| Abstract: |
Purpose. Patients with advanced lung cancer typically receive chemotherapy at the cost of receiving care that may promote quality of life more effectively. The authors examined whether offering chemotherapy and hospice concurrently, a clinically appropriate but often unavailable option, might resolve this problem. Method. Adult smokers (N = 198) completed an Internet-based survey in which they imagined having advanced lung cancer. Participants rated the effectiveness of 4 treatments (supportive care alone, chemotherapy with supportive care, hospice, and chemotherapy with hospice) at achieving 4 goals of treatment (extending survival, controlling symptoms, avoiding side effects, and promoting quality of life at the end of life). Results. Reflecting utilization patterns of lung cancer patients, few respondents preferred supportive care alone (10%) or hospice (19%), and many preferred chemotherapy (29%). The most common choice was concurrent chemotherapy and hospice (42%). Treatments that involved chemotherapy were seen as the most effective at extending survival, whereas treatments that involved hospice were seen as most effective at promoting quality of life. Effectiveness ratings were weakly related to preferences for hospice, moderately related to preferences for chemotherapy with supportive care, and strongly related to preferences for chemotherapy and hospice together. Conclusions. These findings suggest that interest in hospice may be low because, offered without chemotherapy, hospice is perceived as ineffective at controlling symptoms and avoiding side effects. Chemotherapy and hospice together may be a preferred option for treating advanced lung cancer. Furthermore, preferences for chemotherapy and hospice together best reflect the values people placed on the goals of treatment. |
