Palliative care knowledge, attitudes, and experiences amongst patients with bladder cancer and their caregivers.

OBJECTIVES: Palliative care is underutilized amongst patients with bladder cancer despite guideline recommendations and known benefits. In order to uncover potential access barriers, we sought to describe patient and caregiver knowledge, attitudes and experiences surrounding palliative care. METHODS: We surveyed 272 patients with bladder cancer and their caregivers through the Bladder Cancer Advocacy Network Patient Survey Network. In addition to collecting demographic, socioeconomic, and clinical characteristics, previously studied and validated questionnaires on palliative care knowledge and beliefs were administered. Patients and caregivers were also queried regarding their experiences with palliative care consultation. RESULTS: Survey respondents demonstrated highly accurate knowledge of palliative care services. Attitudes and beliefs surrounding palliative care were overall positive. Caregivers demonstrated better knowledge and more positive beliefs of palliative care compared to patients. Despite an overall positive sentiment toward palliative care, only 9% of the cohort had palliative care consultation as part of their cancer treatment plan. Most patients with muscle-invasive or metastatic bladder cancer wished that palliative care had been discussed by their providers. CONCLUSIONS: A subset of bladder cancer patients possess accurate knowledge and positive beliefs of palliative care. Palliative care is infrequently discussed during the treatment of bladder cancer, with patients and their caregivers expressing desire for palliative care to be discussed more often. Provider education surrounding palliative care services is imperative to improving access for bladder cancer patients and caregivers.

Patient and public involvement in the design and conduct of a large, pragmatic observational trial to investigate recurrent, high-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer.

BACKGROUND: Patient-centered approaches to research design are particularly important for diseases with complex treatment decision-making, such as recurrent, high-grade non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC). The objective of this article is to describe patient and public involvement (PPI) in designing a large, pragmatic observational trial and to articulate barriers, challenges, and lessons learned for future design. METHODS: Through multistakeholder involvement, a large, pragmatic observational trial was designed to investigate the outcomes of high-risk, recurrent NMIBC, and it was titled Comparison of Intravesical Therapy and Surgery as Treatment Options for Bladder Cancer (CISTO). CISTO's design used the Guidance for Reporting Involvement of Patients and the Public 2 reporting checklist for PPI and built on prior engagement infrastructure in partnership with the Bladder Cancer Advocacy Network. RESULTS: CISTO's PPI began with research prioritization to identify the highest priority questions facing patients with NMIBC. A pragmatic observational study design was selected and refined through stakeholder input. PPI included patients and caregivers organized into an advocate advisory board and clinicians, researchers, payers, and industry representatives organized into an external advisory board. An engagement plan was created to define the stages of PPI and the level and nature of the involvement of each group. PPI was measured quantitatively and qualitatively through evaluation surveys and iterative feedback from board members, with changes made for continuous improvement. CONCLUSIONS: Through intentional PPI, CISTO aims to produce pragmatic and generalizable results that will allow patients to make informed decisions for recurrent, high-risk NMIBC based on their personal experiences. LAY SUMMARY: Involving patients and other stakeholders in research ensures that it reflects the outcomes that matter most to them. This is especially important when research focuses on conditions in which patients face difficult decisions about treatment options. This article describes the key role that stakeholders played in shaping the Comparison of Intravesical Therapy and Surgery as Treatment Options for Bladder Cancer (CISTO) study. It compares treatments for recurrent noninvasive bladder cancer and describes how stakeholders were engaged to design and develop the study and the practices that supported their involvement.