Abstract
Background The goal of treatment for elderly AML patients is palliative care rather than curative chemotherapy. Advanced care planning (ACP) plays a crucial role in good death. However, the factors associated with ACP and good death have not been well described.
Objective This study aimed to characterize the association between advanced care planning and the outcome of good death in elderly AML patients.
Method AML patients aged ≥60, who received less intensive treatment from August 2020 to December 2021, were interviewed and prospectively followed. All clinical data and potential factors related to ACP and good death were collected.
Results Seventeen AML patients were included during the study period. The median age was 73 years (range 63-88). Twenty-five patients had passed away, with a median survival of 5.5 months. Thirteen patients had undergone ACP. Among them, twelve patients with ACP had passed away, and all had achieved good death, while six out of fifteen in the non-ACP group had achieved good death (p=0.003). Two-thirds of the ACP group initially expected to live for a year when undergoing ACP but later revised their expectations downward. In the non-ACP group, only two patients who achieved a good death were aware that AML would be the cause of death, whereas five out of six in the non-good death group were not aware of it. However, it was found that prognosis understanding alone did not correlate with successful end-of-life care. No other significant factors associated with patient outcomes were identified. Factors associated with the initiation of ACP discussions included decreased platelet count and increased blast count from baseline. Palliative performance status was not predictive when assessed too late. The median time from palliative consultation to death was 3.5 months, which appeared sufficient for patient preparation.
Conclusion The key factor associated with good death was the initiation of ACP discussions with the patient. Decreased platelet count and increased blast count from baseline could serve as warning signs.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Funding Statement
Yes
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
IRB of Faculty of Medicine Chulalongkorn University
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.
