"A very difficult conversation": Challenges and opportunities for improvement in pediatric oncology clinician communication about late effects.

OBJECTIVES: Current approaches to communicating the potential late effects of pediatric oncology treatments leave many patients and families feeling unaware of risks and unprepared for the future. We aimed to identify provider perspectives on early communication about late effects. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with pediatric oncology providers at Dana-Farber/Boston Children's Cancer and Blood Disorders Center from December 2021 to March 2022. Purposeful sampling ensured a diversity of clinical roles. Thematic analysis was conducted using deductive and inductive codes. RESULTS: We interviewed nine pediatric oncology providers; all expressed discomfort discussing potential late effects in early treatment conversations. Barriers to late effects communication included (i) social-emotional factors, including lack of perceived importance to families, worry about emotional burden on families, and provider feelings of helplessness/wanting to provide hope; and (ii) suboptimal set-up/resources, including limitations of consent forms, time constraints, and lack of available data. All providers supported the creation of a communication tool to assist early discussions of late effects. CONCLUSIONS: Communicating about late effect risks poses unique challenges to providers because of the perceived impact on families and the limitations of current practices and available resources. These findings support the need for a late effects communication tool to assist in early communication about late effects risks.

Patient, Caregiver, and Clinician Perspectives on Core Components of Therapeutic Alliance for Adolescents and Young Adults With Advanced Cancer: A Qualitative Study.

Importance: The patient-clinician therapeutic alliance is an important aspect of high-quality cancer care. However, components of the therapeutic alliance in adolescents and young adults (AYAs, aged 12-39 years) with cancer have not been defined. Objective: To identify components of and barriers to the therapeutic alliance between AYAs, caregivers, and clinicians from the perspective of all key stakeholders. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this qualitative study, semistructured in-depth interviews with patients, caregivers, and clinicians were conducted from 2018 to 2021 with no additional follow-up, with content analysis of resulting transcripts. Participants were recruited from Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Kaiser Permanente Southern California, and an online cancer support community (Cactus Cancer Society). Eligible participants were English- or Spanish-speaking. Eligible patients were aged 12 to 39 years with stage IV or recurrent cancer. Eligible caregivers cared for an AYA living with advanced cancer or one who had died within 5 years. Eligible clinicians routinely provided care for AYAs with cancer. Main Outcomes and Measures: Perspectives on therapeutic alliance. Results: Interviews were conducted with 80 participants: 23 were patients (48% were female; 78% were White), 28 were caregivers (82% were female; 50% were White), and 29 were clinicians (69% were female; 45% were White). The mean (SD) age of patients was 29 (7.3) years. Interviews identified 6 components of therapeutic alliance: (1) compassion; (2) sense of connection; (3) clinician presence; (4) information sharing; (5) shared goals; and (6) individualization of care. While some domains were represented in prior models of therapeutic alliance, a unique domain was identified related to the need for individualization of the approach to care for AYA patients and their caregivers. Interviews also identified potential barriers to building the therapeutic alliance specific to the AYA population, including managing discordant needs between patients and caregivers and communication challenges at the end of life. Conclusions and Relevance: This study identified core components and barriers to building therapeutic alliance in the AYA advanced cancer population from the perspective of all the key stakeholders in the relationship. A novel component highlighting the need for individualization was identified. This model enables a deeper understanding of how to build therapeutic alliance in the AYA advanced cancer population, which may guide clinician training and facilitate improved care for this vulnerable population.

Patient-Reported Outcomes in Pediatric Patients With Cancer.

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are reported directly by the patients about their own health. The objective of this article was to provide an overview of PROs in pediatric cancer, to describe how PROs can be incorporated into pediatric cancer clinical trials, and to discuss how PROs can guide symptom management treatment choices in pediatric oncology. Pediatric patient self-report provides a distinct voice in describing their experience compared with family caregiver or clinician report. Thus, every effort should be made to allow children to self-report symptoms, functioning, and other quality-of-life impacts and to use that data to inform treatment decision making. In addition to its incorporation into routine clinical care, it is also important to incorporate PROs into clinical trials to understand the patient experience of treatment toxicities and their impact on quality of life. Key considerations include clearly articulated PRO aims, selection of outcomes, choice of PRO measures, and frequency of PRO assessments. Once PROs are integrated into routine clinical care, it will be important to enable evidence-based symptom management. Strategies should be based on clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). Development and adaptation of care pathways on the basis of CPGs is one approach to standardize evidence-based symptom management at individual institutions. PROs are important to pediatric patients with cancer and their families. Self-report should be emphasized wherever possible. Approaches to enable PRO reporting into routine clinical care and enable preventative and therapeutic actions for symptom management are important. These efforts will optimize quality of life for pediatric patients with cancer.

"There's no playbook for when your kid has cancer": Desired elements of an electronic resource to support pediatric cancer communication.

INTRODUCTION: Acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), the most common childhood malignancy, has a relatively favorable long-term prognosis. Yet the complexity of treatment and the emotionality of the diagnosis leave families feeling unprepared for many aspects of therapy. This qualitative study aimed to identify desired elements and format of a communication resource to support patients and families facing a diagnosis of ALL. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews of 12 parents of children receiving ALL treatment, 10 parents of survivors of ALL, and eight adolescent and young adult (AYA) survivors of ALL were conducted between February and June 2021. The interviews focused on communication experiences throughout treatment and identified domains to be addressed in a resource in development. RESULTS: All participants supported the development of an interactive, electronic health (eHealth) resource to help navigate ALL treatment. They felt a website would be helpful in addressing information gaps and mitigating pervasive feelings of overwhelm. Participants specifically sought: (a) information resources to address feelings of cognitive overload; (b) practical tips to help navigate logistical challenges; (c) clear depictions of treatment choices and trajectories to facilitate decision-making; and (d) additional psychosocial resources and support. Two overarching themes that families felt should be interwoven throughout the eHealth resource were connections with other patients/families and extra support at transitions between phases of treatment. CONCLUSIONS: A new diagnosis of ALL and its treatment are extremely overwhelming. Patients and families unanimously supported an eHealth resource to provide additional information and connect them with emotional support, starting at diagnosis and extending throughout treatment.

Profile Comparison of Patient-Reported and Proxy-Reported Symptoms in Pediatric Patients With Cancer Receiving Chemotherapy.

Importance: The variability in individual symptom and adverse event reporting between pediatric patient-reports and proxy-reports is widely reported. However, the question of whether symptom profiles based on reports from children with cancer and their caregivers are similar or disparate have not yet been studied. Objective: To compare proxy symptom reports with patient self-reports to assess alignment. Design, Setting, and Participants: A multicenter cohort study was conducted from October 2016 to December 2018 from data collected at 9 pediatric cancer centers. Participants were a convenience sample of family caregivers or proxies of children aged 7 to 18 years who had received disease-directed oncology treatment in the form of chemotherapy for at least 1 month. Data were analyzed identifying clusters of individuals (ie, latent profiles) based on various responses (ie, indicators) in August 2021. Exposures: The children of proxy participants received upfront chemotherapy. Children and proxies completed Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) surveys at 2 time points: within 72 hours preceding treatment initiation and following the course of chemotherapy. Main Outcomes and Measures: The latent profile analysis methods were applied to caregiver-proxy reports of PROMIS Pediatric symptom and function measures (anxiety, depressive symptoms, pain interference, fatigue, psychological stress, and physical function-mobility). The instrument categorized respondents as high symptom suffering, medium symptom suffering, and low symptom suffering (hereafter, high, medium, and low symptom groups, respectively). Results: Of 580 approached proxies, 431 (368 [85.00%] were female) identified as legal guardians of children aged 7 to 18 years with a first cancer diagnosis (mean [SD] age, 13.03 [3.40] years; 235 [54.65%] were male). Proxy reports of children's experiences based on the 5 proxy PROMIS measures comprised 3 distinct symptom profiles. The most common proxy assessments of children's experiences were the moderate symptom groups (45.7% [197 of 431]) and the low symptom groups profiles (40.1% [173 of 431]). A high symptom groups profile emerged which represented 14.2% (61 of 431) of proxy assessments. The number of profiles and observed distribution of profile membership was similar between child and proxy reports. Proxy reports of individual symptoms generally recorded higher scores than child reports; however, no significant difference was observed between proxies and child profile model results for the PROMIS measures. Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this cohort study suggest that, at the level of symptom severity profile, proxy caregiver reports may approximate the children's reports and may serve as a guide to care when the child is not able to self-report.

The predictive trifecta? Fatigue, pain, and anxiety severity forecast the suffering profile of children with cancer.

BACKGROUND: Fatigue, pain, and anxiety, symptoms commonly experienced by children with cancer, may predict pediatric symptom suffering profile membership that is amenable to treatment. METHODS: Three latent profiles (Low, Medium, and High symptom suffering) from 436 pediatric patients undergoing cancer care were assessed for association with three single-item symptoms and socio-demographic variables. RESULTS: Pediatric-PRO-CTCAE fatigue, pain, and anxiety severity scores at baseline were highly and significantly associated with the Medium and High Suffering profiles comprised of PROMIS pediatric symptom and function measures. The likelihood of membership in the Medium Suffering group was 11.37 times higher for patients who experienced fatigue severity than those with did not, while experience of pain severity increased the likelihood of the child's membership in the Medium Suffering profile by 2.59 times and anxiety by 3.67 times. The severity of fatigue increased the likelihood of presence in the High Suffering group by 2.99 times while pain severity increased the likelihood of the child's membership in the High Suffering profile by 6.36 times and anxiety by 16.75 times. Controlling for experience of symptom severity, older patients were more likely to be in the Higher or Medium Suffering profile than in the Low Suffering profile; no other socio-demographic or clinical variables had a significant effect on the latent profile classification. CONCLUSION: Clinician knowledge of the strong association between fatigue, pain, and anxiety severity and suffering profiles may help focus supportive care to improve the cancer experience for children most at risk from time of diagnosis through treatment.

Early parental knowledge of late effect risks in children with cancer.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Despite the pervasiveness of late effects in childhood cancer survivors, many parents feel inadequately informed about their child's risks. We assessed early parental knowledge of risks of late effects and predictors of increased knowledge. DESIGN/METHODS: Parents of children receiving cancer treatment at Dana-Farber/Boston Children's Cancer and Blood Disorders Center were surveyed about their knowledge of their child's likelihood of eight late effects. Individual risk for each late effect (yes/no) was assessed using the Children's Oncology Group's Long-Term Follow-Up Guidelines v5 as a reference. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize knowledge scores; ordinal logistic regression was used to identify predictors of higher knowledge. RESULTS: Of 96 parent participants, 11 (11.46%) correctly identified all of their child's risks for the eight late effects. Five of eight was the median number of correctly identified late effect risks. Among 21 parents whose children were at risk for ototoxicity, 95% correctly identified this risk. Conversely, parents of at-risk children were less knowledgeable about risks of secondary malignancy (63% correct identification, of N = 94 at risk), cardiac toxicity (61%; N = 71), neurocognitive impairment (56%; N = 63), and infertility (28%; N = 61). Ordinal logistic regression analysis identified no significant differences in parental knowledge of late effect risks by any factors evaluated. CONCLUSIONS: Gaps in parental knowledge of potential late effects of childhood cancer treatment emerge early in a child's care, and parents are more knowledgeable about some late effects, such as ototoxicity, than others, such as infertility. As no child- or parent-specific factors were associated with increased knowledge of late effect risks, interventions must be applied broadly.

Thinking ahead: Parents' worries about late effects of childhood cancer treatment.

BACKGROUND: Many childhood cancersurvivors experience at least one late effect of treatment, and both late effects and persistent cancer-related worry can negatively impact quality of life in survivorship. Little is known about the prevalence or impact of parental worry about late effects early in treatment. This study evaluated parental perceived likelihood, impact, and worry about late effects of childhood cancer. PROCEDURE: We surveyed 96 parents of pediatric cancer patients at Dana-Farber/Boston Children's Cancer and Blood Disorders Center within a year of diagnosis. Parents were asked about their experiences with late effects communication, general worry about late effects, and specific late effect worries. RESULTS: Most (96%) parents valued information about late effects, and 93% considered late effects in their treatment decision-making. Yet, 24% could not recall receiving any information about late effects, and only 51% felt well prepared for potential late effects. Though only 20% of parents considered their child at high risk of experiencing late effects, 61% were extremely/very worried about late effects. Those who felt their child was at high risk of experiencing late effects were more likely to worry (OR = 4.7, P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Many parents feel inadequately informed about late effects of cancer treatment, and only one-fifth of parents consider late effects to be likely for their child. However, a majority of parents worry about late effects, including ones they think their child is unlikely to experience. Although some worry is anticipated, disproportionate worry may be mitigated by addressing both educational shortfalls and emotional concerns.

"What Matters to Me": What pediatric stem cell transplant patients want their providers to know.

OBJECTIVES: Engagement of pediatric patients in conversations about their healthcare can lead to better psychological and physical outcomes. We used a communication tool called "What Matters to Me" (WMTM) to provide insight into what seriously ill children want to tell their healthcare providers about what is important to them. RESEARCH APPROACH: Content analysis of completed tools. PARTICIPANTS: 21 pediatric patients hospitalized on a stem cell transplant unit. METHODOLOGICAL APPLICATION: Direct content analysis. FINDINGS: Three themes were identified: importance of personal identity, preferences for communication, and preferences for care delivery. INTERPRETATIONS: Children and adolescents with serious medical illnesses are willing to share what matters to them with members of their care team. WMTM provides an opportunity for pediatric units to systematically offer this opportunity to pediatric patients. FINDINGS FOR PSYCHOSOCIAL PROVIDERS: Children and adolescents are able to identify and share what matters to them with their healthcare providers, providing an opportunity for engagement in medical care.

The use of interval-compressed chemotherapy with the addition of vincristine, irinotecan, and temozolomide for pediatric patients with newly diagnosed desmoplastic small round cell tumor.

BACKGROUND: Desmoplastic small round cell tumor (DSRCT) is a rare aggressive sarcoma that affects children and young adults, and portends poor outcomes despite intensive multimodal treatment approaches. We report toxicity, response, and outcomes of patients with DSRCT treated with the addition of vincristine, irinotecan, and temozolomide (VIT) to interval-compressed chemotherapy as per Children's Oncology Group ARST08P1. METHODS: All newly diagnosed pediatric patients with DSRCT treated at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Boston Children's Hospital between 2014 and 2019 as per ARST08P1, Arm P2 with replacement of VAC cycles with VIT, were identified. Medical records were reviewed for clinical and disease characteristics, and treatment response and outcomes. RESULTS: Six patients were treated as per the above regimen. Median age at diagnosis was 15.1 years (range 3.2-16.4) and five patients were male. Five patients had abdominal primary tumors, of which one had exclusively intraabdominal and four had extraabdominal metastases. Two initial cycles of VIT were well tolerated with nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, and constipation as the most common adverse events. Overall response rate defined as partial or complete response after two initial cycles of VIT was 50%. For local control, all patients had surgical resection followed by radiotherapy, and two patients received hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy at the time of surgery. Of the four patients who have completed therapy to date, three remain disease-free with median follow-up time of 46.7 months. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of VIT to interval-compressed chemotherapy is tolerable and active in DSRCT, with activity warranting additional investigation.

Early information needs of adolescents and young adults about late effects of cancer treatment.

BACKGROUND: Adolescent and young adult (AYA) cancer survivors have high risks of late effects. Little is known about the late-effect information needs of AYAs early in treatment or their role in treatment decision making. This study evaluated the importance, quality, and implications of information about late effects in AYAs recently diagnosed with cancer. METHODS: This study surveyed 201 AYAs with cancer who were 15 to 29 years old and were treated at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute (Boston, Massachusetts). Patients were approached within 6 weeks of their diagnosis and were asked about their late-effect and infertility information needs, treatment decision making, and communication outcomes. RESULTS: Forty-five percent of the participants were female; 88% were white. Most AYAs (87% [173 of 200]) considered information about the risks of late effects to be extremely or very important; 80% (159 of 200) valued information about infertility. Many were distressed by information about late effects (53% [105 of 200]) and infertility (45% [89 of 200]); those who considered late-effect information distressing were more likely to value this information (P < .0001). Consideration of late effects (41% [82 of 201]) and infertility (36% [72 of 201]) greatly influenced many patients' treatment decision making. Although 92% of the patients (184 of 199) reported receiving high-quality information about the diagnosis, 57% (113 of 199; P < .0001) and 65% (130 of 199; P < .0001) felt that they had received high-quality information about late effects and infertility, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Most AYAs with cancer value early information about the risks of late effects and infertility, yet many patients felt that they had not received high-quality information about these topics. The development of age-appropriate late-effect communication strategies that recognize high AYA distress may help to address the gap between desired information and perceived information quality.

Parental Considerations Regarding Cure and Late Effects for Children With Cancer.

BACKGROUND: More than 80% of children with cancer become long-term survivors, yet most survivors experience late effects of treatment. Little is known about how parents and physicians consider late-effects risks against a potential survival benefit when making treatment decisions. METHODS: We used a discrete choice experiment to assess the importance of late effects on treatment decision-making and acceptable trade-offs between late-effects risks and survival benefit. We surveyed 95 parents of children with cancer and 41 physicians at Dana-Farber/Boston Children's Cancer and Blood Disorders Center to assess preferences for 5 late effects of treatment: neurocognitive impairment, infertility, cardiac toxicity, second malignancies, and impaired growth and development. RESULTS: Each late effect had a statistically significant association with treatment choice, as did survival benefit (P < .001). Avoidance of severe cognitive impairment was the most important treatment consideration to parents and physicians. Parents also valued cure and decreased risk of second malignancies; physician decision-making was driven by avoidance of second malignancies and infertility. Both parents and physicians accepted a high risk of infertility (parents, a 137% increased risk; physicians, an 80% increased risk) in exchange for a 10% greater chance of cure. CONCLUSIONS: Avoidance of severe neurocognitive impairment was the predominant driver of parent and physician treatment preferences, even over an increased chance of cure. This highlights the importance of exploring parental late-effects priorities when discussing treatment options.

Communication during childhood cancer: Systematic review of patient perspectives.

Effective communication is challenging in childhood cancer, where decisions carry unpredictable and life-threatening implications. We aimed to describe patients' experiences of communicating with clinicians during treatment of childhood cancer. A systematic review of qualitative studies to April 2019 was performed. Eligible studies included patients diagnosed with cancer at age ≤ 18 years and reported their perspectives of communicating with clinicians during treatment of childhood cancer. Data were extracted from primary studies for thematic synthesis. From 101 articles across 25 countries involving 1870 participants who were diagnosed with cancer between ages 3 to 18 years, we identified 6 themes: 1) rendered invisible and powerless (displaced and undermined by adult authority; betrayed and distrustful; feeling neglected; helpless and intimidated; disempowered by lack of information); 2) fear and worry for the future (paralyzed by devastating news; uncertainty, anticipation, and dread; broaching intimate and private topics); 3) burdened with responsibility (pressured and unprepared; balancing external expectations; protecting hope); 4) therapeutic patient-provider relationships (emotional support and encouragement; validated personhood and companionship); 5) safety in trust (truthfulness and transparency; prepared by awareness and understanding; reassured by reliable expertise; depending on adults for protection and difficult decisions; security in expressing opinions and needs); and 6) empowerment and assertive agency (right to individual knowledge and choice; control over own life; partnership and respect; enhancing capacity for self-management). During treatment of childhood cancer, patients gain a sense of respect, safety, and control when they feel clinicians address their information and developmental needs. However, communication that is perceived to be parent-centered can be disempowering. Promoting child agency and partnership may improve care and outcomes for children with cancer.

Parental distress and desire for information regarding long-term implications of pediatric cancer treatment.

BACKGROUND: Parents of children with cancer have unmet information needs regarding future limitations resulting from cancer or its treatment. Prior research has demonstrated that, in early care discussions, clinicians focus on the acute effects of therapy rather than long-term limitations, partly due to worries of causing distress. The validity of concerns regarding distress is unknown. In the current study, the authors evaluated parental distress associated with information regarding future limitations, and the extent to which distress is associated with information preferences. METHODS: The authors surveyed 355 parents of children with cancer within 3 months of diagnosis, and the children's physicians at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Boston Children's Cancer and Blood Disorders Center and the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia. The primary outcome was parental distress associated with information regarding long-term limitations. RESULTS: Approximately 46% of parents found information regarding future limitations to be extremely or very upsetting. In multivariate analysis, parents were more likely to consider information regarding future limitations distressing if they also found prognostic information upsetting (odds ratio [OR], 5.36; P<.001), struggled to accept their child's illness (OR, 2.57; P<.001), or had depression (OR, 1.79; P=.01). However, approximately 92% of parents considered information regarding potential future limitations to be extremely/very important. Those who found information regarding future limitations distressing were more likely to consider it important (96% vs 89%; P=.03) and to desire a precise understanding of their child's risks (92% vs 80%; P=.001). CONCLUSIONS: Although information regarding future limitations caused by cancer treatment is upsetting to many parents, the majority of them desire this information, and those who are distressed are more likely to value this information.

Parent understanding of the risk of future limitations secondary to pediatric cancer treatment.

BACKGROUND: Parents and physicians may have different understandings of a child's risk of future limitations due to cancer or cancer treatment. We evaluated alignment between parent- and physician-estimated risk of late effects. METHODS: We surveyed 352 parents of children with cancer within 12 weeks of diagnosis, and the children's oncologists, at Dana-Farber/Boston Children's Cancer and Blood Disorders Center and Children's Hospital of Philadelphia. We assessed parent and physician estimations of the child's risk of future limitations in physical abilities, intelligence, or quality of life (QOL) due to cancer treatment. Physician-estimated risk of limitations ≥50% was considered high risk. RESULTS: Physicians considered 22% of children at high risk of physical impairments, 9% at high risk for impaired intelligence, and 6% at high risk for impaired QOL. Among high-risk children, 38% of parents recognized this risk in physical abilities, 21% in intelligence, and 5% in QOL. In multivariable analysis, parental understanding of risk, defined as concordant parent and physician estimates, was greater among parents of children at lower risk of future limitations (odds ratio 2.59; 95% confidence interval 1.35-4.96). Regardless of risk, 92% of parents considered it very/extremely important to receive information about potential health implications of cancer treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Although most parents want information about life after cancer, most parents of children at high risk of future impairment do not recognize this risk. Strategies to improve communication about late effects throughout pediatric cancer treatment should prioritize meeting information needs and improving parent understanding of the risk of impairment.

Parent perspectives on information about late effects of childhood cancer treatment and their role in initial treatment decision making.

BACKGROUND: Though most childhood cancer survivors experience late effects of treatment, we know little about parent preferences for late effects information during therapy, or how parents weigh late effects when making treatment decisions. Our objective was to explore how parents of children with cancer consider late effects in initial treatment decision making and during active cancer treatment. METHODS: Semistructured interviews were conducted with 12 parents of children with cancer who were actively receiving treatment at Dana-Farber/Boston Children's Cancer and Blood Disorders Center. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and qualitatively analyzed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Ten of 12 parents reported that they had to decide between two or more treatment options for their child's cancer. Of those, 50% (5/10) considered late effects to be an important factor in their decision making. Most parents wanted early and detailed information about their child's risk of late effects to make treatment decisions and to feel prepared for the future. However, a few parents felt too overwhelmed to focus on late effects at diagnosis. While many recalled extensive late effects information in informed consent discussions, some parents felt these issues were minimally addressed. CONCLUSION: Parents desire detailed information about late effects to make informed treatment decisions and prepare for the future. Despite the role of late effects in treatment decision making, some parents feel that late effects are either inadequately addressed or too overwhelming to process at diagnosis. Parents may benefit from early assessment of their information needs and a return to these issues over time.

Longitudinal parental preferences for late effects communication during cancer treatment.

Few studies have investigated parent preferences for late effects communication during pediatric cancer treatment. We used questionnaire data to assess whether parental preferences for late effects information change over the year after diagnosis. Most parents found this information to be very/extremely important at baseline, assessed soon after diagnosis, (94%, 153/162), 4 months (91%, 147/162), and 12 months (96%, 156/163). Similarly, most parents wanted as much detail as possible about late effects at baseline (85%, 141/165), 4 months (87%, 144/165), and 12 months (83%, 137/165). Parents of children with favorable prognoses preferred more details at baseline (OR 2.94, 1.18-7.31, P = 0.02) than parents whose children had less favorable prognoses.

Parental preparedness for late effects and long-term quality of life in survivors of childhood cancer.

BACKGROUND: Parents of children with cancer desire information regarding the late effects of treatment. In the current study, the authors assessed parents' preparedness for late effects at least 5 years after their child's diagnosis. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted of all eligible parents of children with cancer between April 2004 and September 2005 at Dana-Farber/Boston Children's Cancer and Blood Disorders Center within 1 year of diagnosis, and a follow-up questionnaire was administered at least 5 years later. RESULTS: Approximately 66% of parents of children who were still living, and who were able to be contacted, completed the follow-up questionnaire (91 of 138 parents). Approximately 77% of respondents (70 of 91 respondents) were parents of disease-free survivors and 23% (21 of 91 respondents) were parents of children with recurrent disease. The majority of parents believed they were well prepared for their child's oncology treatment (87%), but fewer felt prepared for future limitations experienced by their children (70%; P = .003 using the McNemar test) or for life after cancer (62%; P<.001). On bivariable analysis among parents of disease-free survivors, parents were more likely to believe themselves to be prepared for future limitations when they also reported that communication with the oncologist helped to address worries regarding the future (odds ratio, 4.50; P = .01). At the time of diagnosis, both parents and physicians underestimated a child's risk of future limitations; 45% of parents and 39% of clinicians predicted future limitations in physical abilities, intelligence, or quality of life, but at the time of the follow-up questionnaire >5 years later, 72% of children experienced limitations in at least 1 domain. CONCLUSIONS: Parents believe themselves to be less prepared for survivorship than for treatment. High-quality communication may help parents to feel more prepared for life after cancer therapy. Cancer 2016;122:2587-94. © 2016 American Cancer Society.