Baker; JiJi Jiang; Jichuan Wang; Maureen E Lyon Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2022-07-01
Authors: Christopher E Knoepke; Erin L Chaussee; Daniel D Matlock; Jocelyn S Thompson; Colleen K McIlvennan; Amrut V Ambardekar; Elisabeth M Schaffer; Prateeti Khazanie; Laura Scherer; Robert M Arnold; Larry A Allen Journal: Med Decis Making Date: 2021-07-23 Impact factor: 2.583