I think it's a bit misleading to put your advice (which is good advice) in the context of experimental treatment. In my experience the cruelty is more likely to

I think it's a bit misleading to put your advice (which is good advice) in the context of experimental treatment. In my experience the cruelty is more likely to come from applying standard treatment that is either hopeless or unnecessary. In our case it was (a) returning to a line of chemo that had most likely already failed, and (b) a pleurodesis when repeat aspirations would have been more appropriate given what the doctors had said about life expectancy. On the other hand there were novel treatments that were relatively non-invasive, safe and had a chance (I guessed about 15%) of 6+ months of benefit: (a) copying the Brighter trial and (b) low-dose intralesional immunotherapy on a palpable lesion. Both were turned out to be too hard to get access to even with the support of our physician. Yes, at some point you have to accept that the only thing left is palliative care. Beware that the window between "still trying all the standard options" and "too late to try something new" may be vanishingly small.