PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - Spooner, Caitlin
AU  - Vivat, Bella
AU  - White, Nicola
AU  - Stone, Patrick
TI  - Outcomes of prognostication in people living with advanced cancer: a qualitative study to inform a Core Outcome Set
AID  - 10.1101/2024.02.08.24302518
DP  - 2024 Jan 01
TA  - medRxiv
PG  - 2024.02.08.24302518
4099  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/02/08/2024.02.08.24302518.short
4100  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/02/08/2024.02.08.24302518.full
AB  - Objective Studies of prognostication in advanced cancer use a wide range of outcomes and outcome measures, making it difficult to compare these studies and their findings. Core Outcome Sets facilitate comparability and standardisation between studies and would benefit future prognostic research. This qualitative study is the second step in developing such a Core Outcome Set, with the aim to explore the perceptions and experiences of patients with advanced cancer, informal caregivers, and clinicians regarding the potential outcomes of prognostication.Methods A qualitative study using semi-structured interviews and framework analysis, informed by the Core Outcome Measures for Effectiveness Trials (COMET) taxonomy. We conducted semi-structured interviews with patients living with advanced cancer (n=8), informal caregivers (n=10), and clinicians (n=10) recruited from palliative care services across three sites in London, United Kingdom. Interviews were conducted in-person, via telephone, or video conferencing.Results We identified 33 outcomes, 16 of which were not previously reported in the literature. We grouped outcomes into 10 domains, using a modified COMET taxonomy: 1) mortality/survival; 2) general physiological/clinical outcomes; 3) psychiatric outcomes; 4) spiritual/religious/existential functioning/wellbeing; 5) emotional functioning/wellbeing; 6) social functioning; 7) delivery of care; 8) perceived health status; 9) personal circumstances; 10) societal/carer burden.Conclusions This study offers valuable insights into outcomes significant to key stakeholders, underscoring the need for a patient-centred approach in research and clinical practice in prognostication in advanced cancer. These outcomes will play a key role in the development of a Core Outcome Set to assess the impact of prognostication in advanced cancer.What is already known on this topic?Previous studies have developed and validated prognostic models in palliative care, but there has been a lack of research evaluating the impact of such models on clinically relevant outcomes.The perspectives of patients, informal caregivers, and clinicians on prognostication in advanced cancer are under-explored.The growing field of patient-reported outcome measurement indicates that the lived experiences of patients and informal caregivers provide valuable insights into care preferences, and how these align with or differ from current clinical practices.What this study addsThis study identified 33 outcomes of prognostication, of which 16 (48%) had not previously been included in existing literature.The qualitative data presented are a valuable resource for a Core Outcome Set for assessing the impact of prognostication in advanced cancer.How this study might affect research, practice, or policyThe final Core Outcome Set will enable increased consistency between future studies evaluating the effects of different methods of prognostication on clinically relevant outcomes.Findings from future, more consistent and comparable, research studies will assist clinicians in deciding which methods of prognostication are preferable.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Clinical Protocols https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10504625/ Funding StatementThis study was supported by the Economic and Social Research Council and Marie Curie Cancer Care (grant number ES/P000592/1) as part of CSs PhD studentship.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:Ethical approval was granted by the London-Camberwell St. Giles Research Ethics Committee and Health Research Authority on 6th September 2022 (reference 22/LO/0469).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.YesI 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).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.YesData are available upon reasonable request. The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.