Background: Honoring the wishes of cancer patients is a responsibility of oncologists; however, end-of-life care (EOLC) discussions are frequently delayed past the point of usefulness.
Objective: To develop a patient-reported outcome (PRO) screening tool that facilitates timing of EOLC discussions.
Design: A seven-item PRO instrument covering four clinical and personhood domains [performance status, pain, burden (financial and family), and depression] was administered to patients with advanced malignancies undergoing noncurative therapy. The PRO instrument included the patient's assessment of the importance of each domain. Results were correlated with the oncologist's assessment of appropriateness of continuing aggressive therapy.
Setting/subjects: Four hundred thirty-three patients fully completed the PRO instrument between February and March 2015 at a single outpatient cancer center.
Results: There was a difference (p < 0.0001) in median scores among cohorts deemed by their oncologists appropriate to continue noncurative treatments versus patients whose physicians were contemplating or actively engaged in EOLC discussions. The scores for the four individual domains also differed among cohorts. An upper threshold score comprising 46% of patients deemed appropriate to curtail treatment (but inclusive of only 26% of patients deemed appropriate to continue) was determined, facilitating identification of patients for EOLC discussions.
Conclusions: A seven-item patient-centric PRO instrument was able to separate advanced malignancy patients into cohorts who their physicians deemed were at differing stages in their cancer journey with increasing needs for advance care planning. A study to determine if the threshold scores identified in this pilot correlate with palliative/EOL consultation frequency and patient survival is underway.