CancerFACE-TCNCT02693665
Building Evidence for Effective Palliative/End of Life Care for Teens With Cancer
A study testing FAmily CEntered Advance Care Planning for Teens with Cancer in people with Cancer, run by Maureen Lyon at 4 sites in United States.
Trial summary
To test the efficacy of FACE-TC on key outcomes, the investigators propose using an intent-to-treat, longitudinal, prospective, multi-site, randomized controlled trial (RCT) design. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 14 to 99 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Cancer
- What is being tested?
- FAmily CEntered Advance Care Planning for Teens with Cancer
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 260 participants
- Where
- 4 sitesUnited States
- Study dates
- 16 Jul 2016to 29 Sep 2022
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 14 to 99 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Selected by adolescent aged 18 to 20;
- Knows cancer status of adolescent;
- Age 18 or older;
- Ability to speak English;
- Willingness to discuss problems related to cancer and EOL;
- Consent to participate;
Who cannot join
- Developmental delay; foster care; active homicidality or suicidality, depression in the severe range
Trial locations and contacts
4 sites in 1 country.
United States4 sites
Akron Children's Hospital
Akron, Ohio, 44308
St. Jude Children's Research Hospital
Memphis, Tennessee, 38105-3678
University of Minnesota Masonic Children's Hospital
Minneapolis, Minnesota, 55455-2070
Children's National Medical Center
Washington D.C., District of Columbia, 22314
About this study
To test the efficacy of FACE-TC on key outcomes, the investigators propose using an intent-to-treat, longitudinal, prospective, multi-site, randomized controlled trial (RCT) design. Adolescents with cancer, aged 14 up to 20 years, and their families (N=130 dyads; N=260 participants) will be recruited and randomized to FACE-TC or Treatment as Usual (TAU) control. Participants will complete standardized questionnaires at baseline and 3, 6, 12, and 18 months post-intervention. Our goal is to assess the extent to which FACE-TC helps adolescents and young adults with cancer and their families: (1) reach and maintain better congruence in treatment preferences over time; (2) improve their quality of life; and (3) document goals of care and advance directives earlier in the course of their potentially life limiting illness.
Read the detailed description
The investigators propose a prospective, longitudinal, 2-arm RCT to test the efficacy of FACE-TC on key measurable outcomes through 18 months post-intervention. Dyads composed of adolescents with cancer and their families (N=130 dyads; 260 subjects) will be enrolled and randomized to either the FACE-TC intervention or Treatment as Usual (TAU) Control group at a ratio of 2:1 [N=87 FACE-TC dyads and N=43 TAU Control dyads]. The investigators estimate 30% attrition by the 18 month post-intervention assessment (20%-25% due to death/complications and 10% due to dropout). Of the original sample of 130 randomized dyads (N=260 subjects), the investigators estimate the investigators will have full longitudinal data at 18 months post-intervention for 91 dyads (N=182 subjects). Participants will be recruited from Akron Children's Hospital, St. Jude Children's Research Hospital and University of Minnesota Masonic Children's Hospital pediatric oncology programs. Participants will undergo written informed consent/assent. Eligible participants will be enrolled and complete the baseline assessment followed by randomization. Randomization will be at the level of the dyad. Allocation will be concealed from the RA-Assessor to prevent bias. Block randomization by study site will control for site differences. Intervention and Control Conditions: The curriculum based FACE-TC consists of: The Session 1 ACP Survey; Session 2 Respecting Choices Interview; and the Session 3 Five Wishes advance directive. To minimize the burden to ill adolescents, the investigators have chosen a Treatment as Usual comparison condition. This group will be provided with an advance care planning booklet/information only. Assessments occur at baseline, and 3, 6, 12, and 18 months post-intervention. At each site the assessments and intervention will be administered by a research team comprised of the site Co-Investigator and two Research Assistants (RA) (RA-Assessor \& RA-Interventionist).Visit protocol: Screening Visit: The RA-Assessor presents the adolescent with cancer and family with an Information Sheet describing the study and conduct an initial assessment about whether they are eligible for enrollment. After consent/assent, further screening for inclusion/exclusion criteria is conducted. Baseline Visit: At enrollment and prior to randomization, baseline measures will be obtained. Entry of baseline data by the RA-Assessor will trigger computerized randomization of patient/family dyads to either FACE-TC intervention or TAU Control using a randomly permuted block design and a 2:1 ratio by study site. The Children's National clinical coordinator will then notify the RA-Interventionist who will schedule the next study visit. The adolescent and family will learn their assignment when the RA-Interventionist calls to schedule study sessions. Attendance will be recorded to assess effects of full vs. partial participation in FACE-TC. Follow-up Visits: RA-Assessor will obtain follow-up measures from the adolescent and family at 3, 6, 12 and 18 month post intervention.
Site Co-Is will oversee site activities and provide weekly, face-to-face supervision of the RAs. They are responsible for recruitment, retention, safety, fidelity to protocol, and supervision and support of RAs. The RAs will assist with recruitment, screening, enrollment and baseline screening measure collection, as well as the day-to-day functioning. RAs will be blind to random assignment. RA-Interventionists will be trained to implement the protocol. Only the RA-Assessor will be permitted to administer post-randomization assessments. Children's National will serve as the data coordinating center and will be responsible for database design and maintenance and the statistical analyses. Sites will be overseen by a Safety Monitoring Committee (SMC). A 2-day Investigator Meeting will be held in Washington, District of Columbia (DC) and will include all site Co-Is, RA-Assessors and consultants. The protocol, its scientific rationale, underlying ethics issues, implementation including recruitment and retention, will be reviewed with the entire team. In month 9 of Year 1 there will be a 3-day training meeting of the RA-Interventionists and RA-Assessors on the intervention, which site-Co-Is will also attend. RA-Assessors will attend only one day of this training in order to maintain blindness. Site Initiation. To begin screening/enrollment (1) the protocol must be approved at each site's Institutional Review Board (IRB) and all personnel must be certified in Human Subjects Research training, (2) personnel are recruited and trained for RA roles, and (3) each RA-Interventionist must complete certification as a Next Steps-ACP Facilitator. Dr. Lyon and the Research Coordinator will verify that the site has all components in place for the logistics of screening, enrolling, scheduling, performing assessments, administering interventions, and collecting the data. To assure continuous quality for the intervention and its evaluation, monitoring will be ongoing. Dr. Lyon and Ms. Briggs will review the first 5 DVD/audio recordings of intervention sessions from each site to ensure fidelity with the protocol. Thereafter, they will randomly review 1 DVD per week, rotating sites. Dr. Lyon and Ms. Briggs will use a competency checklist. Dr. Lyon and Research Coordinator will monitor ongoing site IRB approval documentation and assist sites in annual continuing reviews. The Research Coordinator will keep copies of all regulatory forms, including consent-stamped templates from each site and staff members' Human Subjects Research Training approval certificates. Dr. Lyon and the Research Coordinator will perform twice yearly site monitoring visits while the intervention is being implemented to assure standardization of procedures and resolve any problems that are identified. They will review and confirm that all consents have occurred properly at the sites and that the sites are maintaining all participant and regulatory data. The REDCap database from the FACE-TC pilot will be updated and expanded for this study, and the systems for data entry will be revised to address multi-site implementation. A data dictionary will be created. An external Safety Monitoring Committee (SMC) will be assembled by Dr. Lyon with the responsibility of reviewing safety information, study progress, and other relevant data. The SMC will meet a minimum of once a year. Prior to parametric testing, scale reliabilities for multi-item measures (e.g., pain/fatigue, child and parent psychological, spiritual/religious measures) will be assessed using Cronbach's alpha and their composite scores will be used for data analyses. Analytical Plan for AIM 1. To evaluate the efficacy of FACE-TC on adolescent-family congruence in treatment preferences. Congruence in decision-making for medical treatment will be tested based on agreement (i.e., both patient and his/her family choose the same option) on the Statement of Treatment Preferences in four different cancer-related situations. Kappa coefficients will be applied to assess chance-adjusted agreement between patient and family responses. Change in Kappa coefficient (congruence improvement) from baseline to each follow-up time point during the study period will be tested using bootstrapping technique. The latent growth model (LGM) with categorical outcome will be used to test Hypotheses H1a, i.e., FACE-TC participants will have a higher congruence rate over time. In the LGM, the investigators will set time scores, except those for identification purpose, as free parameters to let the shape of growth trajectory be determined by data. As such, the congruence development trajectory would have an empirically based nonlinear shape, instead of assuming a linear or nonlinear polynomial function. The investigators will apply the growth mixture model (GMM) to test heterogeneity of congruence development trajectories and identify possible patterns of congruence in development trajectories in the full sample. The latent class variable estimated from the GMM captures the pattern of congruence development trajectories. Time-invariant covariates will be used to predict the memberships of the latent trajectory groups; and time-varying covariates will be included to predict the level of congruence at different time points. To test Hypotheses H1b, the investigators will regress the latent growth slope factor and the latent class variable on FACE-TC intervention, controlling for covariates in the GMM to assess 1) how FACE-TC would affect the membership of the latent classes of congruence development; and 2) how the effect of FACE-TC on congruence change over time varies across the latent trajectory classes. Analytical Plan for AIM 2. To evaluate efficacy of FACE-TC on AYA quality of life and family QOL. The LGM and GMM models proposed for evaluating Aim 1 can be readily applied to evaluate Aim 2 and test Hypotheses H2 where the outcome measures are continuous variables. When examining the effects of FACE-TC on QOL for AYAs with cancer and their families, socio-demographics will be controlled as time-invariant covariates, while time-varying covariates will be included in the model to predict measures of QOL at different time points. In addition, family caregiver appraisal/depression measured at the end of the study period will be included as a distal outcome in the GMM models, and how this distal outcome is associated with the patterns of the developmental trajectories of AYA QOL will be assessed. As the same model will be used to evaluate multiple outcomes, Bonferroni correction will be applied to exert a stringent control over false discovery. As attrition is inevitable in longitudinal studies, robust model estimator (e.g., MLR) using the full information maximum likelihood will be used for model estimation. Importantly, missing at random (MAR), instead of missing completely at random, can be assumed in MLR. MAR is a plausible assumption that allows missingness to be dependent on observed measures like intervention assignment. Analytical Plan for AIM 3. To evaluate the efficacy of FACE-TC on early completion of pACP goals of care and advance directives. First, the investigators will use the two-proportion z-test to test the differences in proportions of completion of pACP goals of care and advance directives between FACE-TC and control groups. Then logistic regressions will be used to test the Hypothesis H3, controlling for socio-demographics. Interaction between intervention and ethnicity will be included in the models to test ethnic disparity in regard to intervention efficacy. The investigators will also explore if FACE-TC improves the match between patients' goals of care and the medical care received at the EOL among the adolescents who may die. Descriptive statistics will be used to estimate the frequencies of the study variables. Chi-square statistics with Fisher Exact tests will be used to assess the difference in the match between FACE-TC and controls; and exact logistic regression will be applied to examine the effect of FACE-TC on such a match, controlling for covariates. For continuous outcomes with a modest observation autocorrelation (p=0.20) and moderate effect size (delta=0.35), the estimated sample size to achieve a power of 0.80 at =0.05 level and detect a moderate effect size (delta=0.35) is about N=76 individuals at each of the 5 observation time points. For binary outcomes, a sample size of N=70 can achieve a power of 0.80 to detect a moderate response probability difference of d=0.17 given p=0.20. Our proposed sample of N=130 dyads will ensure a large enough statistical power for our proposed longitudinal analyses on patient data and parent data, respectively. For the cross-sectional logistic regression model proposed to evaluate Aim 3, a sample size of N=100 would achieve a power of 0.83 at alpha=0.05 level to detect an odds ratio of 4.
- Conditions
- Cancer
- Being tested
- FAmily CEntered Advance Care Planning for Teens with Cancer
- Keywords
- pediatric advance care planning, adolescent, family, palliative care, end of life, communication, decision making, surrogate decision maker, health care proxy, intervention, randomized clinical trial, cancer, quality of life, spiritual, religion, treatment congruence, treatment preferences, FAmily CEntered (FACE) Advance Care Planning
- Medical subject headings
- Neoplasms, Death, Communication, Facies
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
FAmily CEntered Advance Care Planning for Teens with CancerBehavioural
Also called FACE-TC
3 session weekly intervention: 1) survey completed by adolescent and family (surrogate decision maker) separately with facilitator; 2) Respecting Choices structured interview about patient's representation of illness, goals of care, hopes, treatment preferences; 3) completion of an advance directive.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| FACE-TC Intervention | Experimental | Adolescent/family dyads randomized to the experimental condition receive Family Centered Advance Care Planning for Teens with Cancer (FACE-TC) intervention - 3 sessions scheduled one week apart of approximately 60 minutes duration each. Session 1 - Lyon Advance Care Planning Survey-Adolescent \& Surrogate versions. Session 2 - Respecting Choices Interview facilitated by trained/certified facilitator with adolescent and family. Focuses on patient's understanding of their illness, possible complications, goals of care and treatment preferences in 3 bad outcome situations; and the Session 3 - Five Wishes an advance directive. Receives: Behavioral: FAmily CEntered Advance Care Planning for Teens with Cancer |
| Treatment As Usual (TAU) | No intervention | Adolescent/family dyads randomized to the treatment as usual (TAU) condition receive written information on advance care planning, but no active intervention. |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Statement of Treatment Preferences (SOTP) a Tool to Measure Goals of Care.
Statement of Treatment Preferences documented adolescents' goals of care and families' understanding. Situations were: (1) prolonged hospital stay with ongoing medical intervention and low chance of survival; (2) treatments extend life by no more than 2-3 months with side-effects; (3) physical impairment; and (4) mental impairment. Choices for the four situations were "to continue all treatments …", "to stop all efforts to keep me alive…", or "do not know." Responses for data analysis were recoded into two categories: congruent (family accurately reported what the patient reported as their treatment preference) versus "stop all treatments." Dyadic responses, "do not know" were treated as not congruent and removed from analysis. Percentage dyadic agreement or disagreement was calculated for each situation. Minimum agreement is 0%. Maximum agreement is 100%. Higher percentage dyadic agreement is better outcome.
Measured: Agreement on SOTP was assessed 2 weeks post-baseline for controls or immediately following Session 2 for FACE-TC intervention dyads, and at 3, 6, 12 and 18 months.
Secondary outcomes (4)
Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS Short Forms 8a - Pediatrics v. 2.0) is a Set of Person-centered Measures That Evaluates and Monitors Physical, Mental, and Social Health in Children and Adolescents.
Assessed adolescent Emotional distress-Anxiety; Emotional Distress-Depressive Symptoms; Fatigue; and Pain Interference using these PROMIS subscales. Each subscale has 8 items each. Minimum value is 8. Maximum value is 40. Higher scores mean worse outcomes for anxiety, depressive symptoms, fatigue, and pain interference.
Measured: Change from baseline in quality of life (defined as symptoms of anxiety, depression, fatigue and pain interference) at 3, 6, and 12 months post baseline compared to controls
Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT)-Spirituality-12 Version 4 Expanded (FACIT-Sp-EX)
Assessed construct of spiritual well-being. Two subscales Meaning/Peace (7 items) and Faith (5 items) and Total score (12 items) were calculated. on a 5-point Likert scale from 0=not at all to 5=very much. Some items are reverse scored. See www.facit.org Meaning/Peace subscale score range from minimum value of 0 to maximum value of 32. Higher scores indicate better meaning/peace.
Faith subscale score range from 0 minimum value to maximum value of 16. Higher scores indicate better meaning/peace.
Total score range is from 0 minimum value to maximum value of 92. Higher scores indicate better spiritual well-being.
Measured: Controlling for baseline, change in of meaning and peace subscale and faith subscale at 3, 6, 12 months post intervention for intervention adolescents compared to control adolescents. Total scores provided for interested investigators were not outcome.
Family Appraisal of Caregiving Questionnaire for Palliative Care (FACQ-PC)
The FACQ-PC is a 25-item measure consists of four theoretically derived subscales: (i) caregiver strain, (ii) positive caregiving appraisals, (iii) caregiver distress, and (iv) family well-being. Scores are from 5 = strongly agree to 1 = strongly disagree. We did not calculate a Total score. We only used the 4 subscale scores. On the subscale scores for positive caregiving appraisals and family well-being, higher scores mean better outcomes, i.e. greater positive caregiving appraisals or family well-being. On the subscale scores for caregiver strain and caregiver distress, higher scores mean worse outcomes, i.e. greater caregiver strain or caregiver distress. The FACQ-PC subscale scores were computed by taking the mean of the items (score range 1-5). Some items were reverse scored, depending on how the item is phrased, so that higher scores = higher amount of the subscale being measured. So the minimum value for each subscale is 1 and the maximum value for each subscale is 5.
Measured: Baseline and 3 months post baseline administered to family surrogates only.
Advance Directive for Adolescent Only Located in the Electronic Health Record at Study Close Out.
The effect of the intervention on documentation in the Electronic Health Record of any advance directive for the adolescent was conducted at study close, using a standardized chart abstraction form.
Measured: This adolescent outcome was measured at one time point only, between 18 months post-intervention or study close-out. At study close out we had 117 adolescents in the study. Attrition was due to deaths, lost to follow-up, and withdrawals.
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted29 Feb 2016 (estimated)
- Study start16 Jul 2016
- Primary completion30 Apr 2021
- Study completion29 Sep 2022
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, outcome measures and adverse events reported by the sponsor.
- Publications (35)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for CancerStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Supportive care
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 260 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Maureen Lyon
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Akron Children's Hospital, National Institute of Nursing Research (NINR), Masonic Cancer Center, University of Minnesota
- Responsible party
- Sponsor-investigator, Maureen Lyon, Children's National Research Institute
- Investigators
- Maureen E Lyon, PhD, Principal investigator, Children's National Research Institute
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02693665
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- Pro00005648
- Other IDs
- 1R01NR015458-01
- Acronym
- FACE-TC
- Status last verified
- Apr 2025
- First submitted
- 17 Feb 2016
- Last updated
- 8 May 2025
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- Individual data sharing
- Yes: No, only de-identified data.
Publications
Lyon ME, Jacobs S, Briggs L, Cheng YI, Wang J. A longitudinal, randomized, controlled trial of advance care planning for teens with cancer: anxiety, depression, quality of life, advance directives, spirituality. J Adolesc Health. 2014 Jun;54(6):710-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2013.10.206. Epub 2014 Jan 7.
PubMed 24411819Lyon ME, Jacobs S, Briggs L, Cheng YI, Wang J. Family-centered advance care planning for teens with cancer. JAMA Pediatr. 2013 May;167(5):460-7. doi: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2013.943.
PubMed 23479062Lyon ME, Garvie PA, Briggs L, He J, McCarter R, D'Angelo LJ. Development, feasibility, and acceptability of the Family/Adolescent-Centered (FACE) Advance Care Planning intervention for adolescents with HIV. J Palliat Med. 2009 Apr;12(4):363-72. doi: 10.1089/jpm.2008.0261.
PubMed 19327074Lyon ME, Garvie PA, Briggs L, He J, Malow R, D'Angelo LJ, McCarter R. Is it safe? Talking to teens with HIV/AIDS about death and dying: a 3-month evaluation of Family Centered Advance Care (FACE) planning - anxiety, depression, quality of life. HIV AIDS (Auckl). 2010;2:27-37. doi: 10.2147/hiv.s7507. Epub 2010 Feb 18.
PubMed 22096382Lyon ME, Garvie PA, McCarter R, Briggs L, He J, D'Angelo LJ. Who will speak for me? Improving end-of-life decision-making for adolescents with HIV and their families. Pediatrics. 2009 Feb;123(2):e199-206. doi: 10.1542/peds.2008-2379.
PubMed 19171571Jacobs S, Perez J, Cheng YI, Sill A, Wang J, Lyon ME. Adolescent end of life preferences and congruence with their parents' preferences: results of a survey of adolescents with cancer. Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2015 Apr;62(4):710-4. doi: 10.1002/pbc.25358. Epub 2014 Dec 24.
PubMed 25545105Wilkins ML, Dallas RH, Fanone KE, Lyon ME. Pediatric palliative care for youth with HIV/AIDS: systematic review of the literature. HIV AIDS (Auckl). 2013 Jul 29;5:165-79. doi: 10.2147/HIV.S44275. Print 2013.
PubMed 23930080Garvie PA, He J, Wang J, D'Angelo LJ, Lyon ME. An exploratory survey of end-of-life attitudes, beliefs, and experiences of adolescents with HIV/AIDS and their families. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2012 Sep;44(3):373-85.e29. doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2011.09.022. Epub 2012 Jul 7.
PubMed 22771129Lyon ME, McCabe MA, Patel KM, D'Angelo LJ. What do adolescents want? An exploratory study regarding end-of-life decision-making. J Adolesc Health. 2004 Dec;35(6):529.e1-6. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2004.02.009.
PubMed 15581537Rosenberg AR, Wolfe J, Wiener L, Lyon M, Feudtner C. Ethics, Emotions, and the Skills of Talking About Progressing Disease With Terminally Ill Adolescents: A Review. JAMA Pediatr. 2016 Dec 1;170(12):1216-1223. doi: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2016.2142.
PubMed 27749945Lyon ME, D'Angelo LJ, Dallas RH, Hinds PS, Garvie PA, Wilkins ML, Garcia A, Briggs L, Flynn PM, Rana SR, Cheng YI, Wang J. A randomized clinical trial of adolescents with HIV/AIDS: pediatric advance care planning. AIDS Care. 2017 Oct;29(10):1287-1296. doi: 10.1080/09540121.2017.1308463. Epub 2017 Mar 30.
PubMed 28359212Weaver MS, Anderson B, Cole A, Lyon ME. Documentation of Advance Directives and Code Status in Electronic Medical Records to Honor Goals of Care. J Palliat Care. 2020 Oct;35(4):217-220. doi: 10.1177/0825859719860129. Epub 2019 Jul 7.
PubMed 31280659Feudtner C, Rosenberg AR, Boss RD, Wiener L, Lyon ME, Hinds PS, Bluebond-Langner M, Wolfe J. Challenges and Priorities for Pediatric Palliative Care Research in the U.S. and Similar Practice Settings: Report From a Pediatric Palliative Care Research Network Workshop. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2019 Nov;58(5):909-917.e3. doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2019.08.011. Epub 2019 Aug 21.
PubMed 31445136Watson A, Weaver M, Jacobs S, Lyon ME. Interdisciplinary Communication: Documentation of Advance Care Planning and End-of-Life Care in Adolescents and Young Adults With Cancer. J Hosp Palliat Nurs. 2019 Jun;21(3):215-222. doi: 10.1097/NJH.0000000000000512.
PubMed 30829829Needle J, Brunnquel D, Lyon M. Mature minors, mature decisions: Advance care planning for adolescent patients with life-limiting illness. Journal of Pediatric Ethics! Advanced Care Planning and End of Life. 2018;1(3).
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 8 May 2025. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Building Evidence for Effective Palliative/End of Life Care for Teens With Cancer
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02693665
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- FACE-TC / Pro00005648
- Conditions
- Cancer
- Keywords
- pediatric advance care planning, adolescent, family, palliative care, end of life, communication, decision making, surrogate decision maker
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 260 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Maureen LyonUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Akron Children's Hospital, National Institute of Nursing Research (NINR), Masonic Cancer Center, University of Minnesota
- Study start
- 16 Jul 2016 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 30 Apr 2021 (actual)
- Study completion
- 29 Sep 2022 (actual)
- First posted
- 29 Feb 2016 (estimated)
- Results
- Posted 14 Jan 2025
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
To test the efficacy of FACE-TC on key outcomes, the investigators propose using an intent-to-treat, longitudinal, prospective, multi-site, randomized controlled trial (RCT) design. Adolescents with cancer, aged 14 up to 20 years, and their families (N=130 dyads; N=260 participants) will be recruited and randomized to FACE-TC or Treatment as Usual (TAU) control. Participants will complete standardized questionnaires at baseline and 3, 6, 12, and 18 months post-intervention. Our goal is to assess the extent to which FACE-TC helps adolescents and young adults with cancer and their families: (1) reach and maintain better congruence in treatment preferences over time; (2) improve their quality of life; and (3) document goals of care and advance directives earlier in the course of their potentially life limiting illness.
Detailed description
The investigators propose a prospective, longitudinal, 2-arm RCT to test the efficacy of FACE-TC on key measurable outcomes through 18 months post-intervention. Dyads composed of adolescents with cancer and their families (N=130 dyads; 260 subjects) will be enrolled and randomized to either the FACE-TC intervention or Treatment as Usual (TAU) Control group at a ratio of 2:1 [N=87 FACE-TC dyads and N=43 TAU Control dyads]. The investigators estimate 30% attrition by the 18 month post-intervention assessment (20%-25% due to death/complications and 10% due to dropout). Of the original sample of 130 randomized dyads (N=260 subjects), the investigators estimate the investigators will have full longitudinal data at 18 months post-intervention for 91 dyads (N=182 subjects). Participants will be recruited from Akron Children's Hospital, St. Jude Children's Research Hospital and University of Minnesota Masonic Children's Hospital pediatric oncology programs. Participants will undergo written informed consent/assent. Eligible participants will be enrolled and complete the baseline assessment followed by randomization. Randomization will be at the level of the dyad. Allocation will be concealed from the RA-Assessor to prevent bias. Block randomization by study site will control for site differences. Intervention and Control Conditions: The curriculum based FACE-TC consists of: The Session 1 ACP Survey; Session 2 Respecting Choices Interview; and the Session 3 Five Wishes advance directive. To minimize the burden to ill adolescents, the investigators have chosen a Treatment as Usual comparison condition. This group will be provided with an advance care planning booklet/information only. Assessments occur at baseline, and 3, 6, 12, and 18 months post-intervention. At each site the assessments and intervention will be administered by a research team comprised of the site Co-Investigator and two Research Assistants (RA) (RA-Assessor \& RA-Interventionist).Visit protocol: Screening Visit: The RA-Assessor presents the adolescent with cancer and family with an Information Sheet describing the study and conduct an initial assessment about whether they are eligible for enrollment. After consent/assent, further screening for inclusion/exclusion criteria is conducted. Baseline Visit: At enrollment and prior to randomization, baseline measures will be obtained. Entry of baseline data by the RA-Assessor will trigger computerized randomization of patient/family dyads to either FACE-TC intervention or TAU Control using a randomly permuted block design and a 2:1 ratio by study site. The Children's National clinical coordinator will then notify the RA-Interventionist who will schedule the next study visit. The adolescent and family will learn their assignment when the RA-Interventionist calls to schedule study sessions. Attendance will be recorded to assess effects of full vs. partial participation in FACE-TC. Follow-up Visits: RA-Assessor will obtain follow-up measures from the adolescent and family at 3, 6, 12 and 18 month post intervention.
Site Co-Is will oversee site activities and provide weekly, face-to-face supervision of the RAs. They are responsible for recruitment, retention, safety, fidelity to protocol, and supervision and support of RAs. The RAs will assist with recruitment, screening, enrollment and baseline screening measure collection, as well as the day-to-day functioning. RAs will be blind to random assignment. RA-Interventionists will be trained to implement the protocol. Only the RA-Assessor will be permitted to administer post-randomization assessments. Children's National will serve as the data coordinating center and will be responsible for database design and maintenance and the statistical analyses. Sites will be overseen by a Safety Monitoring Committee (SMC). A 2-day Investigator Meeting will be held in Washington, District of Columbia (DC) and will include all site Co-Is, RA-Assessors and consultants. The protocol, its scientific rationale, underlying ethics issues, implementation including recruitment and retention, will be reviewed with the entire team. In month 9 of Year 1 there will be a 3-day training meeting of the RA-Interventionists and RA-Assessors on the intervention, which site-Co-Is will also attend. RA-Assessors will attend only one day of this training in order to maintain blindness. Site Initiation. To begin screening/enrollment (1) the protocol must be approved at each site's Institutional Review Board (IRB) and all personnel must be certified in Human Subjects Research training, (2) personnel are recruited and trained for RA roles, and (3) each RA-Interventionist must complete certification as a Next Steps-ACP Facilitator. Dr. Lyon and the Research Coordinator will verify that the site has all components in place for the logistics of screening, enrolling, scheduling, performing assessments, administering interventions, and collecting the data. To assure continuous quality for the intervention and its evaluation, monitoring will be ongoing. Dr. Lyon and Ms. Briggs will review the first 5 DVD/audio recordings of intervention sessions from each site to ensure fidelity with the protocol. Thereafter, they will randomly review 1 DVD per week, rotating sites. Dr. Lyon and Ms. Briggs will use a competency checklist. Dr. Lyon and Research Coordinator will monitor ongoing site IRB approval documentation and assist sites in annual continuing reviews. The Research Coordinator will keep copies of all regulatory forms, including consent-stamped templates from each site and staff members' Human Subjects Research Training approval certificates. Dr. Lyon and the Research Coordinator will perform twice yearly site monitoring visits while the intervention is being implemented to assure standardization of procedures and resolve any problems that are identified. They will review and confirm that all consents have occurred properly at the sites and that the sites are maintaining all participant and regulatory data. The REDCap database from the FACE-TC pilot will be updated and expanded for this study, and the systems for data entry will be revised to address multi-site implementation. A data dictionary will be created. An external Safety Monitoring Committee (SMC) will be assembled by Dr. Lyon with the responsibility of reviewing safety information, study progress, and other relevant data. The SMC will meet a minimum of once a year. Prior to parametric testing, scale reliabilities for multi-item measures (e.g., pain/fatigue, child and parent psychological, spiritual/religious measures) will be assessed using Cronbach's alpha and their composite scores will be used for data analyses. Analytical Plan for AIM 1. To evaluate the efficacy of FACE-TC on adolescent-family congruence in treatment preferences. Congruence in decision-making for medical treatment will be tested based on agreement (i.e., both patient and his/her family choose the same option) on the Statement of Treatment Preferences in four different cancer-related situations. Kappa coefficients will be applied to assess chance-adjusted agreement between patient and family responses. Change in Kappa coefficient (congruence improvement) from baseline to each follow-up time point during the study period will be tested using bootstrapping technique. The latent growth model (LGM) with categorical outcome will be used to test Hypotheses H1a, i.e., FACE-TC participants will have a higher congruence rate over time. In the LGM, the investigators will set time scores, except those for identification purpose, as free parameters to let the shape of growth trajectory be determined by data. As such, the congruence development trajectory would have an empirically based nonlinear shape, instead of assuming a linear or nonlinear polynomial function. The investigators will apply the growth mixture model (GMM) to test heterogeneity of congruence development trajectories and identify possible patterns of congruence in development trajectories in the full sample. The latent class variable estimated from the GMM captures the pattern of congruence development trajectories. Time-invariant covariates will be used to predict the memberships of the latent trajectory groups; and time-varying covariates will be included to predict the level of congruence at different time points. To test Hypotheses H1b, the investigators will regress the latent growth slope factor and the latent class variable on FACE-TC intervention, controlling for covariates in the GMM to assess 1) how FACE-TC would affect the membership of the latent classes of congruence development; and 2) how the effect of FACE-TC on congruence change over time varies across the latent trajectory classes. Analytical Plan for AIM 2. To evaluate efficacy of FACE-TC on AYA quality of life and family QOL. The LGM and GMM models proposed for evaluating Aim 1 can be readily applied to evaluate Aim 2 and test Hypotheses H2 where the outcome measures are continuous variables. When examining the effects of FACE-TC on QOL for AYAs with cancer and their families, socio-demographics will be controlled as time-invariant covariates, while time-varying covariates will be included in the model to predict measures of QOL at different time points. In addition, family caregiver appraisal/depression measured at the end of the study period will be included as a distal outcome in the GMM models, and how this distal outcome is associated with the patterns of the developmental trajectories of AYA QOL will be assessed. As the same model will be used to evaluate multiple outcomes, Bonferroni correction will be applied to exert a stringent control over false discovery. As attrition is inevitable in longitudinal studies, robust model estimator (e.g., MLR) using the full information maximum likelihood will be used for model estimation. Importantly, missing at random (MAR), instead of missing completely at random, can be assumed in MLR. MAR is a plausible assumption that allows missingness to be dependent on observed measures like intervention assignment. Analytical Plan for AIM 3. To evaluate the efficacy of FACE-TC on early completion of pACP goals of care and advance directives. First, the investigators will use the two-proportion z-test to test the differences in proportions of completion of pACP goals of care and advance directives between FACE-TC and control groups. Then logistic regressions will be used to test the Hypothesis H3, controlling for socio-demographics. Interaction between intervention and ethnicity will be included in the models to test ethnic disparity in regard to intervention efficacy. The investigators will also explore if FACE-TC improves the match between patients' goals of care and the medical care received at the EOL among the adolescents who may die. Descriptive statistics will be used to estimate the frequencies of the study variables. Chi-square statistics with Fisher Exact tests will be used to assess the difference in the match between FACE-TC and controls; and exact logistic regression will be applied to examine the effect of FACE-TC on such a match, controlling for covariates. For continuous outcomes with a modest observation autocorrelation (p=0.20) and moderate effect size (delta=0.35), the estimated sample size to achieve a power of 0.80 at =0.05 level and detect a moderate effect size (delta=0.35) is about N=76 individuals at each of the 5 observation time points. For binary outcomes, a sample size of N=70 can achieve a power of 0.80 to detect a moderate response probability difference of d=0.17 given p=0.20. Our proposed sample of N=130 dyads will ensure a large enough statistical power for our proposed longitudinal analyses on patient data and parent data, respectively. For the cross-sectional logistic regression model proposed to evaluate Aim 3, a sample size of N=100 would achieve a power of 0.83 at alpha=0.05 level to detect an odds ratio of 4.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Supportive care
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| FACE-TC Intervention | Experimental | Behavioral: FAmily CEntered Advance Care Planning for Teens with CancerAdolescent/family dyads randomized to the experimental condition receive Family Centered Advance Care Planning for Teens with Cancer (FACE-TC) intervention - 3 sessions scheduled one week apart of approximately 60 minutes duration each. Session 1 - Lyon Advance Care Planning Survey-Adolescent \& Surrogate versions. Session 2 - Respecting Choices Interview facilitated by trained/certified facilitator with adolescent and family. Focuses on patient's understanding of their illness, possible complications, goals of care and treatment preferences in 3 bad outcome situations; and the Session 3 - Five Wishes an advance directive. |
| Treatment As Usual (TAU) | No intervention | –Adolescent/family dyads randomized to the treatment as usual (TAU) condition receive written information on advance care planning, but no active intervention. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 14 to 99 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (6 listed)
- Selected by adolescent aged 18 to 20;
- Knows cancer status of adolescent;
- Age 18 or older;
- Ability to speak English;
- Willingness to discuss problems related to cancer and EOL;
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Developmental delay; foster care; active homicidality or suicidality, depression in the severe range
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| FAmily CEntered Advance Care Planning for Teens with CancerAlso: FACE-TC3 session weekly intervention: 1) survey completed by adolescent and family (surrogate decision maker) separately with facilitator; 2) Respecting Choices structured interview about patient's representation of illness, goals of care, hopes, treatment preferences; 3) completion of an advance directive. | Behavioural | FACE-TC Intervention |
Primary outcome
Statement of Treatment Preferences (SOTP) a Tool to Measure Goals of Care.
Time frame: Agreement on SOTP was assessed 2 weeks post-baseline for controls or immediately following Session 2 for FACE-TC intervention dyads, and at 3, 6, 12 and 18 months.
Statement of Treatment Preferences documented adolescents' goals of care and families' understanding. Situations were: (1) prolonged hospital stay with ongoing medical intervention and low chance of survival; (2) treatments extend life by no more than 2-3 months with side-effects; (3) physical impairment; and (4) mental impairment. Choices for the four situations were "to continue all treatments …", "to stop all efforts to keep me alive…", or "do not know." Responses for data analysis were recoded into two categories: congruent (family accurately reported what the patient reported as their treatment preference) versus "stop all treatments." Dyadic responses, "do not know" were treated as not congruent and removed from analysis. Percentage dyadic agreement or disagreement was calculated for each situation. Minimum agreement is 0%. Maximum agreement is 100%. Higher percentage dyadic agreement is better outcome.
4 secondary outcomes
Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS Short Forms 8a - Pediatrics v. 2.0) is a Set of Person-centered Measures That Evaluates and Monitors Physical, Mental, and Social Health in Children and Adolescents.
Time frame: Change from baseline in quality of life (defined as symptoms of anxiety, depression, fatigue and pain interference) at 3, 6, and 12 months post baseline compared to controls
Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT)-Spirituality-12 Version 4 Expanded (FACIT-Sp-EX)
Time frame: Controlling for baseline, change in of meaning and peace subscale and faith subscale at 3, 6, 12 months post intervention for intervention adolescents compared to control adolescents. Total scores provided for interested investigators were not outcome.
Family Appraisal of Caregiving Questionnaire for Palliative Care (FACQ-PC)
Time frame: Baseline and 3 months post baseline administered to family surrogates only.
Advance Directive for Adolescent Only Located in the Electronic Health Record at Study Close Out.
Time frame: This adolescent outcome was measured at one time point only, between 18 months post-intervention or study close-out. At study close out we had 117 adolescents in the study. Attrition was due to deaths, lost to follow-up, and withdrawals.
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 8 May 2025.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
- Background: PubMed 24411819Lyon ME, Jacobs S, Briggs L, Cheng YI, Wang J. A longitudinal, randomized, controlled trial of advance care planning for teens with cancer: anxiety, depression, quality of life, advance directives, spirituality. J Adolesc Health. 2014 Jun;54(6):710-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2013.10.206. Epub 2014 Jan 7.
- Background: PubMed 23479062Lyon ME, Jacobs S, Briggs L, Cheng YI, Wang J. Family-centered advance care planning for teens with cancer. JAMA Pediatr. 2013 May;167(5):460-7. doi: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2013.943.
- Background: PubMed 19327074Lyon ME, Garvie PA, Briggs L, He J, McCarter R, D'Angelo LJ. Development, feasibility, and acceptability of the Family/Adolescent-Centered (FACE) Advance Care Planning intervention for adolescents with HIV. J Palliat Med. 2009 Apr;12(4):363-72. doi: 10.1089/jpm.2008.0261.
- Background: PubMed 22096382Lyon ME, Garvie PA, Briggs L, He J, Malow R, D'Angelo LJ, McCarter R. Is it safe? Talking to teens with HIV/AIDS about death and dying: a 3-month evaluation of Family Centered Advance Care (FACE) planning - anxiety, depression, quality of life. HIV AIDS (Auckl). 2010;2:27-37. doi: 10.2147/hiv.s7507. Epub 2010 Feb 18.
- Background: PubMed 19171571Lyon ME, Garvie PA, McCarter R, Briggs L, He J, D'Angelo LJ. Who will speak for me? Improving end-of-life decision-making for adolescents with HIV and their families. Pediatrics. 2009 Feb;123(2):e199-206. doi: 10.1542/peds.2008-2379.
- Background: PubMed 25545105Jacobs S, Perez J, Cheng YI, Sill A, Wang J, Lyon ME. Adolescent end of life preferences and congruence with their parents' preferences: results of a survey of adolescents with cancer. Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2015 Apr;62(4):710-4. doi: 10.1002/pbc.25358. Epub 2014 Dec 24.
- Background: PubMed 23930080Wilkins ML, Dallas RH, Fanone KE, Lyon ME. Pediatric palliative care for youth with HIV/AIDS: systematic review of the literature. HIV AIDS (Auckl). 2013 Jul 29;5:165-79. doi: 10.2147/HIV.S44275. Print 2013.
- Background: PubMed 22771129Garvie PA, He J, Wang J, D'Angelo LJ, Lyon ME. An exploratory survey of end-of-life attitudes, beliefs, and experiences of adolescents with HIV/AIDS and their families. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2012 Sep;44(3):373-85.e29. doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2011.09.022. Epub 2012 Jul 7.
- Background: PubMed 15581537Lyon ME, McCabe MA, Patel KM, D'Angelo LJ. What do adolescents want? An exploratory study regarding end-of-life decision-making. J Adolesc Health. 2004 Dec;35(6):529.e1-6. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2004.02.009.
- Background: PubMed 27749945Rosenberg AR, Wolfe J, Wiener L, Lyon M, Feudtner C. Ethics, Emotions, and the Skills of Talking About Progressing Disease With Terminally Ill Adolescents: A Review. JAMA Pediatr. 2016 Dec 1;170(12):1216-1223. doi: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2016.2142.
- Background: PubMed 28359212Lyon ME, D'Angelo LJ, Dallas RH, Hinds PS, Garvie PA, Wilkins ML, Garcia A, Briggs L, Flynn PM, Rana SR, Cheng YI, Wang J. A randomized clinical trial of adolescents with HIV/AIDS: pediatric advance care planning. AIDS Care. 2017 Oct;29(10):1287-1296. doi: 10.1080/09540121.2017.1308463. Epub 2017 Mar 30.
- Background: PubMed 31280659Weaver MS, Anderson B, Cole A, Lyon ME. Documentation of Advance Directives and Code Status in Electronic Medical Records to Honor Goals of Care. J Palliat Care. 2020 Oct;35(4):217-220. doi: 10.1177/0825859719860129. Epub 2019 Jul 7.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Yes. No, only de-identified data.
Related trials for Cancer
Not yet recruitingPhase 1
Hepatic Artery Infusion of Carfilzomib in Participants With Liver Metastatic Disease Previously Treated With Hepatic Artery Infusion Pump Therapy
Colorectal Neoplasms, Neoplasms
RecruitingPhase 2
Tafasitamab With Acalabrutinib and Venetoclax for the Treatment of Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia/Small Lymphocytic Lymphoma
Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia, Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia/Small Lymphocytic Lymphoma
Active, not recruitingPhase 1/2
Selumetinib in Treating Young Patients With Recurrent or Refractory Low Grade Glioma
Low Grade Glioma, Recurrent Childhood Pilocytic Astrocytoma
Enrolling by invitationPhase 2
A Single-Arm Study of Nimotuzumab Combined With NALIRIFOX as First-Line Treatment for Pancreatic Cancer
Pancreatic Cancer Metastatic
Recruiting
Methylation Profiling in Self-Samples for Identification of (Epi)Genetic Biomarkers for Gynecological Cancers
Gynaecological Cancers, Ovarian Cancer
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Maureen E Lyon, PhD principal investigator
Children's National Research Institute
4 sites in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing FAmily CEntered Advance Care Planning for Teens with Cancer in people with Cancer, run by Maureen Lyon at 4 sites in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 6 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 8 May 2025. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 4 sites in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 14 Jan 2025). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Statement of Treatment Preferences (SOTP) a Tool to Measure Goals of Care. (time frame: Agreement on SOTP was assessed 2 weeks post-baseline for controls or immediately following Session 2 for FACE-TC intervention dyads, and at 3, 6, 12 and 18 months.). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT02693665, which also lists 35 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 8 May 2025.