Medical futility and appropriate medical care in patients whose death is thought to be imminent

Often it is very difficult to make decisions involving the termination of aggressive cancer care in the case of patients who are no longer benefiting. Among these patients, our ability to "do everything possible" to continue life is in conflict with "doing the right thing"; the greatest benefit to these patients derives from delivering excellent supportive care and assisting them in understanding and accepting end-of-life issues. Furthermore, in a cost-conscious environment with limited resources, all patients and, indeed, all of society, benefit when aggressive and often costly cancer care is limited to those patients who are likely to benefit. However, these issues are complex, blending treatment science and ethics, and thus, the physician frequently has no objective reference point on which to base the decisions. This paper integrates the principles of ethics (respect for autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice) and three difficult issues encountered by physicians in clinical decision-making in terminal cancer patients in the American healthcare system. These issues include: medical futility and appropriate care, applications of outcomes research in clinical decision-making, and impact of cost, particularly in a managed care environment, on treatment choice. These topics are illustrated with reference to patients presenting to our emergency center with stage IV lung cancer and dyspnea, and the application of an outcomes model under development to predict imminent death in these patients is discussed. Outcomes models may provide patients, their families, and their physicians with objective data on which to base end-of-life decision-making. Minimizing aggressive treatment of terminally ill patients may provide better life quality and will reduce costs during the patients' end of life. Ethics plays a crucial role in integrating medical science, patient choice, and cost in making appropriate decisions.