Cancer surgeons' attitudes and practices about discussing the chance of operative "cure"

Abstract

Background: While physician attitudes about treatment goals have been examined around end-of-life care, surgeon attitudes regarding communication of therapeutic goals prior to cancer-directed operations have not been investigated. We examined how surgeons discuss the potential for cancer "cure" prior to operative treatment and how surgeons perceive patient priorities and treatment goals.

Methods: Surgeons were invited to complete a Web-based survey about attitudes and practices when discussing cancer-directed operations, including how they defined cancer cure and whether and how they discussed cure as a treatment goal.

Results: A total of 551 e-mail invitations were sent and opened; 205 responses were received (response rate 37.2%). While 44.9% of surgeons reported being asked about cure in all or most discussions, only 37.6% used the word cure as often. When discussing cure, an equal number of surgeons reported using qualitative versus quantitative language to express probability of cure (45.7% and 47.4%, respectively). Roughly one third of surgeons (n = 65, 31.7%) defined cure as 5-year, disease-free survival; 36.1% (n = 74) defined cure as absence of recurrence over the patient's lifetime; and 21 (10.2%) defined cure as return to baseline population risk for that specific cancer. Over half of surgeons (n = 112, 56.9%) perceived that to "be cured" was among the top 2 priorities of patients presenting for operative treatment.

Conclusion: When discussing relative benefits and goals of therapy, surgeon self-reported discussions of cure varied considerably. Despite identifying cure as a top priority for patients, surgeons were not inclined to incorporate cure into discussions of risks, benefits, and goals of therapy.