Sample size calculation: There was no interventional study directly investigating the effectiveness in increasing the extent of congruence between patient preferred and actual end-of-life (EOL) care received by terminally ill cancer patients; therefore sample size estimation will be based on the effectiveness of holding EOL care discussions between patients and physicians on the extent to increase congruence between the patient's preferred and actual EOL care received. Patients who reported having EOL care discussions with their physicians significantly more likely to receive EOL care consistent to their preferences (OR=2.26; p<.0001) and received significantly fewer aggressive medical interventions near death, with lower rates of CPR (0.8% vs 6.7%; AOR, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.03-0.80), mechanical ventilation support (1.6% vs 11.0%; AOR, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.08-0.83), and ICU care (4.1% vs 12.4%; AOR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.14-0.90), respectively. A sample size of 124-195 dyads per group achieves 80% power to detect a difference between the interventional and control group by a two-sided hypothesis test with a significance level of 0.05. In compensating the 18.5% of attrition rate found in our previous longitudinal study, 147-231 dyads per group are needed. The proposed sample size will be targeted on 231 dyads per group to ensure adequate power to detect the hypothesized effects of the proposed intervention.