ArticleJAMA oncology2024
Systemic Anticancer Therapy and Overall Survival in Patients With Very Advanced Solid Tumors.
Article in JAMA oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 12 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prognostic Value of Performance Status, Albumin, and CRP in Last-Line Chemotherapy for Pancreatic vs. Other Gastrointestinal Cancers-Simple Tools Matter.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2024Trial
- SHIELD: An AI Framework for Skeletal Health Intelligence and Early Lesion Detection to Improve Orthopedic Referrals.Journal of medical systems · 2026Article
- Palliative care use and end-of-life care quality in HR+/HER2- metastatic breast cancer.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2025Article
- Novel Systemic Anticancer Treatments and Health Services Use at the End of Life Among Adults With Cancer.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2025Article
- Advance care planning for adults with cancer.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Article
- Family satisfaction with the end-of-life discussions and resuscitation orders for patients with severe COVID-19: a multicenter study in Saudi Arabia.BMC medical ethics · 2025Article
- Machine learning for prediction of 30-day mortality in patients with advanced cancer: comparing pan-cancer and single-cancer models.ESMO real world data and digital oncology · 2025Article
- We Need to Talk About Quality of Life with Cancer Patients: Primum Non Nocere in Oncology.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Article
- Review
- The Erosion of Healthcare and Scientific Integrity: A Growing Concern.Journal of healthcare leadership · 2025Review
- Trends in use of intensive care during hospitalizations at the end-of-life among older adults with advanced cancer.Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Importance: Two prominent organizations, the American Society of Clinical Oncology and the National Quality Forum (NQF), have developed a cancer quality metric aimed at reducing systemic anticancer therapy administration at the end of life. This metric, NQF 0210 (patients receiving chemotherapy in the last 14 days of life), has been critiqued for focusing only on care for decedents and not including the broader population of patients who may benefit from treatment. Objective: To evaluate whether the overall population of patients with metastatic cancer receiving care at practices with higher rates of oncologic therapy for very advanced disease experience longer survival. Design, Setting, and Participants: This nationwide population-based cohort study used Flatiron Health, a deidentified electronic health record database of patients diagnosed with metastatic or advanced disease, to identify adult patients (aged ≥18 years) with 1 of 6 common cancers (breast cancer, colorectal cancer, non-small cell lung cancer [NSCLC], pancreatic cancer, renal cell carcinoma, and urothelial cancer) treated at health care practices from 2015 to 2019. Practices were stratified into quintiles based on retrospectively measured rates of NQF 0210, and overall survival was compared by disease type among all patients treated in each practice quintile from time of metastatic diagnosis using multivariable Cox proportional hazard models with a Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons. Data were analyzed from July 2021 to July 2023. Exposure: Practice-level NQF 0210 quintiles. Main Outcome and Measure: Overall survival. Results: Of 78 446 patients (mean [SD] age, 67.3 [11.1] years; 52.2% female) across 144 practices, the most common cancer types were NSCLC (34 201 patients [43.6%]) and colorectal cancer (15 804 patients [20.1%]). Practice-level NQF 0210 rates varied from 10.9% (quintile 1) to 32.3% (quintile 5) for NSCLC and 6.8% (quintile 1) to 28.4% (quintile 5) for colorectal cancer. No statistically significant differences in survival were observed between patients treated at the highest and the lowest NQF 0210 quintiles. Compared with patients seen at practices in the lowest NQF 0210 quintiles, the hazard ratio for death among patients seen at the highest quintiles varied from 0.74 (95% CI, 0.55-0.99) for those with renal cell carcinoma to 1.41 (95% CI, 0.98-2.02) for those with urothelial cancer. These differences were not statistically significant after applying the Bonferroni-adjusted critical P = .008. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, patients with metastatic or advanced cancer treated at practices with higher NQF 0210 rates did not have improved survival. Future efforts should focus on helping oncologists identify when additional therapy is futile, developing goals of care communication skills, and aligning payment incentives with improved end-of-life care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.