Personalized End-Of-Life Care: Associations Between Patient Preferences And Treatment Intensity Near Death

6516 Background: Medical treatment at the end-of-life (EOL) should be responsive to patient values, but research shows it may instead reflect the regional supply of health services and/or physician practice patterns. We sought to determine whether patients' preferences are associated with EOL medical care and place of death. Methods: Coping with Cancer is an NCI/NIMH-funded, multi-site prospective, longitudinal cohort study of patients with advanced cancer, conducted from September 2002-February 2008. Analyses were based upon 317 deceased patients interviewed at baseline and followed until death, a median of 4.4 months later. EOL care was obtained from chart review, and regressed on patients' baseline preferences for life-extending therapy. Analyses were adjusted for significant confounds; i.e., socio-demographics, cancer type, patient denial, EOL discussion, do-not resuscitate (DNR) order, and treatment center. A sub-analysis examined EOL care within three different medical centers to determine whether patients' preferences and treatment intensity varied by region/practice type. Results: 90 of 317 patients (28.4%) reported a desire to receive life-extending therapy at baseline. Patients' preferences did not differ by proximity to death or performance status, but patients who preferred life-extending therapy had higher rates of denial (75.0% vs. 55.6%, p = 0.002) and were less likely to report having an EOL conversation (24.4% vs. 48.9%, p = 0.0002) or a DNR order (24.4% vs. 48.9%, p < 0.0001). These patients were more likely to undergo ICU admission (AOR 4.6, 95% CI 1.9–11.1) and ventilation (AOR 3.0, 95% CI 1.2–7.3), and die in an ICU (AOR 6.7, 95% CI 2.4–18.7) instead of at home (AOR 0.6, 95% CI 0.3–0.9). A sub-analysis of patients treated at Yale, Parkland, and New Hampshire Oncology-Hematology confirmed that patients' preference for life-extending treatment was associated with higher rates of ICU admission in all three centers. Conclusions: Advanced cancer patients' treatment preferences may play a more important role in determining the intensity of medical care at the EOL than previously recognized. Future research should determine whether these preferences are informed and thus reflect patients' true values for EOL care. No significant financial relationships to disclose.