Feasibility, usability and acceptance of weekly electronic patient-reported outcomes among patients receiving pelvic CT- or online MR-guided radiotherapy - A prospective pilot study

Electronic health intervention to manage symptoms of immunotherapy in patients with cancer (SOFIA): Results from a randomized controlled pilot trial

BACKGROUND

For patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors, early detection of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) is critical for one's safety. To this end, a smartphone app (SOFIA) was developed that featured the assessment of electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePROs) focusing on irAEs as well as a set of comprehensive supportive information. Its feasibility and preliminary efficacy were evaluated in a randomized controlled trial (RCT).

METHODS

Patients who received immune checkpoint inhibition therapy were randomly assigned to an intervention group (IG) or a control group (CG; care as usual). During the 12-week intervention period, IG patients used SOFIA to report twice weekly ePROs and receive cancer- and immunotherapy-relevant contents. Before a patient's next clinical visit, the physician in charge was given the ePRO reports. The primary objective was to test the feasibility of SOFIA. Furthermore, the preliminary efficacy of SOFIA for health-related quality of life (HRQOL), psychosocial outcomes, and medical data was examined. Clinical outcomes were assessed at baseline (T0), post-intervention (T1), and a 3-month follow-up (T2).

RESULTS

Seventy-one patients were randomized to the IG (n = 34) or the CG (n = 37). SOFIA showed high feasibility and acceptance. At T1, patients in the IG reported significantly better HRQOL and role functioning and less depression, distress, and appetite loss. No significant differences were revealed regarding medical data, the utilization of supportive care services, or survival.

CONCLUSIONS

SOFIA showed high feasibility and acceptance and improved HRQOL and psychosocial outcomes. These results suggest further evaluation of efficacy in a large-scale confirmatory multicenter RCT.

Mobile applications in radiation oncology-current choices and future potentials

PURPOSE

To review existing scientific literature on mobile applications (apps) in the field of radiation oncology and to evaluate characteristics of commercially available apps across different platforms.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature for publications presenting apps in the field of radiation oncology was carried out using the PubMed database, Cochrane library, Google Scholar, and annual meetings of major radiation oncology societies. Additionally, the two major marketplaces for apps, App Store and Play Store, were searched for available radiation oncology apps for patients and health care professionals (HCP).

RESULTS

A total of 38 original publications which met the inclusion criteria were identified. Within those publications, 32 apps were developed for patients and 6 for HCP. The vast majority of patient apps focused on documenting electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePROs). In the two major marketplaces, 26 apps were found, mainly supporting HCP with dose calculations.

CONCLUSION

Apps used in (and for) scientific research in radiation oncology are rarely available for patients and HCP in common marketplaces.

Feasibility of Using Wearables for Home Monitoring during Radiotherapy for Head and Neck Cancer-Results from the OncoWatch 1.0 Study

Background: Consumer wearables allow objective health data monitoring, e.g., of physical activity and heart rate, which might change over a cancer treatment course. Patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) receiving radiotherapy (RT) with curative intent typically experience side effects such as pain, decreased appetite, and dehydration, which may lead to hospitalizations. Therefore, health data monitoring could be important to understand a patient’s condition outside the hospital. The OncoWatch 1.0 study investigated the feasibility of using smartwatches for patients with HNC receiving RT. Methods: This study was a prospective, single-cohort feasibility study. The inclusion criteria were patients ≥ 18 years of age who planned to receive curatively intended radiotherapy for HNC. Consenting patients were asked to wear a smartwatch during RT and until two weeks after the end of RT. The primary endpoint was adherence. The secondary endpoints were data acquisition and variations in heart rate and physical activity. Results: Ten patients were included, with a median age of 62 years and eight males. The adherence rate for wearing the watch >12 h/d over the study period was 31%. The data acquisition rate was 61%. Conclusions: Although the primary endpoint was not reached, new knowledge has been established, including the secure data setup and key points that need to be addressed in future studies.

Developing a Mobile Patient-Reported Outcomes Version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events Administration System to Capture Postradiation Toxicity in Oncology: Usability and Feasibility Study

Background

Accurate self-reported symptomatic toxicity documentation via the Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE) is essential throughout cancer treatment to ensure safety and understand therapeutic efficacy. However, the capture of accurate toxicities from patients undergoing radiation therapy is challenging because this is generally provided only at the time of scheduled visits.

Objective

This study seeks to establish the usability and feasibility of a mobile PRO-CTCAE Administration System (mPROS) to capture toxicities related to radiation therapy.

Methods

English-speaking adult patients who were undergoing radiation therapy for cancer were enrolled and given a brief demonstration of the Say All Your Symptoms (SAYS) and Symptom Tracking Entry Program (STEP) interfaces of the mPROS app, followed by a patient-use phase where patient actions were observed as they navigated mPROS to enter toxicities. Patient feedback was captured via a semistructured interview and brief questionnaire.

Results

We enrolled 25 patients (age: mean 60.7 years; females: n=13, 52%; White patients: n=13; 52%; non-Hispanic patients: n=19, 76%; college graduates: n=17, 68%). Patients almost equally preferred the SAYS (n=14, 56%) or STEP (n=11, 44%) interfaces, with 21 patients (84%) agreeing that they would use mPROS to report their symptoms to their health care team and 19 patients (76%) agreeing that they would recommend mPROS to others.

Conclusions

The mPROS app is usable and feasible for facilitating the patient reporting of radiation therapy–related symptomatic toxicities. A revised version of mPROS that incorporates patient input and includes electronic health record integration is being developed and validated as part of a multicenter trial.