# Increasing challenges of general practitioner-oncologist interaction in end-of-life communication: a qualitative study

## TL;DR

This study explores the challenges general practitioners face when communicating with oncologists about end-of-life care for patients with advanced lung cancer.

## Contribution

The study highlights the increasing complexity in GP-oncologist communication due to modern oncology's advances and prognostic uncertainty.

## Key findings

- GPs face challenges in timing and conducting end-of-life conversations due to lack of standardized communication with oncologists.
- Prognostic uncertainty and rapid advances in oncology complicate the integration of palliative care.
- Direct phone calls and digital platforms are suggested as effective modes of GP-oncologist interaction.

## Abstract

The timely initiation of end-of-life (EOL) conversations is considerered best practice for patients with advanced cancer and therefore recommended in oncological guidelines. General practitioners (GPs) play a key role in the coordination of EOL-care and often claim that they have also the responsibility to initiate the necessary conversations. Nonetheless, the content of these conversations is rarely a subject of communication between GPs and oncology specialists but crucial for timely integration of palliative care. The aim of this study is to explore the GPs‘ perspectives on initiation and conduction of EOL-conversations in patients with metastatic lung cancer and how they perceive the interaction with the oncologists of a cancer center.

Qualitative design with in-depth interviews with GPs that refer patients with metastatic lung cancer to a cancer center; thematic analysis following Braun and Clarke.

We identified three main themes: timing and conduction of EOL-conversations, factors influencing EOL-conversations, and modes of GP-oncologist interaction. All themes showed important and increasing challenges in regard to communication strategies or procedures within the cancer center and between general practitioners and oncologists. Aside from the elucidated challenges of EOL-communication, new problems arise from the difficulties in keeping pace with advances in oncology and the increasing prognostic uncertainty. Additionally, the lack of standardized communication in EOL-topics between GPs and oncologists is underlined. Options in the mode of interaction include written information in reports or digital platforms and direct phone calls.

Because of the growing complexity in modern oncology, strategies for improvement in GP-oncologist interaction have to consider information about therapeutic advances and prognosis of patients. The increasing prognostic uncertainty hazards the adequate provision and conduction of EOL-conversations and thus, the timely integration of palliative care. As a consequence, a trustful personal interaction that includes direct contact via phone calls between GPs and oncologists should be encouraged.

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12904-025-01690-w.