Prospective Study Comparing Clinicians’ and Cancer Patients’ Estimates of Risk of Relapse and Toxicity with Adjuvant Chemotherapy

Abstract

The aim of this study was to compare physicians’ and patients’ estimates of risk of relapse and toxicity. A prospective, cross-sectional, multicenter study including 735 patients with cancer and 29 oncologists. Physicians’ appraisals of risk of relapse with and without chemotherapy (27.5% and 43.1%) and risk of severe toxicity (12.2%) were more realistic than those of patients (34.6%, 78.5%, and 57.4%, respectively). The greater the risk of recurrence and risk of toxicity estimated, the less physicians expressed satisfaction with SDM. Estimations of risk of relapse and toxicity are important in diagnostic and therapeutic decision-making and can help patients face their situation.

Keywords:

• Chemotherapy
• prognosis and response predictions
• quality of life
• supportive care and symptom control
• treatment

Acknowledgments

We thank Priscilla Chase for their assistance in the preparation of this manuscript and IRICOM S.L. team for the support of the website registry. We thank patients, oncologists and participating hospitals for their contribution to the NEOcoping study: HU Central de Asturias (Oviedo), Hospital Universitario (HU) Fundación Alcorcón (Madrid), HU de Canarias (Tenerife), HU Insular de Gran Canarias (Las Palmas), HU La Paz (Madrid), HU Virgen de La Luz (Cuenca), HU Marqués de Valdecilla (Santander), HU La Princesa (Madrid), HU Morales Meseguer (Murcia), Hospital Galdakao-Usansolo (Galdakao), Hospital Grupo Quirón (Sevilla), HU Santa Creu i Sant Pau (Barcelona), HU Son Espases (Mallorca), and Hospital General de Segovia (Segovia).

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. This is an observational trial without intervention.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Disclosure statement

All authors declare that they have no conflict of interest. This is an academic study.

Data availability statement

The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Author contributions

C.C. and P.J.F. participated in the conception research question, implementation of the study protocol, interpretation of data, and drafting of the manuscript.

C.C. and A.C.B. performed the statistical analysis and participated in the interpretation of the data and drafting of the manuscript.

R.M., M.M., E.M.C., O.H., I.G., P.M., and B.C. participated in the study conception, design of research, collected the data, and provided intellectual contribution to drafting the manuscript.

All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Transparency declaration

The lead author affirms that this manuscript is an honest, accurate, and transparent account of the study being reported. The reporting of this work is compliant with STROBE guidelines. The lead author affirms that no important aspects of the study have been omitted and that any discrepancies from the study as planned have been explained.

Additional information

Funding

The study was supported by the FSEOM-Onvida for Projects on Long Survivors and Quality-of-life, SEOM (Spanish Society of Medical Oncology) 2015.