Prognostic tools or clinical predictions: Which are better in palliative care?
<h4>Purpose</h4>The Palliative Prognostic (PaP) score; Palliative Prognostic Index (PPI); Feliu Prognostic Nomogram (FPN) and Palliative Performance Scale (PPS) have all been proposed as prognostic tools for palliative cancer care. However, clinical judgement remains the principal way by...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
2021-01-01
|
| Series: | PLoS ONE |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0249763 |
| _version_ | 1819278111872647168 |
|---|---|
| author | P Stone V Vickerstaff A Kalpakidou C Todd J Griffiths V Keeley K Spencer P Buckle D Finlay R Z Omar |
| author_facet | P Stone V Vickerstaff A Kalpakidou C Todd J Griffiths V Keeley K Spencer P Buckle D Finlay R Z Omar |
| author_sort | P Stone |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | <h4>Purpose</h4>The Palliative Prognostic (PaP) score; Palliative Prognostic Index (PPI); Feliu Prognostic Nomogram (FPN) and Palliative Performance Scale (PPS) have all been proposed as prognostic tools for palliative cancer care. However, clinical judgement remains the principal way by which palliative care professionals determine prognoses and it is important that the performance of prognostic tools is compared against clinical predictions of survival (CPS).<h4>Methods</h4>This was a multi-centre, cohort validation study of prognostic tools. Study participants were adults with advanced cancer receiving palliative care, with or without capacity to consent. Key prognostic data were collected at baseline, shortly after referral to palliative care services. CPS were obtained independently from a doctor and a nurse.<h4>Results</h4>Prognostic data were collected on 1833 participants. All prognostic tools showed acceptable discrimination and calibration, but none showed superiority to CPS. Both PaP and CPS were equally able to accurately categorise patients according to their risk of dying within 30 days. There was no difference in performance between CPS and FPN at stratifying patients according to their risk of dying at 15, 30 or 60 days. PPI was significantly (p<0.001) worse than CPS at predicting which patients would survive for 3 or 6 weeks. PPS and CPS were both able to discriminate palliative care patients into multiple iso-prognostic groups.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Although four commonly used prognostic algorithms for palliative care generally showed good discrimination and calibration, none of them demonstrated superiority to CPS. Prognostic tools which are less accurate than CPS are of no clinical use. However, prognostic tools which perform similarly to CPS may have other advantages to recommend them for use in clinical practice (e.g. being more objective, more reproducible, acting as a second opinion or as an educational tool). Future studies should therefore assess the impact of prognostic tools on clinical practice and decision-making. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-24T00:06:49Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-6363b21906db4d829f9a9cb31917a31b |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1932-6203 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-24T00:06:49Z |
| publishDate | 2021-01-01 |
| publisher | Public Library of Science (PLoS) |
| record_format | Article |
| series | PLoS ONE |
| spelling | doaj.art-6363b21906db4d829f9a9cb31917a31b2022-12-21T17:24:59ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032021-01-01164e024976310.1371/journal.pone.0249763Prognostic tools or clinical predictions: Which are better in palliative care?P StoneV VickerstaffA KalpakidouC ToddJ GriffithsV KeeleyK SpencerP BuckleD FinlayR Z Omar<h4>Purpose</h4>The Palliative Prognostic (PaP) score; Palliative Prognostic Index (PPI); Feliu Prognostic Nomogram (FPN) and Palliative Performance Scale (PPS) have all been proposed as prognostic tools for palliative cancer care. However, clinical judgement remains the principal way by which palliative care professionals determine prognoses and it is important that the performance of prognostic tools is compared against clinical predictions of survival (CPS).<h4>Methods</h4>This was a multi-centre, cohort validation study of prognostic tools. Study participants were adults with advanced cancer receiving palliative care, with or without capacity to consent. Key prognostic data were collected at baseline, shortly after referral to palliative care services. CPS were obtained independently from a doctor and a nurse.<h4>Results</h4>Prognostic data were collected on 1833 participants. All prognostic tools showed acceptable discrimination and calibration, but none showed superiority to CPS. Both PaP and CPS were equally able to accurately categorise patients according to their risk of dying within 30 days. There was no difference in performance between CPS and FPN at stratifying patients according to their risk of dying at 15, 30 or 60 days. PPI was significantly (p<0.001) worse than CPS at predicting which patients would survive for 3 or 6 weeks. PPS and CPS were both able to discriminate palliative care patients into multiple iso-prognostic groups.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Although four commonly used prognostic algorithms for palliative care generally showed good discrimination and calibration, none of them demonstrated superiority to CPS. Prognostic tools which are less accurate than CPS are of no clinical use. However, prognostic tools which perform similarly to CPS may have other advantages to recommend them for use in clinical practice (e.g. being more objective, more reproducible, acting as a second opinion or as an educational tool). Future studies should therefore assess the impact of prognostic tools on clinical practice and decision-making.https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0249763 |
| spellingShingle | P Stone V Vickerstaff A Kalpakidou C Todd J Griffiths V Keeley K Spencer P Buckle D Finlay R Z Omar Prognostic tools or clinical predictions: Which are better in palliative care? PLoS ONE |
| title | Prognostic tools or clinical predictions: Which are better in palliative care? |
| title_full | Prognostic tools or clinical predictions: Which are better in palliative care? |
| title_fullStr | Prognostic tools or clinical predictions: Which are better in palliative care? |
| title_full_unstemmed | Prognostic tools or clinical predictions: Which are better in palliative care? |
| title_short | Prognostic tools or clinical predictions: Which are better in palliative care? |
| title_sort | prognostic tools or clinical predictions which are better in palliative care |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0249763 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT pstone prognostictoolsorclinicalpredictionswhicharebetterinpalliativecare AT vvickerstaff prognostictoolsorclinicalpredictionswhicharebetterinpalliativecare AT akalpakidou prognostictoolsorclinicalpredictionswhicharebetterinpalliativecare AT ctodd prognostictoolsorclinicalpredictionswhicharebetterinpalliativecare AT jgriffiths prognostictoolsorclinicalpredictionswhicharebetterinpalliativecare AT vkeeley prognostictoolsorclinicalpredictionswhicharebetterinpalliativecare AT kspencer prognostictoolsorclinicalpredictionswhicharebetterinpalliativecare AT pbuckle prognostictoolsorclinicalpredictionswhicharebetterinpalliativecare AT dfinlay prognostictoolsorclinicalpredictionswhicharebetterinpalliativecare AT rzomar prognostictoolsorclinicalpredictionswhicharebetterinpalliativecare |