Clark DuMontier, William Dale, Anna C Revette, Jane Roberts, Ameya Sanyal, Neha Perumal, Eric C Blackstone, Hajime Uno, Mary I Whitehead, Lewis Mustian, Tammy T Hshieh, Jane A Driver, Gregory A Abel
{"title":"Ethics of overtreatment and undertreatment in older adults with cancer.","authors":"Clark DuMontier, William Dale, Anna C Revette, Jane Roberts, Ameya Sanyal, Neha Perumal, Eric C Blackstone, Hajime Uno, Mary I Whitehead, Lewis Mustian, Tammy T Hshieh, Jane A Driver, Gregory A Abel","doi":"10.1186/s12910-025-01255-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Over-/undertreatment are pervasive in older adults with cancer, and challenges arise in applying the principles of bioethics: beneficence, nonmaleficence, justice, and patient autonomy. The objective of this study was to determine whether these ethical principles relate to over-/undertreatment for older adults, and how tensions among the principles may contribute.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a modified Delphi study with 13 experts in biomedical ethics for iterative rounds of data collection. In the first round, we presented via electronic questionnaire our previously published definitions of over-/undertreatment in older adults with cancer. We then asked which ethical principles related to each definition, followed by how over-/undertreatment might arise from conflicts among different ethical principles. Consensus for each question was defined as ≥ 75% of experts answering \"agree\" or \"strongly agree\". The second round consisted of a virtual discussion with nine of the panel experts led by a qualitative researcher to summarize round one results and review questions that did not reach consensus, followed by a second questionnaire including those questions.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>Experts reached consensus that beneficence, non-maleficence, and autonomy were related to over-/undertreatment in older adults with cancer. Consensus was reached (92%) that overtreatment can occur when oncologists overemphasize beneficence valuing the potential benefit of cancer treatments, while underemphasizing non-maleficence with respect to treatment toxicities. Consensus was also reached (85%) that undertreatment reflects a lack of justice in equitable consideration of cancer treatments that could provide similar net benefits in older adults compared to younger adults. Lastly, consensus was reach that, in most cases, it is unethical to make a treatment recommendation without (1) formal assessment of patient frailty (e.g., via a geriatric assessment) or (2) the opportunity for the patient to share their values, goals, and preferences.</p><p><strong>Interpretation: </strong>Our findings elucidate the ethical principles underpinning over- and undertreatment in older adults with cancer.</p>","PeriodicalId":55348,"journal":{"name":"BMC Medical Ethics","volume":"26 1","pages":"105"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12291383/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Medical Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-025-01255-9","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Over-/undertreatment are pervasive in older adults with cancer, and challenges arise in applying the principles of bioethics: beneficence, nonmaleficence, justice, and patient autonomy. The objective of this study was to determine whether these ethical principles relate to over-/undertreatment for older adults, and how tensions among the principles may contribute.
Methods: We conducted a modified Delphi study with 13 experts in biomedical ethics for iterative rounds of data collection. In the first round, we presented via electronic questionnaire our previously published definitions of over-/undertreatment in older adults with cancer. We then asked which ethical principles related to each definition, followed by how over-/undertreatment might arise from conflicts among different ethical principles. Consensus for each question was defined as ≥ 75% of experts answering "agree" or "strongly agree". The second round consisted of a virtual discussion with nine of the panel experts led by a qualitative researcher to summarize round one results and review questions that did not reach consensus, followed by a second questionnaire including those questions.
Findings: Experts reached consensus that beneficence, non-maleficence, and autonomy were related to over-/undertreatment in older adults with cancer. Consensus was reached (92%) that overtreatment can occur when oncologists overemphasize beneficence valuing the potential benefit of cancer treatments, while underemphasizing non-maleficence with respect to treatment toxicities. Consensus was also reached (85%) that undertreatment reflects a lack of justice in equitable consideration of cancer treatments that could provide similar net benefits in older adults compared to younger adults. Lastly, consensus was reach that, in most cases, it is unethical to make a treatment recommendation without (1) formal assessment of patient frailty (e.g., via a geriatric assessment) or (2) the opportunity for the patient to share their values, goals, and preferences.
Interpretation: Our findings elucidate the ethical principles underpinning over- and undertreatment in older adults with cancer.
期刊介绍：
BMC Medical Ethics is an open access journal publishing original peer-reviewed research articles in relation to the ethical aspects of biomedical research and clinical practice, including professional choices and conduct, medical technologies, healthcare systems and health policies.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
