Factors important to patients' quality of life at the end of life.

BACKGROUND: When curative treatments are no longer options for patients dying of cancer, the focus of care often turns from prolonging life to promoting quality of life (QOL). Few data exist on what predicts better QOL at the end of life (EOL) for advanced cancer patients. The purpose of this study was to determine the factors that most influence QOL at the EOL, thereby identifying promising targets for interventions to promote QOL at the EOL. METHODS: Coping With Cancer is a US multisite, prospective, longitudinal cohort study of 396 advanced cancer patients and their informal caregivers who were enrolled from September 1, 2002, through February 28, 2008. Patients were followed up from enrollment to death a median of 4.1 months later. Patient QOL in the last week of life was a primary outcome of Coping With Cancer and the present report. RESULTS: The following set of 9 factors, preceded by a sign indicating the direction of the effect and presented in rank order of importance, explained the most variance in patients' QOL at the EOL: 1 = (-) intensive care unit stays in the final week (explained 4.4% of the variance in QOL at the EOL), 2 = (-) hospital deaths (2.7%), 3 = (-) patient worry at baseline (2.7%), 4 = (+) religious prayer or meditation at baseline (2.5%), 5 = site of cancer care (1.8%), 6 = (-) feeding-tube use in the final week (1.1%), 7 = (+) pastoral care within the hospital or clinic (1.0%), 8 = (-) chemotherapy in the final week (0.8%), and 9 = (+) patient-physician therapeutic alliance at baseline (0.7%). The vast majority of the variance in QOL at the EOL, however, remained unexplained. CONCLUSION: Advanced cancer patients who avoid hospitalizations and the intensive care unit, who are less worried, who pray or meditate, who are visited by a pastor in the hospital/clinic, and who feel a therapeutic alliance with their physicians have the highest QOL at the EOL.

The influence of age on the likelihood of receiving end-of-life care consistent with patient treatment preferences.

BACKGROUND: Age differences may help to explain discrepancies in medical care received by cancer patients near death. OBJECTIVES: Understanding age differences in advanced cancer patients' end-of-life experiences. DESIGN: NCI and NIMH funded multi-site prospective cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: 396 deceased cancer patients, mean age (58.6 +/- 12.5), in the Coping with Cancer study. MEASUREMENTS: Baseline interviews (Treatment Preference) and 1 week postmortem chart reviews (Treatment Received). RESULTS: 14.1% of patients were 20-44 years old, 54.0% were 45-64 years old, and 31.8% were > or = 65 years old. Compared to younger patients, middle-aged patients wanted less life-prolonging care (OR 0.32; CI 0.16-0.64). In the last week of life, older patients were less likely to undergo ventilation (OR 0.27; CI 0.07-1.00) than younger patients. Middle-aged patients who preferred life-prolonging care were less likely to receive it than younger patients (OR 0.21; CI 0.08-0.54), but were more likely to avoid unwanted life-prolonging care (OR 2.38; CI 1.20-4.75) than younger patients. Older patients were less likely to receive desired life-prolonging care than younger patients (OR 0.23; CI 0.08-0.68), however, they were not more likely to avoid unwanted life-prolonging care than younger patients (OR 1.74; CI 0.87-3.47). CONCLUSIONS: Likelihood of a patient's treatment preference being consistent with care differ by age and treatment preferences. Older patients preferring life-prolonging therapies are less likely to receive them than younger patients; middle-aged patients who want to avoid life-prolonging care are more likely to do so than younger patients. Both findings have implications for patients' quality-of-death, indicating a need for further research.

Health care costs in the last week of life: associations with end-of-life conversations.

BACKGROUND: Life-sustaining medical care of patients with advanced cancer at the end of life (EOL) is costly. Patient-physician discussions about EOL wishes are associated with lower rates of intensive interventions. METHODS: Funded by the National Institute of Mental Health and the National Cancer Institute, Coping With Cancer is a longitudinal multi-institutional study of 627 patients with advanced cancer. Patients were interviewed at baseline and were followed up through death. Costs for intensive care unit and hospital stays, hospice care, and life-sustaining procedures (eg, mechanical ventilator use and resuscitation) received in the last week of life were aggregated. Generalized linear models were applied to test for cost differences in EOL care. Propensity score matching was used to reduce selection biases. RESULTS: Of 603 participants, 188 (31.2%) reported EOL discussions at baseline. After propensity score matching, the remaining 415 patients did not differ in sociodemographic characteristics, recruitment sites, illness acknowledgment, or treatment preferences. Further analyses, adjusted by quintiles of propensity scores and significant confounders, revealed that the mean (SE) aggregate costs of care (in 2008 US dollars) were $1876 ($177) for patients who reported EOL discussions compared with $2917 ($285) for patients who did not, a cost difference of $1041 (35.7% lower among patients who reported EOL discussions) (P =.002). Patients with higher costs had worse quality of death in their final week (Pearson production moment correlation partial r = -0.17, P =.006). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with advanced cancer who reported having EOL conversations with physicians had significantly lower health care costs in their final week of life. Higher costs were associated with worse quality of death.

Mental health, treatment preferences, advance care planning, location, and quality of death in advanced cancer patients with dependent children.

BACKGROUND: Clinicians observe that advanced cancer patients with dependent children agonize over the impact their death will have on their children. The objective of this study was to determine empirically whether advanced cancer patients with and without dependent children differ in treatment preferences, mental health, and end-of-life (EOL) outcomes. METHODS: Coping with Cancer is a National Cancer Institute/National Institute of Mental Health-funded, multi-institutional, prospective cohort study of 668 patients with advanced cancer. Patients with and without dependent children were compared on rates of psychiatric disorders, advance care planning (ACP), EOL care, quality of their last week of life, and location of death. RESULTS: In adjusted analyses, patients with advanced cancer who had dependent children were more likely to meet panic disorder criteria (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 5.41; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 2.13-13.69), more likely to be worried (mean difference in standard deviations [delta], 0.09; P=.006), and more likely to prefer aggressive treatment over palliative care (AOR, 1.77; 95% CI, 1.07-2.93). Patients with dependent children were less likely to engage in ACP (eg, do not resuscitate orders: AOR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.26-0.75) and had a worse quality of life in the last week of life (delta, 0.15; P=.007). Among spousal caregivers, those with dependent children were more likely to meet criteria for major depressive disorder (AOR, 4.53; 95% CI, 1.47-14) and generalized anxiety disorder (AOR, 3.95; 95% CI, 1.29-12.16). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with dependent children were more anxious, were less likely to engage in ACP, and were more likely to have a worse quality of life in their last week of life. Advanced cancer patients and spousal caregivers with dependent children represent a particularly distressed group that warrants further clinical attention, research, and support.