It is an excruciating question for cancer patients with a prognosis of only months to live: Should they try another round of chemotherapy?
Guidelines for oncologists say no for very sick patients, those who are often bedridden and cannot handle most daily needs themselves. But for patients who are more self-sufficient, chemotherapy is considered a reasonable option. Despite its well-known toxic side effects, many end-stage patients and their doctors have considered chemotherapy worth trying, believing it may ease discomfort or buy time.
Now, a new study suggests that even those stronger patients may not benefit from end-of-life chemotherapy — and that for many, their quality of life may worsen in their final weeks compared with patients who forgo last-ditch treatment.
Photo: Olivier Asselin/ Reuters
“It worsened quality of life for those that are relatively healthy, and those are the ones that the guidelines support treating,” said Charles Blanke, a medical oncologist at Oregon Health & Science University, who was not involved in the study. “Chemotherapy is supposed to either help people live better or help them live longer, and this study showed that chemotherapy did neither.”
The study, published Thursday in JAMA Oncology, followed 312 adult patients with a prognosis of six months or less to live. The patients, in six oncology clinics across the country, all had solid-tumor cancers that had metastasized. The types included lung, colon, pancreatic and breast cancer, among others. About half opted for end-stage chemotherapy.
After each died, researchers asked the relative or caregiver most knowledgeable about their well-being to rate the patient’s physical and psychological distress and overall quality of life in their last week of life. (The caregivers’ views were considered reliable because their assessment at the study’s outset matched the patients’ own quality-of-life assessments.)
For patients who were sicker at the start, caregiver ratings of their last week’s quality of life were similar whether they received chemotherapy or not. But for the 122 patients with fewer initial symptoms, results were striking. Of those receiving chemotherapy, 56 percent were reported to have lower quality of life in their last week, compared with 31 percent of those who did not have chemotherapy.
Holly Prigerson, a director of the Center for Research on End-of-Life Care at Weill Cornell Medical College in New York and the study’s principal investigator, said she and colleagues had expected “the exact opposite.”
“The real kicker is it’s the people who are performing well, who are thinking they’re going to benefit, that didn’t,” she said.
Perhaps healthier patients might feel greater dismay from the side effects because they had “further to fall,” said Blanke, who co-wrote an editorial about the study.
Researchers also said there was no difference in survival between chemotherapy and non-chemotherapy groups. However, the study was not devised to measure survival, and experts cautioned against relying on those observations.
Some oncologists said that while the study tackled a difficult question in a careful manner, patients and doctors should avoid generalizing based on its results.
Thomas Gribbin, an oncologist in Grand Rapids, Michigan, noted that patients were seen between 2002 and 2008, before some newer chemotherapy drugs with fewer side effects or the ability to directly target certain tumors or cancer-causing mutations.
“Doctors have been learning who not to treat and I think this captures what we did 10 years ago,” Gribbin said. “A lot of the chemicals we would use today are not necessarily toxic to every organ in your body. And we have improvement in how we manage side effects.”
Most important, he and others said, is that chemotherapy advice to patients should be highly individualized.
“Some patients desire to live as long as possible, some people are looking for excellent quality of life all along, and some people want to hang on three months till their daughter’s wedding,” Gribbin said.
Lowell Schnipper, chairman of the American Society of Clinical Oncology’s task force on value in cancer care, said the organization’s guidelines, which were based on chemotherapy’s likelihood of diminishing end-stage tumors, “not the likelihood of improved quality of life,” should remain for now. But he added that future guideline discussions would likely consider quality-of-life studies.
The new study was not a randomized trial, which might be ethically impossible, experts said. And some potentially useful information was either unavailable or not reported, including the type of chemotherapy and patients’ previous treatment history.
Why some chose end-of-life chemotherapy was unclear, although patients who did were more likely to have pancreatic or breast cancer and be younger, more educated, healthier and treated in academic medical centers.
Quality of life in the last week was assessed with three broad questions, providing only a snapshot. Prigerson said future studies should include monthly assessments with more detailed questions.
Oncologists said it was important to realize that patients’ situations and desires can change.
A patient of Gribbin’s, Brian Whalen, 75, with advanced pancreatic cancer, has so far chosen chemotherapy. Its side effects are tolerable, he said, and he has survived months longer than initially predicted.
But, he said, “I am not getting better and I do not expect to.”
If side effects worsen or he becomes more disabled, Whalen said he would stop treatment: “I will not go out miserable. I would hope to be able to smile until my last day.”
Last week Joseph Nye, the well-known China scholar, wrote on the Australian Strategic Policy Institute’s website about how war over Taiwan might be averted. He noted that years ago he was on a team that met with then-president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁), “whose previous ‘unofficial’ visit to the US had caused a crisis in which China fired missiles into the sea and the US deployed carriers off the coast of Taiwan.” Yes, that’s right, mighty Chen caused that crisis all by himself. Neither the US nor the People’s Republic of China (PRC) exercised any agency. Nye then nostalgically invoked the comical specter
Relations between Taiwan and the Czech Republic have flourished in recent years. However, not everyone is pleased about the growing friendship between the two countries. Last month, an incident involving a Chinese diplomat tailing the car of vice president-elect Hsiao Bi-khim (蕭美琴) in Prague, drew public attention to the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) operations to undermine Taiwan overseas. The trip was not Hsiao’s first visit to the Central European country. It was meant to be low-key, a chance to meet with local academics and politicians, until her police escort noticed a car was tailing her through the Czech capital. The
April 15 to April 21 Yang Kui (楊逵) was horrified as he drove past trucks, oxcarts and trolleys loaded with coffins on his way to Tuntzechiao (屯子腳), which he heard had been completely destroyed. The friend he came to check on was safe, but most residents were suffering in the town hit the hardest by the 7.1-magnitude Hsinchu-Taichung Earthquake on April 21, 1935. It remains the deadliest in Taiwan’s recorded history, claiming around 3,300 lives and injuring nearly 12,000. The disaster completely flattened roughly 18,000 houses and damaged countless more. The social activist and
Over the course of former President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) 11-day trip to China that included a meeting with Chinese Communist Party (CCP) leader Xi Jinping (習近平) a surprising number of people commented that the former president was now “irrelevant.” Upon reflection, it became apparent that these comments were coming from pro-Taiwan, pan-green supporters and they were expressing what they hoped was the case, rather than the reality. Ma’s ideology is so pro-China (read: deep blue) and controversial that many in his own Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) hope he retires quickly, or at least refrains from speaking on some subjects. Regardless