Effectiveness of a Multimedia Educational Intervention to Improve Understanding of the Risks and Benefits of Palliative Chemotherapy in Patients With Advanced Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial | Oncology | JAMA Oncology | JAMA Network
[Skip to Navigation]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 35.153.100.128. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
1.
Weeks  JC, Catalano  PJ, Cronin  A,  et al.  Patients’ expectations about effects of chemotherapy for advanced cancer.   N Engl J Med. 2012;367(17):1616-1625. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1204410PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
2.
Meropol  NJ, Weinfurt  KP, Burnett  CB,  et al.  Perceptions of patients and physicians regarding phase I cancer clinical trials: implications for physician-patient communication.   J Clin Oncol. 2003;21(13):2589-2596. doi:10.1200/JCO.2003.10.072PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
3.
Enzinger  AC, Zhang  B, Schrag  D, Prigerson  HG.  Outcomes of prognostic disclosure: associations with prognostic understanding, distress, and relationship with physician among patients with advanced cancer.   J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(32):3809-3816. doi:10.1200/JCO.2015.61.9239PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
4.
Mack  JW, Walling  A, Dy  S,  et al.  Patient beliefs that chemotherapy may be curative and care received at the end of life among patients with metastatic lung and colorectal cancer.   Cancer. 2015;121(11):1891-1897. doi:10.1002/cncr.29250PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
5.
Audrey  S, Abel  J, Blazeby  JM, Falk  S, Campbell  R.  What oncologists tell patients about survival benefits of palliative chemotherapy and implications for informed consent: qualitative study.   BMJ. 2008;337:a752. doi:10.1136/bmj.a752PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
6.
Enzinger  AC, Wind  JK, Frank  E,  et al.  A stakeholder-driven approach to improve the informed consent process for palliative chemotherapy.   Patient Educ Couns. 2017;100(8):1527-1536. doi:10.1016/j.pec.2017.03.024PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
7.
Degner  LF, Sloan  JA, Venkatesh  P.  The Control Preferences Scale.   Can J Nurs Res. 1997;29(3):21-43.PubMedGoogle Scholar
8.
Légaré  F, Kearing  S, Clay  K,  et al.  Are you SURE?: assessing patient decisional conflict with a 4-item screening test.   Can Fam Physician. 2010;56(8):e308-e314.PubMedGoogle Scholar
9.
Mazor  KM, Street  RL  Jr, Sue  VM, Williams  AE, Rabin  BA, Arora  NK.  Assessing patients’ experiences with communication across the cancer care continuum.   Patient Educ Couns. 2016;99(8):1343-1348. doi:10.1016/j.pec.2016.03.004PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
10.
Brehaut  JC, O’Connor  AM, Wood  TJ,  et al.  Validation of a decision regret scale.   Med Decis Making. 2003;23(4):281-292. doi:10.1177/0272989X03256005PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
11.
Cella  DF, Tulsky  DS, Gray  G,  et al.  The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy scale: development and validation of the general measure.   J Clin Oncol. 1993;11(3):570-579. doi:10.1200/JCO.1993.11.3.570PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
12.
Schafer  JL.  Multiple imputation: a primer.   Stat Methods Med Res. 1999;8(1):3-15. doi:10.1177/096228029900800102PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
13.
Leighl  NB, Shepherd  HL, Butow  PN,  et al.  Supporting treatment decision making in advanced cancer: a randomized trial of a decision aid for patients with advanced colorectal cancer considering chemotherapy.   J Clin Oncol. 2011;29(15):2077-2084. doi:10.1200/JCO.2010.32.0754PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
14.
Olver  IN, Whitford  HS, Denson  LA, Peterson  MJ, Olver  SI.  Improving informed consent to chemotherapy: a randomized controlled trial of written information versus an interactive multimedia CD-ROM.   Patient Educ Couns. 2009;74(2):197-204. doi:10.1016/j.pec.2008.08.021PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
15.
Oostendorp  LJM, Ottevanger  PB, Donders  ART,  et al.  Decision aids for second-line palliative chemotherapy: a randomised phase II multicentre trial.   BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2017;17(1):130. doi:10.1186/s12911-017-0529-yPubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Limit 200 characters
Limit 25 characters
Conflicts of Interest Disclosure

Identify all potential conflicts of interest that might be relevant to your comment.

Conflicts of interest comprise financial interests, activities, and relationships within the past 3 years including but not limited to employment, affiliation, grants or funding, consultancies, honoraria or payment, speaker's bureaus, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, royalties, donation of medical equipment, or patents planned, pending, or issued.

Err on the side of full disclosure.

If you have no conflicts of interest, check "No potential conflicts of interest" in the box below. The information will be posted with your response.

Not all submitted comments are published. Please see our commenting policy for details.

Limit 140 characters
Limit 3600 characters or approximately 600 words
    Brief Report
    July 16, 2020

    Effectiveness of a Multimedia Educational Intervention to Improve Understanding of the Risks and Benefits of Palliative Chemotherapy in Patients With Advanced Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial

    Author Affiliations
    • 1Division of Population Sciences, Dana-Farber/Partners CancerCare, Boston, Massachusetts
    • 2Division of Gastrointestinal Oncology, Dana-Farber/Partners CancerCare, Boston, Massachusetts
    • 3Susan F. Smith Center for Women’s Cancers, Dana-Farber/Partners CancerCare, Boston, Massachusetts
    • 4Division of Medical Oncology, University of North Carolina Lineberger Cancer Center, Chapel Hill
    • 5Division of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco
    • 6Division of Medical Oncology, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond
    • 7Division of Medical Oncology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts
    • 8Department of Nursing, Dana-Farber/Partners CancerCare, Boston, Massachusetts
    JAMA Oncol. 2020;6(8):1265-1270. doi:10.1001/jamaoncol.2020.1921
    Key Points

    Question  Does a video/booklet intervention that integrates authentic patient narratives to convey palliative chemotherapy risks and benefits improve patients’ understanding that cure is very unlikely?

    Findings  In this multicenter randomized clinical trial involving 186 patients with metastatic colorectal cancer or locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer initiating palliative chemotherapy, providing a regimen-specific chemotherapy educational video/booklet did not alter patients’ expectations of cure. Despite highlighting prognostic information, it did not increase distress.

    Meaning  Providing a palliative chemotherapy educational video/booklet did not meaningfully improve patients’ understanding of treatment risks and benefits, suggesting that future studies would need to examine intervention modifications or an alternative delivery strategy to improve outcomes.

    Abstract

    Importance  Despite requirements of informed consent, patients with advanced cancer often receive palliative chemotherapy (PC) without understanding that the likelihood of cure is remote.

    Objective  To determine whether a PC educational video and booklet at treatment initiation could improve patients’ understanding of its benefits and risks.

    Interventions  Regimen-specific PC videos and booklets presenting information about logistics, potential benefits, life expectancy (optional), adverse effects, and alternatives. Videos featured authentic patients sharing diverse experiences. After receiving treatment recommendations, research assistants distributed materials to patients for independent review.

    Design, Setting, and Participants  Multicenter randomized clinical trial of patients with advanced colorectal or pancreatic cancer starting first-line or second-line PC in 5 US cancer centers with enrollment from June 2015 to September 2017 and follow-up to December 2019.

    Main Outcomes and Measures  The primary outcome was accurate expectations of chemotherapy benefits at 3 months, defined as responding “not at all likely” to “What is your understanding of how likely the chemotherapy is to cure your cancer?” (from the Cancer Care Outcomes Research and Surveillance study). Secondary outcomes included understanding of adverse effects, decisional conflict (SURE test), regret (Decisional Regret Scale), and distress (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy–General emotional well-being subscale).

    Results  Among 186 patients with advanced colorectal or pancreatic cancer who were starting first-line or second-line PC (94 randomized to usual care, 92 to intervention; mean [SD] age, 59.3 [12.6] [range, 28-86] years; 107 [58%] male; 118 [63.4%] colorectal and 68 [36.6%] pancreatic cancer), most patients wanted “a lot” of information or “as much information as possible” about adverse effects (149, 80.1%), likelihood of cure (148, 79.6%), and prognosis (148, 79.6%). Among the intervention arm, 59 (78%) reviewed the booklet and 30 (40%) reviewed the video within 2 weeks. The primary outcome did not differ between intervention and control arms (52.6%; 95% CI, 40.3%-65.0%; vs 55.5%; 95% CI, 45.1%-66.0%). Accurate adverse effect understanding was more common among intervention than control patients (56.0%; 95% CI, 44.3%-67.7%; vs 40.2%; 95% CI, 29.5%-50.9%; P = .05), although this did not meet the threshold for statistical significance. The intervention did not increase distress, despite frank prognostic information. Other secondary outcomes were similar.

    Conclusions and Relevance  Provision of an educational video and booklet did not alter patients’ expectation of cure from PC. Alternative delivery strategies, such as integration with nurse teaching, could be explored in future studies.

    Trial Registration  ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02282722

    ×