Can oncologists predict survival for patients with progressive disease after standard chemotherapies ?

Prediction of survival is important for patients with advanced cancer so that they can make the most of the rest of their lives. Many cancer patients want to obtain information about their prognosis in a direct and honest manner1–3. Nevertheless, clinicians are often averse to predicting survival4 and divulging prognostic information5, possibly because breaking bad news to a patient can be stressful for the physician. A physician’s level of experience in estimating survival might affect how prognosis is formulated. For example, an inexperienced physician might guess or use “intuition,” ask an “expert,” consult a textbook, search the electronic literature for prognostic studies, rely on their own judgment, or use a prognostic index6. However, even experienced oncologists find it difficult to predict survival time. Indeed, previous studies reported that clinically predicted survival (cps) by oncologists was uncertain7 and optimistic in terminally ill patients with cancer8–11. A systematic review of eight studies reported that cps for terminal ill cancer patients was accurate for only 25%, 43%, and 61% within, respectively, 1, 2, and 4 weeks of actual survival (as)11. Some studies reported that only 20%–25% of predictions were accurate (within ±33% of as); others reported that survival was overestimated in 63%–83% of terminally ill patients8–10,12. ABSTRACT


INTRODUCTION
Prediction of survival is important for patients with advanced cancer so that they can make the most of the rest of their lives.Many cancer patients want to obtain information about their prognosis in a direct and honest manner [1][2][3] .Nevertheless, clinicians are often averse to predicting survival 4 and divulging prognostic information 5 , possibly because breaking bad news to a patient can be stressful for the physician.
A physician's level of experience in estimating survival might affect how prognosis is formulated.For example, an inexperienced physician might guess or use "intuition," ask an "expert," consult a textbook, search the electronic literature for prognostic studies, rely on their own judgment, or use a prognostic index 6 .However, even experienced oncologists find it difficult to predict survival time.Indeed, previous studies reported that clinically predicted survival (cps) by oncologists was uncertain 7 and optimistic in terminally ill patients with cancer [8][9][10][11] .A systematic review of eight studies reported that cps for terminal ill cancer patients was accurate for only 25%, 43%, and 61% within, respectively, 1, 2, and 4 weeks of actual survival (as) 11 .Some studies reported that only 20%-25% of predictions were accurate (within ±33% of as); others reported that survival was overestimated in 63%-83% of terminally ill patients [8][9][10]12 .

Background
Prediction of prognosis is important for patients so that they can make the most of the rest of their lives.Oncologists could predict survival, but the accuracy of such predictions is unclear.

Methods
In this observational prospective cohort study, 14 oncologists treating 9 major adult solid malignancies were asked to complete questionnaires predicting survival based on performance status, oral intake, and other clinical factors when patients experienced progressive disease after standard chemotherapies.Clinically predicted survival (cps) was calculated by the oncologists from the date of progressive disease to the predicted date of death.Actual survival (as) was compared with cps using Kaplan-Meier survival curves, and factors affecting inaccurate prediction were determined by logistic regression analysis.The prediction of survival time was considered accurate when the cps/as ratio was between 0.67 and 1.33.

Results
The study cohort consisted of 75 patients.Median cps was 120 days (interquartile range: 60-180 days), and median as was 121 days (interquartile range: 40-234 days).The participating oncologists accurately predicted as within a 33% range 36% of the time; the survival time was overestimated 36% of time and underestimated 28% of the time.The factors affecting the accuracy of the survival estimate were the experience of the oncologist, patient age, and information given about the palliative care unit.

Current OnCOlOgy-VOlume 21, number 2, April 2014
Copyright © 2014 Multimed Inc.Following publication in Current Oncology, the full text of each article is available immediately and archived in PubMed Central (PMC).
Prediction of survival for patients before terminal illness is more important than that for the terminal stage, because a prediction 1-4 weeks ahead of death might be too late for patients to make the most of their remaining life.
In previous studies, predictions of survival were limited to terminally ill patients with cancer, except in work by Stockler and colleagues 7 .No reports have addressed cps in patients who finished standard chemotherapies and experienced progressive disease.Predictors of prognosis have to be determined to improve the accuracy of cps estimates for such patients.
In this prospective study, we examined the accuracy of cps estimates for patients who experienced progressive disease after standard chemotherapies.

METHODS
This single-centre prospective study was based on a questionnaire (Table i).The study was approved by the institutional review board.

Patients
At the National Cancer Center Hospital in Japan, between October 2010 and October 2011, our study recruited patients with advanced unresectable cancer and patients with progressive disease after standard chemotherapies (Table ii).This observational cohort consisted of adult patients with various solid malignancies, including those of breast, lung, pancreas, colon and rectum, stomach, cervix, endometrium, and ovary, and sarcoma.The attending oncologists (n = 14) were asked to complete the cps questionnaire for patients who had acquired resistance to standard chemotherapies.The cps was estimated by the attending doctor within 7 days (at most) after the diagnosis of progressive disease after standard chemotherapy.Doctors were asked to write the predicted survival as a number of months, weeks, or days at the time of prediction.All completed questionnaires were sent to the clinical trials office.The patients were all followed until death.

Definition of Terms
All primary cancers were diagnosed by pathology examination.The as was defined as the time from the date of diagnosis of progressive disease after standard chemotherapy to the date of death.The cps was defined as the time from the date the questionnaire was completed to the predicted date of death.
Oral intake was judged mainly by the attending doctor using a simple open-ended question: How do you feel about your appetite?The answer was then scored: 1, normal or good; 2, more than 50% of normal oral intake; or 3, less than 50% of normal oral intake.A palliative care unit (pcu) was defined as a place for palliation and residency without chemotherapy and included inpatient or outpatient pcus and home-based hospices.Best supportive care referred to hospice care based in a hospital or at home without any intensive chemotherapy 13 .

Statistical Analysis
We calculated the Spearman correlation coefficient between the as and the cps.The ratio of the cps to the as was calculated for each patient to examine the concordance between the variables.The prediction of survival time was considered accurate when the ratio was in the range 0.67-1.33(that is, a concordance of ±33%) 8 .Survival analysis was performed using the Kaplan-Meier method.Using multivariate regression analysis, we assessed factors affecting the difference between as and cps.
Putative factors affecting successful prediction of survival were examined using multivariate logistic regression analysis.In all statistical analyses, values of p < 0.05 were considered significant.The statistical analyses were performed using SAS 9.3 (SAS Institute, Cary, NC, U.S.A.).

Patient and Physician Characteristics
The study enrolled 75 patients who met the eligibility criteria.Oncologists were stratified according to professional experience: less than 10 years' experience (n = 7) and 10 or more years' experience (n = 7).Table iii shows patient and oncologist characteristics, and Table iv shows the decisions of the oncologists based on patient factors.Nearly 70% of the study patients had a performance status of 0-1 at the time of progressive disease.At that time, approximately 60% were considered preferable for best supportive care by their oncologist, but 70% of all patients did not receive any information about their prognosis.The main reason for that information not being conveyed was uncertainty about the survival prediction or lack of a request for the information.Although the patients had experienced progressive disease after standard chemotherapy, 35% were supposed to receive further chemotherapy.In cases of progressive disease after standard chemotherapies, 80% of patients were referred to hospice before death, and 80% of referred patients died at hospice.

Multivariate Analyses
We examined independent factors correlated with the difference between cps and as (Table v).These variables were significant in multivariate regression analysis for inaccurate survival estimations:

DISCUSSION
In the present study, we investigated the accuracy of cps estimates in patients with advanced cancer who had experienced progressive disease after standard chemotherapy.Survival was accurately predicted in only 36% of cases, although the cps estimate was highly correlated with as overall.The professional experience of the oncologist, patient age, and referral to a pcu were independent factors for a difference between cps and as.
Giving information as needed to patients, including expected survival, is important even though patients might not ask doctors for that information.
In the present study, more than half the patients had a performance status of 0 or 1 at detection of progressive disease after standard chemotherapies.Prediction of survival might have been more difficult for doctors in that setting than in the terminally ill setting.Previous studies reported that only 20%-25% of predictions are accurate in terminally ill cancer patients 8,9 .In our study, 36% of the predictions were in the accurate range, and more than 80% of the predictions were based either on performance status or metastatic lesions (Table iv).As seen in earlier studies, survival predictions for the near future were more accurate than those for more than 6 months into the future (Figure 1 and 2).A report on the association between the professional experience of the oncologist and prediction shows that prognostic accuracy increases with the experience of the doctor 8 ; however, another study reported contradictory findings 10 .Of the oncologists who did not disclose the cps to their patients because the patient did not request that information, 80% had been practicing for less than 10 years.Less-experienced oncologists might tend to build strong doctor-patient relationships, and they might therefore be overly optimistic and unwilling to accept the imminent death of their patients.Alternatively, they might be trying not to scare patients 14 .However, an optimistic cps can result in late referral to a pcu 8 .Indeed, our study findings indicated that patients who were not referred to a pcu had optimistic cps estimates, although the observed relation between pcu referral and cps is preliminary because of the small sample size.Patients should be given enough time to prepare for a pcu and should be in appropriate physical and psychological condition for referral.In addition, patients who have no  information about pcus tend to receive aggressive chemotherapy near the end of life, which can contribute to poor quality of life 13 .Predicting survival time is difficult, and disclosing the prediction to patients is therefore also difficult.In the present study, the cps was disclosed in only 28% of cases.Many articles suggest that most patients with incurable cancer are keen on receiving information regarding their prognosis [1][2][3]15,16 . Most atients would like to know their predicted survival, although physician and patient predictions are largely discordant 17 .Nevertheless, most physicians remain unwilling to disclose prognosis estimates to patients with incurable cancer.In previous studies, physicians favoured providing frank survival estimates in only 37% of cases 18 .Although disclosing the estimated survival time to a patient is not always necessary, doctors should make a considerable effort to communicate with their patients and to help them decide how they wish to live the remainder of their life [19][20][21] .
This study has some limitations.First, because of the small sample size, we might have missed some factors affecting the survival prediction other than experience as an oncologist, patient age, and pcu information given.A larger sample would be required to adequately identify other factors.Second, predictive factors that might improve the accuracy of cps estimates could not be clarified because of variations in patient characteristics and the professional experience of the oncologists.Third, patients might have been told their cps after the questionnaire was completed, which might have affected subsequent care choices.

CONCLUSIONS
Although it is difficult to accurately estimate survival for patients who acquire resistance to standard chemotherapies, an earnest attempt should be made to provide as accurate a cps as possible for patients who wish to have this information so that they can improve their quality of life.Well-planned studies to identify predictive factors that can assist in making an accurate assessment of cps and to determine how best to deliver that information are warranted.

figure 1 figure 2
figure1 The Spearman rank correlation coefficient for clinically predicted survival (cps) compared with actual survival (as) was 0.70 (p < 0.001), indicating a highly significant association.

Current OnCOlOgy-VOlume 21, number 2, April 2014
Copyright © 2014 Multimed Inc.Following publication in Current Oncology, the full text of each article is available immediately and archived in PubMed Central (PMC).
o To the patient o To the family o To neither If you did NOT communicate the cps ("to neither"), why?Current OnCOlOgy-VOlume 21, number 2, April 2014 Copyright © 2014 Multimed Inc.Following publication in Current Oncology, the full text of each article is available immediately and archived in PubMed Central (PMC).

table ii
Development of drug resistance by malignancy egfr = epidermal growth factor receptor.table iii Oncologist and patient characteristics Current OnCOlOgy-VOlume 21, number 2, April 2014 Copyright © 2014 Multimed Inc.Following publication in Current Oncology, the full text of each article is available immediately and archived in PubMed Central (PMC).

table iv
Oncologist decisions about patient factors cps = clinical prediction of survival.

table v
Factors independently correlated with differences between clinical predicted survival (cps) and actual survival in multivariate analysis ci = confidence interval.