The use of patient-reported outcomes to detect adverse events in metastatic melanoma patients receiving immunotherapy: a randomized controlled pilot trial

FASTOCH: Feasibility of Electronic Patient-Reported Outcomes in Older Patients With Cancer-A Multicenter Prospective Study

PURPOSE

Multiple studies have demonstrated that electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePROs) improve overall survival and quality of life in cancer care. However, there are no specific prospective data on remote ePRO monitoring in the older population, although they represent a significant proportion of patients with cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From February 2021 to April 2022, patients age 75 years and older under active anticancer treatment were consecutively recruited in six institutions. Remote ePRO feasibility was determined in intention-to-test (ITT) on the basis of the number of active users in the overall population. Primary failure applied to patients who had no Internet access or declined to test ePROs, while the other patients were assigned to the ITT population. Feasibility was also determined per-protocol on the basis of the number of active patients in the ITT population.

RESULTS

Of the 473 patients included, primary failure applied to 288 patients (233 of whom had no Internet access). Among the 185 patients in ITT, 122 used ePROs, leading to a 26% feasibility in ITT and a 66% feasibility per protocol. In a multivariate analysis, the intent to test population was from a higher socioprofessional category (P = .009) and felt in better general condition in the Geriatric 8-score evaluation (P = .002). Active patients significantly differed from the inactive on their self-assessment of a better general condition (P < .001) only.

CONCLUSION

Our multicenter study showed a limited feasibility rate (26%) of remote ePROs monitoring for older patients with cancer, mainly because of technology barriers. Yet, among the patients who did have Internet access, most of them indeed used ePROs (66%). Given the expected benefit of ePROs, the technology barriers therefore need to be lifted to improve cancer care in older patients.

The advantages, disadvantages, threats, and opportunities of electronic patient-reported outcome systems in cancer: A systematic review

Objective

Electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) systems hold promise for revolutionizing communication between cancer patients and healthcare providers across various care settings. This systematic review explores the multifaceted landscape of ePROs in cancer care, encompassing their advantages, disadvantages, potential risks, and opportunities for improvement.

Methods

In our systematic review, we conducted a rigorous search in Scopus, Web of Science, and PubMed, employing comprehensive medical subject heading terms for ePRO and cancer, with no date limitations up to 2024. Studies were critically appraised and thematically analyzed based on inclusion and exclusion criteria, including considerations of advantages, disadvantages, opportunities, and threats.

Findings

Analyzing 85 articles revealed 69 themes categorized into four key areas. Advantages (n = 14) were dominated by themes like "improved quality of life and care." Disadvantages (n = 26) included "limited access and technical issues." Security concerns and lack of technical skills were prominent threats (n = 10). Opportunities (n = 19) highlighted advancements in symptom management and potential solutions for technical challenges.

Conclusion

This review emphasizes the crucial role of continuous exploration, integration, and innovation in ePRO systems for optimizing patient outcomes in cancer care. Beyond traditional clinical settings, ePROs hold promise for applications in survivorship, palliative care, and remote monitoring. By addressing existing limitations and capitalizing on opportunities, ePROs can empower patients, enhance communication, and ultimately improve care delivery across the entire cancer care spectrum.

Assessing Patient-Reported Outcomes in Routine Cancer Clinical Care Using Electronic Administration and Telehealth Technologies: Realist Synthesis of Potential Mechanisms for Improving Health Outcomes

BACKGROUND

The routine measurement of patient-reported outcomes in cancer clinical care using electronic patient-reported outcome measures (ePROMs) is gaining momentum worldwide. However, a deep understanding of the mechanisms underpinning ePROM interventions that could inform their optimal design to improve health outcomes is needed.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to identify the implicit mechanisms that underpin the effectiveness of ePROM interventions and develop program theories about how and when ePROM interventions improve health outcomes.

METHODS

A realist synthesis of the literature about ePROM interventions in cancer clinical care was performed. A conceptual framework of ePROM interventions was constructed to define the scope of the review and frame the initial program theories. Literature searches of Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, Scopus, and CINAHL, supplemented by citation tracking, were performed to identify relevant literature to develop, refine, and test program theories. Quality appraisal of relevant studies was performed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool.

RESULTS

Overall, 61 studies were included in the realist synthesis: 15 (25%) mixed methods studies, 9 (15%) qualitative studies, 13 (21%) descriptive studies, 21 (34%) randomized controlled trials, and 3 (5%) quasi-experimental studies. In total, 3 initial program theories were developed regarding the salient components of ePROM interventions-remote self-reporting, real-time feedback to clinicians, and clinician-patient telecommunication. The refined theories posit that remote self-reporting enables patients to recognize and report symptoms accurately and empowers them to communicate these to clinicians, real-time feedback prompts clinicians to manage symptoms proactively, and clinician-patient telephone interactions and e-interactions between clinic encounters improve symptom management by reshaping how clinicians and patients communicate. However, the intervention may not achieve the intended benefit if ePROMs become a reminder to patients of their illness and are not meaningful to them and when real-time feedback to clinicians lacks relevance and increases the workload.

CONCLUSIONS

The key to improving health outcomes through ePROM interventions is enabling better symptom reporting and communication through remote symptom self-reporting, promoting proactive management of symptoms through real-time clinician feedback, and facilitating clinician-patient interactions. Patient engagement with self-reporting and clinician engagement in responding to feedback are vital and may reinforce each other in improving outcomes. Effective ePROM interventions might fundamentally alter how clinicians and patients interact between clinic encounters.

Registry study of immune-related adverse events using electronic patient-reported outcome in patients with cancer receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors: protocol for a multicentre cohort study

INTRODUCTION

The use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) is rapidly expanding in cancer treatment. ICIs have a unique safety profile, characterised by immune-related adverse events (irAEs). The safety profile of ICIs lacks patient experience and perspectives. This study primarily aims to obtain a database for descriptive research on the status of irAEs using the Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria (PRO-CTCAE) in patients with gastrointestinal cancer, lung cancer and malignant pleural mesothelioma treated with regimens containing ICIs.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is an ongoing, multicentre, observational study in Japan. Eligible patients must be at least 20 years old and have been diagnosed with lung cancer, malignant pleural mesothelioma or gastrointestinal cancer and plan to use ICIs. Participants will install the electronic PRO (ePRO) application and report adverse events via ePRO using PRO-CTCAE once weekly for up to 48 weeks. A registry will be established using background information obtained from medical records. The sample size is determined by 1 year projection without using statistical methods. Statistical analyses will include point estimates and 95% CIs for the incidence of each adverse event by cancer type and regimen at each time point.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This research will be conducted per the Declaration of Helsinki, the Ethical Guidelines for Life Science and Medical Research Involving Human Subjects issued by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology and the Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare, and the revised Personal Information Protection Law. The study protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee (approval ID T2021-0180) of Tokyo Medical University Hospital on 15 October 2021.

REGISTRATION DETAILS

The study began enrolling patients in December 2021. The target enrolment is 260; as of October 2022, 141 have been enrolled, and the enrolment is scheduled to end on 30 June 2023.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

UMIN000046418.

Effects of routine collection of patient-reported outcomes on patient health outcomes in oncology settings: A systematic review

Objective

This study aims to investigate the potential benefits of integrating patient-reported outcomes (PROs) into routine clinical practice for patients undergoing active anticancer treatment.

Methods

We conducted a comprehensive systematic review of randomized controlled trials involving cancer patients undergoing active anticancer treatment, spanning various cancer types and stages. The review covered four electronic databases (Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and CINAHL) up to September 2022. Key inclusion criteria focused on the incorporation of PROs as a routine intervention. Bias assessment followed the Cochrane collaboration's criteria, while the synthesis of results utilized effect size measurements (Cohen's d). The study adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines.

Results

Out of 1549 initially screened records, 16 published randomized controlled trials encompassing 5300 patients met the inclusion criteria. The interventions involved 18 different PROs measurements, with prominent tools being EORTC QLQ-C30 (utilized in four trials) and PRO-CTCAE (utilized in four trials). Measured endpoints included overall quality of life (12 trials), physical health (11 trials), mental health (7 trials), and social health (5 trials). Overall, the study revealed a limited number of statistically significant findings, with predominantly small to moderate effect sizes associated with the interventions.

Conclusions

The findings suggest that the routine integration of PROs into clinical practice does not yield definitive advantages in terms of PROs. It is apparent that further efforts are necessary to ascertain the impact of these interventions on patient health.

Systematic review registration

The review protocol was registered on PROSPERO (ID: CRD42022365456).

Evaluating Immune-Related Adverse Events Using PRO-CTCAE in a Phase II Study of Ipilimumab for Hormone-Sensitive Prostate Cancer

Introduction

 Use of the Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE) during chemotherapy is associated with decreased hospitalization rates, improved quality of life, and longer survival. Limited data exist on the benefit of this symptom assessment tool for monitoring immune-related adverse events (irAEs).

Methods

 We incorporated irAE-related items from the National Cancer Institute's (NCI) PRO-CTCAE in a trial evaluating ipilimumab in combination with androgen deprivation therapy in 16 patients with hormone-sensitive prostate cancer. For comparison, NCI's CTCAE version 4.0 was used by clinicians.

Results

 IrAE-related PRO-CTCAE surveys and matched CTCAEs (184 pairs) reporting abdominal pain, diarrhea, fatigue, anorexia, nausea, vomiting, rash, and pruritus were collected at each treatment administration and during follow-up. Fatigue, diarrhea, rash, and pruritus were the symptoms most frequently reported by both patients and clinicians. Agreement was lowest for pruritus (κ = 0.10) and highest for rash (κ = 0.64). IrAEs were more commonly reported and of higher grade with PRO-CTCAE scores compared with CTCAE grades.

Conclusion

 PRO-CTCAEs focused on irAEs capture the patient's immunotherapy experience while complementing the clinician's toxicity assessment measures. Further study is needed to assess PRO-CTCAE's utility in identifying and managing irAEs.

Testing a Model of Care for Patients on Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors Based on Electronic Patient-Reported Outcomes: Protocol for a Randomized Phase II Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Management of severe symptomatic immune-related adverse events (IrAEs) related to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) can be facilitated by timely detection. As patients face a heterogeneous set of symptoms outside the clinical setting, remotely monitoring and assessing symptoms by using patient-reported outcomes (PROs) may result in shorter delays between symptom onset and clinician detection.

OBJECTIVE

We assess the effect of a model of care for remote patient monitoring and symptom management based on PRO data on the time to detection of symptomatic IrAEs from symptom onset. The secondary objectives are to assess its effects on the time between symptomatic IrAE detection and intervention, IrAE grade (severity), health-related quality of life, self-efficacy, and overall survival at 6 months.

METHODS

For this study, 198 patients with cancer receiving systemic treatment comprising ICIs exclusively will be recruited from 2 Swiss university hospitals. Patients are randomized (1:1) to a digital model of care (intervention) or usual care (control group). Patients are enrolled for 6 months, and they use an electronic app to complete weekly Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General questionnaire and PROMIS (PROs Measurement Information System) Self-Efficacy to Manage Symptoms questionnaires. The intervention patient group completes a standard set of 37 items in a weekly PROs version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE) questionnaire, and active symptoms are reassessed daily for the first 3 months by using a modified 24-hour recall period. Patients can add items from the full PRO-CTCAE item library to their questionnaire. Nurses call patients in the event of new or worsening symptoms and manage them by using a standardized triage algorithm based on the United Kingdom Oncology Nursing Society 24-hour triage tool. This algorithm provides guidance on deciding if patients should receive in-person care, if monitoring should be increased, or if self-management education should be reinforced.

RESULTS

The Institut Suisse de Recherche Expérimentale sur le Cancer Foundation and Kaiku Health Ltd funded this study. Active recruitment began since November 2021 and is projected to conclude in November 2023. Trial results are expected to be published in the first quarter of 2024 and will be disseminated through publications submitted at international scientific conferences.

CONCLUSIONS

This trial is among the first trials to use PRO data to directly influence routine care of patients treated with ICIs and addresses some limitations in previous studies. This trial collects a wider spectrum of self-reported symptom data daily. There are some methodological limitations brought by changes in evolving treatment standards for patients with cancer. This trial's results could entail further academic discussions on the challenges of diagnosing and managing symptoms associated with treatment remotely by providing further insights into the burden symptoms represent to patients and highlight the complexity of care procedures involved in managing symptomatic IrAEs.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05530187; https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05530187.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

DERR1-10.2196/48386.

An eHealth App (CAPABLE) Providing Symptom Monitoring, Well-Being Interventions, and Educational Material for Patients With Melanoma Treated With Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors: Protocol for an Exploratory Intervention Trial

BACKGROUND

Since treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) is becoming standard therapy for patients with high-risk and advanced melanoma, an increasing number of patients experience treatment-related adverse events such as fatigue. Until now, studies have demonstrated the benefits of using eHealth tools to provide either symptom monitoring or interventions to reduce treatment-related symptoms such as fatigue. However, an eHealth tool that facilitates the combination of both symptom monitoring and symptom management in patients with melanoma treated with ICIs is still needed.

OBJECTIVE

In this pilot study, we will explore the use of the CAPABLE (Cancer Patients Better Life Experience) app in providing symptom monitoring, education, and well-being interventions on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) outcomes such as fatigue and physical functioning, as well as patients' acceptance and usability of using CAPABLE.

METHODS

This prospective, exploratory pilot study will examine changes in fatigue over time in 36 patients with stage III or IV melanoma during treatment with ICI using CAPABLE (a smartphone app and multisensory smartwatch). This cohort will be compared to a prospectively collected cohort of patients with melanoma treated with standard ICI therapy. CAPABLE will be used for a minimum of 3 and a maximum of 6 months. The primary endpoint in this study is the change in fatigue between baseline and 3 and 6 months after the start of treatment. Secondary end points include HRQoL outcomes, usability, and feasibility parameters.

RESULTS

Study inclusion started in April 2023 and is currently ongoing.

CONCLUSIONS

This pilot study will explore the effect, usability, and feasibility of CAPABLE in patients with melanoma during treatment with ICI. Adding the CAPABLE system to active treatment is hypothesized to decrease fatigue in patients with high-risk and advanced melanoma during treatment with ICIs compared to a control group receiving standard care. The Medical Ethics Committee NedMec (Amsterdam, The Netherlands) granted ethical approval for this study (reference number 22-981/NL81970.000.22).

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05827289; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05827289.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

DERR1-10.2196/49252.

Effectiveness of routine provision of feedback from patient-reported outcome measurements for cancer care improvement: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Research shows that feeding back patient-reported outcome information to clinicians and/or patients could be associated with improved care processes and patient outcomes. Quantitative syntheses of intervention effects on oncology patient outcomes are lacking.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effects of patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) feedback intervention on oncology patient outcomes.

DATA SOURCES

We identified relevant studies from 116 references included in our previous Cochrane review assessing the intervention for the general population. In May 2022, we conducted a systematic search in five bibliography databases using predefined keywords for additional studies published after the Cochrane review.

STUDY SELECTION

We included randomized controlled trials evaluating the effects of PROM feedback intervention on processes and outcomes of care for oncology patients.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

We used the meta-analytic approach to synthesize across studies measuring the same outcomes. We estimated pooled effects of the intervention on outcomes using Cohen's d for continuous data and risk ratio (RR) with a 95% confidence interval for dichotomous data. We used a descriptive approach to summarize studies which reported insufficient data for a meta-analysis.

MAIN OUTCOME(S) AND MEASURES(S)

Health-related quality of life (HRQL), symptoms, patient-healthcare provider communication, number of visits and hospitalizations, number of adverse events, and overall survival.

RESULTS

We included 29 studies involving 7071 cancer participants. A small number of studies was available for each metanalysis (median = 3 studies, ranging from 2 to 9 studies) due to heterogeneity in the evaluation of the trials. We found that the intervention improved HRQL (Cohen's d = 0.23, 95% CI 0.11-0.34), mental functioning (Cohen's d = 0.14, 95% CI 0.02-0.26), patient-healthcare provider communication (Cohen's d = 0.41, 95% CI 0.20-0.62), and 1-year overall survival (OR = 0.64, 95% CI 0.48-0.86). The risk of bias across studies was considerable in the domains of allocation concealment, blinding, and intervention contamination.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Although we found evidence to support the intervention for highly relevant outcomes, our conclusions are tempered by the high risk of bias relating mainly to intervention design. PROM feedback for oncology patients may improve processes and outcomes for cancer patients but more high-quality evidence is required.

The Feasibility, Acceptability, and Effectiveness of Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Symptom Monitoring for Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Toxicities: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

Increasing use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in routine cancer care will increase the incidence of immune-related adverse events (irAEs). Systems are needed to support remote monitoring for irAEs. Electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) symptom monitoring systems can help monitor and manage symptoms and side effects. We assessed the content and features of ePRO symptom monitoring systems for irAEs, and their feasibility, acceptability, and impact on patient outcomes and health care utilization.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted in May 2022 on MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Quantitative and qualitative data relevant to the review questions were extracted and synthesized in tables.

RESULTS

Seven papers describing five ePRO systems were included. All systems collected PROs between clinic visits. Two of five used validated symptom questionnaires, 3/5 provided prompts to complete questionnaires, 4/5 provided reminders to self-report, and 3/5 provided clinician alerts for severe/worsening side effects. Four of five provided coverage of ≥26/30 irAEs in the ASCO irAE guideline. Feasibility and acceptability were demonstrated with consent rates of 54%-100%, 17%-27% of questionnaires generating alerts, and adherence rates of 74%-75%. One paper showed a reduction in grade 3-4 irAEs, treatment discontinuation, clinic visit duration, and emergency department presentations, while another showed no difference in these outcomes or the rate of steroid use.

CONCLUSION

There is preliminary evidence of the feasibility and acceptability of ePRO symptom monitoring for irAEs. However, further studies are needed to confirm the impact on ICI-specific outcomes, such as the frequency of grade 3-4 irAEs and duration of immunosuppression. Suggestions for the content and features of future ePRO systems for irAEs are provided.

Implementation of electronic prospective surveillance models in cancer care: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Electronic prospective surveillance models (ePSMs) for cancer rehabilitation include routine monitoring of the development of treatment toxicities and impairments via electronic patient-reported outcomes. Implementing ePSMs to address the knowledge-to-practice gap between the high incidence of impairments and low uptake of rehabilitation services is a top priority in cancer care.

METHODS

We conducted a scoping review to understand the state of the evidence concerning the implementation of ePSMs in oncology. Seven electronic databases were searched from inception to February 2021. All articles were screened and extracted by two independent reviewers. Data regarding the implementation strategies, outcomes, and determinants were extracted. The Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change taxonomy and the implementation outcomes taxonomy guided the synthesis of the implementation strategies and outcomes, respectively. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research guided the synthesis of determinants based on five domains (intervention characteristics, individual characteristics, inner setting, outer setting, and process).

RESULTS

Of the 5122 records identified, 46 interventions met inclusion criteria. The common implementation strategies employed were "conduct educational meetings," "distribute educational materials," "change record systems," and "intervene with patients to enhance uptake and adherence." Feasibility and acceptability were the prominent outcomes used to assess implementation. The complexity, relative advantage, design quality, and packaging were major implementation determinants at the intervention level. Knowledge was key at the individual level. At the inner setting level, major determinants were the implementation climate and readiness for implementation. At the outer setting level, meeting the needs of patients was the primary determinant. Engaging various stakeholders was key at the process level.

CONCLUSIONS

This review provides a comprehensive summary of what is known concerning the implementation of ePSMs. The results can inform future implementation and evaluation of ePSMs, including planning for key determinants, selecting implementation strategies, and considering outcomes alongside local contextual factors to guide the implementation process.

Patient-reported outcome (PRO) measurements in chronic and malignant diseases: ten years' experience with PRO-algorithm-based patient-clinician interaction (telePRO) in AmbuFlex

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported Outcome (PRO) measures may be used as the basis for out-patient follow-up instead of fixed appointments. The patients attend follow-up from home by filling in questionnaires developed for that specific aim and patient group (telePRO). The questionnaires are handled in real time by a specific algorithm, which assigns an outcome color reflecting clinical need. The specific questionnaires and algorithms (named solutions) are constructed in a consensus process with clinicians. We aimed to describe AmbuFlex' telePRO solutions and the algorithm outcomes and variation between patient groups, and to discuss possible applications and challenges.

METHODS

TelePRO solutions with more than 100 processed questionnaires were included in the analysis. Data were retrieved together with data from national registers. Characteristics of patients, questionnaires and outcomes were tabulated for each solution. Graphs were constructed depicting the overall and within-patient distribution of algorithm outcomes for each solution.

RESULTS

From 2011 to 2021, 29 specific telePRO solutions were implemented within 24 different ICD-10 groups. A total of 42,015 patients were referred and answered 171,268 questionnaires. An existing applicable instrument with cut-off values was available for four solutions, whereas items were selected or developed ad hoc for the other solutions. Mean age ranged from 10.7 (Pain in children) to 73.3 years (chronic kidney disease). Mortality among referred patients varied between 0 (obesity, asthma, endometriosis and pain in children) and 528 per 1000 patient years (Lung cancer). There was substantial variation in algorithm outcome across patient groups while different solutions within the same patient group varied little.

DISCUSSION

TelePRO can be applied in diseases where PRO can reflect clinical status and needs. Questionnaires and algorithms should be adapted for the specific patient groups and clinical aims. When PRO is used as replacement for clinical contact, special carefulness should be observed with respect to patient safety.

Effectiveness of a phone-based nurse monitoring assessment and intervention for chemotherapy-related toxicity: A randomized multicenter trial

Purpose

Anticancer treatment-related toxicities can impact morbidity and mortality, hamper the administration of treatment, worsen the quality of life and increase the burden on the healthcare system. Therefore, their prompt identification is crucial. NICSO (Italian Network for Supportive Care in Cancer) conducted a nationwide randomized trial to evaluate the role of a planned, weekly phone-based nurse monitoring intervention to prevent and treat chemotherapy, targeted therapy- and immunotherapy-related toxicities. Here, we report the results from the chemotherapy arm.

Methods

This was a nationwide, randomized, open-label trial conducted among 29 Italian centers (NCT04726020) involving adult patients with breast, colon, or lung cancer and a life expectancy ≥6 months receiving adjuvant chemotherapy. Patients received either a weekly nurse monitoring phone call and an educational leaflet reporting practical advice about prevention and treatment of toxicities (experimental group) or the educational leaflet only (control group).

Results

The addition of a nurse monitoring intervention may help reduce time spent with severe toxicities (grade ≥3), particularly those less frequently reported in clinical practice, such as fatigue. When considering grade 1–2 AEs, times with mild/moderate diarrhea, mucositis, fatigue and pain were shorter in the experimental arm. Time spent without AEs was significantly longer in the experimental arms for all the toxicities. The requirement for special medical attention was comparable between groups.

Conclusion

This study suggests the need for implementing a better system of toxicity assessment and management for patients treated with adjuvant chemotherapy to promote effective preventive and/or therapeutic intervention against these events.

Exploring supportive care and information needs through a proposed eHealth application among melanoma patients undergoing systemic therapy: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

During and after systemic therapy, patients with high risk and advanced melanoma experience challenges regarding cancer-related symptoms, treatment-related adverse events, and an impact of these symptoms on their physical and psychosocial well-being. Few studies have investigated the specific needs of these patients and the potential role of eHealth applications in meeting those needs.

OBJECTIVE

To explore the supportive care and information needs of high risk and advanced melanoma patients, and how these needs can be supported by eHealth applications.

METHODS

In this qualitative study, semi-structured interviews with high risk and advanced melanoma patients during or after systemic treatment were conducted to understand their needs and requirements as possible end-users of mobile eHealth applications. Interview transcripts were independently coded and thematically analyzed.

RESULTS

Thirteen participants consented to be interviewed, aged 31 to 71 years. Nearly all patients (n = 12, 92%) experienced unmet information and supportive care needs during and after active treatment. Patients expected to value eHealth applications that facilitate information gathering, wellbeing interventions, and symptom management. The majority of patients (n = 10, 77%) anticipated various advantages from using an eHealth application, including increased autonomy, higher quality of life, and improved disease self-management.

DISCUSSION

High risk and advanced melanoma patients have unmet supportive care and information needs during and after systemic treatment. The use of eHealth applications might be an effective way to meet these unmet needs. Patients anticipate a variety of advantages from using these applications, including deriving various benefits from the use of these applications, such as enhanced autonomy.

Impact of patient-reported outcomes on symptom monitoring during treatment with checkpoint inhibitors: health-related quality of life among melanoma patients in a randomized controlled trial

Introduction

In a randomized controlled trial, we previously investigated if melanoma patients receiving checkpoint inhibitors had fewer severe immune-related adverse events (irAEs) when they reported symptoms using electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePRO) with triggered alerts as an add-on to standard care, compared to standard care alone. The aim of this study is to examine between-group differences in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and associations between irAEs severity and HRQoL.

Methods

The study population of 138 patients completed the EuroQol EQ-5D-5L Index and FACT-M questionnaires at baseline and weeks 24 and 48. We analyzed HRQoL from all patients who completed at least one questionnaire. Missing FACT-M items were imputed following existing guidelines.

Results

There was no difference in HRQoL at baseline as measured EQ-5D-5L between the intervention and the control group. Between baseline and 48 weeks, mean EQ-5D-5L scores were unchanged among patients in the intervention group (p = 0.81) but decreased significantly among patients in the control group (p = 0.03). Consequently, patients in the intervention group had higher mean scores than those in the control group (p = 0.05) at 48 weeks. Mean FACT-M scores did not differ significantly between the two groups at any of the time points. There were observed no between-group differences in mean EQ-5D-5 and mean FACT-M scores between patients with severe irAEs and patients who had none.

Conclusion

Melanoma patients receiving CPIs who self-reported irAEs using ePRO with triggered alerts as a supplement to standard care maintained their HRQoL compared to patients who received standard care alone. Patients in the intervention group had a significantly better HRQoL measured by EQ-5D-5L than controls 48 weeks after baseline. The results suggest that including ePRO in standard care increases melanoma patients´ well-being. Further and larger studies are needed to confirm this finding and examine the impact of severe irAEs on cancer patients’ HRQoL.

Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT03073031 Registered 8 March 2017, Retrospectively registeredhttps://clinicaltrials.gov/.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s41687-022-00414-5.

Routine provision of feedback from patient-reported outcome measurements to healthcare providers and patients in clinical practice

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs) assess a patient's subjective appraisal of health outcomes from their own perspective. Despite hypothesised benefits that feedback  on PROMs can support decision-making in clinical practice and improve outcomes, there is uncertainty surrounding the effectiveness of PROMs feedback.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of PROMs feedback to patients, or healthcare workers, or both on patient-reported health outcomes and processes of care.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, two other databases and two clinical trial registries on 5 October 2020. We searched grey literature and consulted experts in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Two review authors independently screened and selected studies for inclusion. We included randomised trials directly comparing the effects on outcomes and processes of care of PROMs feedback to healthcare professionals and patients, or both with the impact of not providing such information.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two groups of two authors independently extracted data from the included studies and evaluated study quality. We followed standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane and EPOC. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of the evidence. We conducted meta-analyses of the results where possible.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 116 randomised trials which assessed the effectiveness of PROMs feedback in improving processes or outcomes of care, or both in a broad range of disciplines including psychiatry, primary care, and oncology. Studies were conducted across diverse ambulatory primary and secondary care settings in North America, Europe and Australasia. A total of 49,785 patients were included across all the studies. The certainty of the evidence varied between very low and moderate. Many of the studies included in the review were at risk of performance and detection bias. The evidence suggests moderate certainty that PROMs feedback probably improves quality of life (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.15, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.05 to 0.26; 11 studies; 2687 participants), and leads to an increase in patient-physician communication (SMD 0.36, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.52; 5 studies; 658 participants), diagnosis and notation (risk ratio (RR) 1.73, 95% CI 1.44 to 2.08; 21 studies; 7223 participants), and disease control (RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.41; 14 studies; 2806 participants). The intervention probably makes little or no difference for general health perceptions (SMD 0.04, 95% CI -0.17 to 0.24; 2 studies, 552 participants; low-certainty evidence), social functioning (SMD 0.02, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.09; 15 studies; 2632 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and pain (SMD 0.00, 95% CI -0.09 to 0.08; 9 studies; 2386 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). We are uncertain about the effect of PROMs feedback on physical functioning (14 studies; 2788 participants) and mental functioning (34 studies; 7782 participants), as well as fatigue (4 studies; 741 participants), as the certainty of the evidence was very low. We did not find studies reporting on adverse effects defined as distress following or related to PROM completion.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

PROM feedback probably produces moderate improvements in communication between healthcare professionals and patients as well as in diagnosis and notation, and disease control, and small improvements to quality of life. Our confidence in the effects is limited by the risk of bias, heterogeneity and small number of trials conducted to assess outcomes of interest. It is unclear whether   many of these improvements are clinically meaningful or sustainable in the long term. There is a need for more high-quality studies in this area, particularly studies which employ cluster designs and utilise techniques to maintain allocation concealment.

Evaluation of Technology-Enabled Monitoring of Patient-Reported Outcomes to Detect and Treat Toxic Effects Linked to Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors

IMPORTANCE

Immune checkpoint inhibitors can produce distinct toxic effects that require prompt recognition and timely management.

OBJECTIVE

To develop a technology-enabled, dynamically adaptive protocol that can provide the accurate information needed to inform specific remedies for immune toxic effects in patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

An open-label cohort study was conducted at a single tertiary referral center from September 6, 2019, to September 3, 2020. The median follow-up duration was 63 (interquartile range, 35.5-122) days. Fifty patients with genitourinary cancers treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors were enrolled.

INTERVENTIONS

A fit-for-purpose electronic platform was developed to enable active patient and care team participation. A smartphone application downloaded onto patients' personal mobile devices prompted them to report their symptoms at least 3 times per week. The set of symptoms and associated queries were paired with alert thresholds for symptoms requiring clinical action.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary end point of this interim analysis was feasibility, as measured by patient and care team adherence, and lack of increase in care team staffing. Operating characteristics were estimated for each symptom alert and used to dynamically adapt the alert thresholds to ensure sensitivity while reducing unnecessary alerts.

RESULTS

Of the 50 patients enrolled, 47 had at least 1 follow-up visit and were included in the analysis. Median age was 65 years (range, 37-86), 39 patients (83%) were men, and 39 patients (83%) had metastatic cancer, with the most common being urothelial cell carcinoma and renal cell carcinoma (22 [47%] patients each). After initial onboarding, no further care team training or additional care team staffing was required. Patients had a median study adherence rate of 74% (interquartile range, 60%-86%) and 73% of automated alerts were reviewed within 3 days by the clinic team. Symptoms with the highest positive predictive value for adverse events requiring acute intervention included dizziness (21%), nausea/vomiting (26%), and shortness of breath (14%). The symptoms most likely to result in unnecessary alerts were arthralgia and myalgia, fatigue, and cough.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The findings of this cohort study suggest an acceptable and fiscally sound method can be developed to create a dynamic learning system to detect and manage immune-related toxic effects.