Mismatch between Pediatric Oncologists' Private and Parent-Facing Prognostic Communication: Communication Patterns Used to Soften Prognostic Disclosure

Purpose: Most parents of children with cancer desire honest prognostic communication, yet oncologists often avoid clear prognostic disclosure. This study explored differences between oncologists' private assessments of prognosis and their prognostic communication with patients and parents. Patients and Methods: In this prospective, longitudinal, mixed-methods study, we audio-recorded serial disease reevaluation conversations between children with advancing cancer, parents, and primary oncologists and separately surveyed and interviewed oncologists at disease progression time points. At time points when oncologists privately described curability as ≤10%, content analysis was used to compare prognostic language in recorded dialogue with private responses about prognosis. Results: Of 33 enrolled patient-parent dyads, 17 patients with high-risk cancer under the care of 6 primary oncologists experienced disease progression during the study period. In 95% of oncologist interviews at disease progression time points, oncologists either predicted curability to be ≤10% or incurable. In most interviews (82%), oncologists stated unequivocally that chances of cure were ≤10%, yet did not communicate these low odds during recorded discussions at the same time point. Analysis revealed three distinct communication patterns through which oncologists softened prognostic disclosure to patients and families: (1) space-holding for hope of cure: statements acknowledging difficult prognosis yet leaving room for possibility of cure; (2) vague warning: statements implying that cancer may progress without offering specifics; and (3) data without interpretation: statements describing disease progression findings in detail without explaining what this meant for the patient's future life or survival. Conclusion: Pediatric oncologists often temper their assessment of poor prognosis when speaking with patients and families. Future work should explore serious conversation guides and other clinical interventions aimed at encouraging person-centered prognostic disclosure for patients with advancing cancer and their families.