Digital Monitoring and Management of Patients With Advanced or Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Treated With Cancer Immunotherapy and Its Impact on Quality of Clinical Care: Interview and Survey Study Among Health Care Professionals and Patients

Patient-Reported Outcome and Experience Measures in Advanced Nursing Practice: What Are Key Considerations for Implementation and Optimized Use?

OBJECTIVE

To discuss the opportunities and challenges of implementing patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) within advanced practice nursing services in cancer care.

METHODS

This discussion paper has been informed by an environmental scan of evidence from systematic reviews and primary studies evaluating the use and implementation of PROMs and PREMs. Literature from the contexts of cancer and chronic disease, including nursing and multidisciplinary supportive care literature, has been included.

RESULTS

Advanced practice nurses are well-positioned to evaluate and respond to PROMs and PREMs data; several studies have highlighted improved patient outcomes concerning quality of life, symptom distress, and functional status within nurse-led services. Nevertheless, the implementation of PROMs and PREMs in cancer care and nurse-led services is variable. Previous studies have highlighted implementation challenges, which can hinder comparability and generalizability of PROMs and PREMs instruments. Advanced practice nurses should consider these challenges, including ways to use standardized PROM instruments. Electronic PROMs, while efficient, may exclude individuals at risk of inequity. Complex, lengthy, and frequent administration of PROMs may also overburden people living with or after cancer, with people affected by cancer expressing preference for flexible use in some studies. Therefore, the involvement of people affected by cancer in planning for PROMs/PREMs implementation may overcome this challenge. Finally, organizational considerations in implementation should address financial investments, including initial costs for technology and training and consideration of the operationalization of PROMs within existing infrastructure for the seamless utilization of PROMs data.

CONCLUSION

Despite the potential of advanced practice nursing services to enhance patient-reported outcomes and experiences, variability in the implementation of PROMs and PREMs poses challenges. Use of validated measures, electronic or paper-based instruments, and the preferences of people affected by cancer for the use of PROMs and PREMs must be carefully considered in consultation with end users for successful implementation.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

In planning for the implementation of PROMs and PREMs within nurse-led services, implementation risks may be mitigated through establishing clear guidelines for their use, investment in the development of the required infrastructure, user education, and rigorous implementation processes, including patient involvement in PROMs/PREMs selection.

Impact of Electronic Patient-Reported Outcomes on Unplanned Consultations and Hospitalizations in Patients With Cancer Undergoing Systemic Therapy: Results of a Patient-Reported Outcome Study Compared With Matched Retrospective Data

BACKGROUND

The evaluation of electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePROs) is increasingly being used in clinical studies of patients with cancer and enables structured and standardized data collection in patients' everyday lives. So far, few studies or analyses have focused on the medical benefit of ePROs for patients.

OBJECTIVE

The current exploratory analysis aimed to obtain an initial indication of whether the use of the Consilium Care app (recently renamed medidux; mobile Health AG) for structured and regular self-assessment of side effects by ePROs had a recognizable effect on incidences of unplanned consultations and hospitalizations of patients with cancer compared to a control group in a real-world care setting without app use. To analyze this, the incidences of unplanned consultations and hospitalizations of patients with cancer using the Consilium Care app that were recorded by the treating physicians as part of the patient reported outcome (PRO) study were compared retrospectively to corresponding data from a comparable population of patients with cancer collected at 2 Swiss oncology centers during standard-of-care treatment.

METHODS

Patients with cancer in the PRO study (178 included in this analysis) receiving systemic therapy in a neoadjuvant or noncurative setting performed a self-assessment of side effects via the Consilium Care app over an observational period of 90 days. In this period, unplanned (emergency) consultations and hospitalizations were documented by the participating physicians. The incidence of these events was compared with retrospective data obtained from 2 Swiss tumor centers for a matched cohort of patients with cancer.

RESULTS

Both patient groups were comparable in terms of age and gender ratio, as well as the distribution of cancer entities and Joint Committee on Cancer stages. In total, 139 patients from each group were treated with chemotherapy and 39 with other therapies. Looking at all patients, no significant difference in events per patient was found between the Consilium group and the control group (odds ratio 0.742, 90% CI 0.455-1.206). However, a multivariate regression model revealed that the interaction term between the Consilium group and the factor "chemotherapy" was significant at the 5% level (P=.048). This motivated a corresponding subgroup analysis that indicated a relevant reduction of the risk for the intervention group in the subgroup of patients who underwent chemotherapy. The corresponding odds ratio of 0.53, 90% CI 0.288-0.957 is equivalent to a halving of the risk for patients in the Consilium group and suggests a clinically relevant effect that is significant at a 2-sided 10% level (P=.08, Fisher exact test).

CONCLUSIONS

A comparison of unplanned consultations and hospitalizations from the PRO study with retrospective data from a comparable cohort of patients with cancer suggests a positive effect of regular app-based ePROs for patients receiving chemotherapy. These data are to be verified in the ongoing randomized PRO2 study (registered on ClinicalTrials.gov; NCT05425550).

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03578731; https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03578731.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

RR2-10.2196/29271.

Feasibility and User Experience of Digital Patient Monitoring for Real-World Patients With Lung or Breast Cancer

BACKGROUND

Digital patient monitoring (DPM) tools can facilitate early symptom management for patients with cancer through systematic symptom reporting; however, low adherence can be a challenge. We assessed patient/healthcare professional (HCP) use of DPM in routine clinical practice.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients with locally advanced/metastatic lung cancer or HER2-positive breast cancer received locally approved/reimbursed drugs alongside DPM, with elements tailored by F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, on the Kaiku Health DPM platform. Patient access to the DPM tool was through their own devices (eg, laptops, PCs, smartphones, or tablets), via either a browser or an app on Apple iOS or Android devices. Coprimary endpoints were patient DPM tool adoption (positive threshold: 60%) and week 1-6 adherence to weekly symptom reporting (positive threshold: 70%). Secondary endpoints included experience and clinical impact.

RESULTS

At data cutoff (June 9, 2022), adoption was 85% and adherence was 76%. Customer satisfaction and effort scores for patients were 76% and 82%, respectively, and 83% and 79% for HCPs. Patients spent approximately 10 minutes using the DPM tool and completed approximately 1.0 symptom questionnaires per week (completion time 1-4 minutes). HCPs spent approximately 1-3 minutes a week using the tool per patient. Median time to HCP review for alerted versus non-alerted symptom questionnaires was 19.6 versus 21.5 hours. Most patients and HCPs felt that the DPM tool covered/mostly covered symptoms experienced (71% and 75%), was educational (65% and 92%), and improved patient-HCP conversations (70% and 83%) and cancer care (51% and 71%).

CONCLUSION

The DPM tool demonstrated positive adoption, adherence, and user experience for patients with lung/breast cancer, suggesting that DPM tools may benefit clinical cancer care.

Comparison of the Real-World Reporting of Symptoms and Well-Being for the HER2-Directed Trastuzumab Biosimilar Ogivri With Registry Data for Herceptin in the Treatment of Breast Cancer: Prospective Observational Study (OGIPRO) of Electronic Patient-Reported Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Trastuzumab has had a major impact on the treatment of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive breast cancer (BC). Anti-HER2 biosimilars such as Ogivri have demonstrated safety and clinical equivalence to trastuzumab (using Herceptin as the reference product) in clinical trials. To our knowledge, there has been no real-world report of the side effects and quality of life (QoL) in patients treated with biosimilars using electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePROs).

OBJECTIVE

The primary objective of this prospective observational study (OGIPRO study) was to compare the ePRO data related to treatment side effects collected with the medidux app in patients with HER2-positive BC treated with the trastuzumab biosimilar Ogivri (prospective cohort) to those obtained from historical cohorts treated with Herceptin alone or combined with pertuzumab and/or chemotherapy (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02004496 and NCT03578731).

METHODS

Patients were treated with Ogivri alone or combined with pertuzumab and/or chemotherapy and hormone therapy in (neo)adjuvant and palliative settings. Patients used the medidux app to dynamically record symptoms (according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events [CTCAE]), well-being (according to the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status scale), QoL (using the EQ-5D-5L questionnaire), cognitive capabilities, and vital parameters over 6 weeks. The primary endpoint was the mean CTCAE score. Key secondary endpoints included the mean well-being score. Data of this prospective cohort were compared with those of the historical cohorts (n=38 patients; median age 51, range 31-78 years).

RESULTS

Overall, 53 female patients with a median age of 54 years (range 31-87 years) were enrolled in the OGIPRO study. The mean CTCAE score was analyzed in 50 patients with available data on symptoms, while the mean well-being score was evaluated in 52 patients with available data. The most common symptoms reported in both cohorts included fatigue, taste disorder, nausea, diarrhea, dry mucosa, joint discomfort, tingling, sleep disorder, headache, and appetite loss. Most patients experienced minimal (grade 0) or mild (grade 1) toxicities in both cohorts. The mean CTCAE score was comparable between the prospective and historical cohorts (29.0 and 30.3, respectively; mean difference -1.27, 95% CI -7.24 to 4.70; P=.68). Similarly, no significant difference was found for the mean well-being score between the groups treated with the trastuzumab biosimilar Ogivri and Herceptin (74.3 and 69.8, respectively; mean difference 4.45, 95% CI -3.53 to 12.44; P=.28).

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment of patients with HER2-positive BC with the trastuzumab biosimilar Ogivri resulted in equivalent symptoms, adverse events, and well-being as found for patients treated with Herceptin as determined by ePRO data. Hence, integration of an ePRO system into research and clinical practice can provide reliable information when investigating the real-world tolerability and outcomes of similar therapeutic compounds.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05234021; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05234021.

Oncology Nurses' Experiences of Using Health Information Systems in the Delivery of Cancer Care in a Range of Care Settings: A Systematic Integrative Review

OBJECTIVES

This systematic review aimed to identify oncology nurses' experiences of using health information systems (HIS) in the delivery of cancer care.

DATA SOURCES

The electronic databases searched included CINAHL, MEDLINE (EBSCO host), SCOPUS, Web of Science Core Collection, Google Scholar, OVID, and ProQuest Central (using advanced search strategy) and hand searching of reference lists of the included articles and relevant systematic reviews. Studies published in English language were examined.

CONCLUSION

Twenty-six studies were included. Three themes emerged: (1) the transparency and application of the nursing process within HIS, (2) HIS enhancing and facilitating communication between nurses and patients, and (3) the impact of HIS on the elements of person-centered care. Nurses' experiences with HIS were overall positive. However, digital systems do not fully capture all elements of the nursing processes; this was confirmed in this review, through the nurses' lens. Most studies used HIS for symptom reporting and monitoring within non-inpatient settings and largely biomedical and lack insight into the person-centeredness and overall holistic care.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE

There are evidently varied views of HIS adoption across the globe. HIS can improve health-related quality of life and symptom burden, including self-reporting of symptoms among patients. However, there is a need for ongoing high-quality research, and clearer reporting than is evident in the current 26 studies, to fully understand the impact of HIS within the nursing processes and patient outcomes across all specialty cancer fields.

Digital Therapeutics for Improving Effectiveness of Pharmaceutical Drugs and Biological Products: Preclinical and Clinical Studies Supporting Development of Drug + Digital Combination Therapies for Chronic Diseases

Limitations of pharmaceutical drugs and biologics for chronic diseases (e.g., medication non-adherence, adverse effects, toxicity, or inadequate efficacy) can be mitigated by mobile medical apps, known as digital therapeutics (DTx). Authorization of adjunct DTx by the US Food and Drug Administration and draft guidelines on "prescription drug use-related software" illustrate opportunities to create drug + digital combination therapies, ultimately leading towards drug-device combination products (DTx has a status of medical devices). Digital interventions (mobile, web-based, virtual reality, and video game applications) demonstrate clinically meaningful benefits for people living with Alzheimer's disease, dementia, rheumatoid arthritis, cancer, chronic pain, epilepsy, depression, and anxiety. In the respective animal disease models, preclinical studies on environmental enrichment and other non-pharmacological modalities (physical activity, social interactions, learning, and music) as surrogates for DTx "active ingredients" also show improved outcomes. In this narrative review, we discuss how drug + digital combination therapies can impact translational research, drug discovery and development, generic drug repurposing, and gene therapies. Market-driven incentives to create drug-device combination products are illustrated by Humira® (adalimumab) facing a "patent-cliff" competition with cheaper and more effective biosimilars seamlessly integrated with DTx. In conclusion, pharma and biotech companies, patients, and healthcare professionals will benefit from accelerating integration of digital interventions with pharmacotherapies.

A sociotechnical framework to assess patient-facing eHealth tools: results of a modified Delphi process

Among the thousands of eHealth tools available, the vast majority do not get past pilot phases because they cannot prove value, and only a few have been systematically assessed. Although multiple eHealth assessment frameworks have been developed, these efforts face multiple challenges. This study aimed to address some of these challenges by validating and refining an initial list of 55 assessment criteria based on previous frameworks through a two-round modified Delphi process with in-between rounds of interviews. The expert panel (n = 57) included participants from 18 countries and 9 concerned parties. A consensus was reached on 46 criteria that were classified into foundational and contextual criteria. The 36 foundational criteria focus on evaluating the eHealth tool itself and were grouped into nine clusters: technical aspects, clinical utility and safety, usability and human centricity, functionality, content, data management, endorsement, maintenance, and developer. The 10 contextual criteria focus on evaluating the factors that vary depending on the context the tool is being evaluated for and were grouped into seven clusters: data-protection compliance, safety regulatory compliance, interoperability and data integration, cultural requirements, affordability, cost-benefit, and implementability. The classification of criteria into foundational and contextual helps us assess not only the quality of an isolated tool, but also its potential fit in a specific setting. Criteria subscales may be particularly relevant when determining the strengths and weaknesses of the tool being evaluated. This granularity enables different concerned parties to make informed decisions about which tools to consider according to their specific needs and priorities.

An integrative review of adult cancer patients' experiences of nursing telephone and virtual triage systems for symptom management

PURPOSE

Telephone and virtual triage services are becoming increasingly common in ambulatory oncology settings. Few studies have evaluated their implementation from the perspective of service users. This study aims to evaluate the experiences of engaging with nurse-delivered telephone and virtual triage systems for symptom management among people undergoing cancer treatment.

METHODS

An integrative review was undertaken. MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycInfo, Academic Search Complete and Scopus were systematically searched. Twelve publications met the inclusion criteria, and data related to cancer patients' perceptions of the triage process were extracted and analysed.

RESULTS

Telephone-based (n=7), app-based (n=5) and video-based teleconferencing (n=2) triage systems were evaluated positively overall, enhancing ease of health system navigation, avoidance of emergency department for consultation, and the information, reassurance and support provided to support self-management of symptoms. However, several factors influenced the users' engagement with triage services, including confidence to articulate symptoms, limited opening hours, waiting times for initial triage or follow-up and digital literacy. Collectively, these factors contributed to delayed reporting or under-reporting of symptoms, undermining the potential impact of services. Studies included variable reporting of intervention characteristics, including the qualification of nurses delivering and leading services.

CONCLUSIONS

Future evaluations of triage services must give greater consideration to the characterisation of interventions to ensure transferability, including nursing roles and qualifications. To ensure effective intervention and optimal supportive care for symptom management, patients must be prepared to engage triage services early. Future evaluations must ensure the impact of digital literacy on engagement with, and experience of, virtual triage is investigated.

Features of teleoncology in lung cancer: A scoping review

OBJECTIVES

There are several challenges in providing healthcare services for lung cancer patients. Using teleoncology is an effective solution to meet such challenges. Given this, we in this study aimed to identify the features of teleoncology in lung cancer.

METHODS

We conducted this scoping review in 2023. We first searched scientific databases including PubMed, Scopus, ISI Web of Sciences, and Science Direct by combining related keywords for the past 12 years (2012-2023).

RESULTS

After reviewing 860 articles, we selected 39 studies for the purpose of this study. The interventions of teleoncology for lung cancer patients have four main categories, namely: monitoring of symptoms, monitoring the process of treatment and rehabilitation of patients, self-management and patient empowerment, and providing consultation for patients.

CONCLUSION

The appropriate implementation of teleoncology systems improves the patient's condition and reduces lung cancer complications by improving the availability of different health services.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

More attention should be paid to the evaluation of telemedicine systems from the perspective of patients and health service providers. Also, the latest platforms, including mobile phone-based software, should be used to implement such systems.

Development of an eHealth-enhanced model of care for the monitoring and management of immune-related adverse events in patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors

PURPOSE

The use of electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) data in routine care has been tied to direct patient benefits such as improved quality of care and symptom control and even overall survival. The modes of action behind such benefits are seldom described in detail. Here, we describe the development of a model of care leveraging ePRO data to monitor and manage symptoms of patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors.

METHODS

Development was split into four stages: (1) identification of an underlying theoretical framework, (2) the selection of an ePRO measure (ePROM), (3) the adaptation of an electronic application to collect ePRO data, and (4) the description of an ePRO-oriented workflow. The model of care is currently evaluated in a bicentric longitudinal randomized controlled phase II trial, the IePRO study.

RESULTS

The IePRO model of care is grounded in the eHealth Enhanced Chronic Care Model. Patients are prompted to report symptoms using an electronic mobile application. Triage nurses are alerted, review the reported symptoms, and contact patients in case of a new or worsening symptom. Nurses use the UKONS 24-hour telephone triage tool to issue patient management recommendations to the oncology team. Adapted care coordinating procedures facilitate team collaboration and provide patients with timely feedback.

CONCLUSION

This report clarifies how components of care are created and modified to leverage ePRO to enhance care. The model describes a workflow that enables care teams to be proactive and provide patients with timely, multidisciplinary support to manage symptoms.

Assessing the impact of digital patient monitoring on health outcomes and healthcare resource usage in addition to the feasibility of its combination with at-home treatment, in participants receiving systemic anticancer treatment in clinical practice: protocol for an interventional, open-label, multicountry platform study (ORIGAMA)

INTRODUCTION

Digital patient monitoring (DPM) tools can enable more effective clinical care and improved patient outcomes in cancer. However, their broad adoption requires ease of use and demonstration of real-world clinical utility/impact. ORIGAMA (MO42720) is an interventional, open-label, multicountry platform study investigating the clinical utility of DPM tools and specific treatments. ORIGAMA will begin with two cohorts that aim to assess the impact of the atezolizumab-specific Roche DPM Module (hosted on the Kaiku Health DPM platform (Helsinki, Finland)) on health outcomes and healthcare resource usage, and its feasibility to support at-home treatment administration, in participants receiving systemic anticancer treatment. Other digital health solutions may be added to future cohorts.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

In Cohort A, participants with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), extensive-stage SCLC or Child Pugh A unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma will be randomised to a locally approved anticancer regimen containing intravenous atezolizumab (TECENTRIQ, F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd/Genentech) and local standard-of-care support, with/without the Roche DPM Module. Cohort B will assess the feasibility of the Roche DPM Module in supporting administration of three cycles of subcutaneous atezolizumab (1875 mg; Day 1 of each 21-day cycle) in the hospital, followed by 13 cycles at home by a healthcare professional (ie, flexible care), in participants with programmed cell-death ligand 1-positive, early-stage NSCLC. The primary endpoints are the mean difference in change of the participant-reported Total Symptom Interference Score at Week 12 from baseline (Cohort A) and flexible care adoption rate at Cycle 6 (Cohort B).

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study will be conducted according to the Declaration of Helsinki, and/or the applicable laws and regulations of the country in which the research is conducted, whichever affords the greater protection to the individual. The study received its first Ethics Committee approval in Spain in October 2022. Participants will provide written informed consent in a face-to-face setting. The results of this study will be presented at national and/or international congresses and disseminated via publication in peer-reviewed journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05694013.

Assessing the Quality and Impact of eHealth Tools: Systematic Literature Review and Narrative Synthesis

BACKGROUND

Technological advancements have opened the path for many technology providers to easily develop and introduce eHealth tools to the public. The use of these tools is increasingly recognized as a critical quality driver in health care; however, choosing a quality tool from the myriad of tools available for a specific health need does not come without challenges.

OBJECTIVE

This review aimed to systematically investigate the literature to understand the different approaches and criteria used to assess the quality and impact of eHealth tools by considering sociotechnical factors (from technical, social, and organizational perspectives).

METHODS

A structured search was completed following the participants, intervention, comparators, and outcomes framework. We searched the PubMed, Cochrane, Web of Science, Scopus, and ProQuest databases for studies published between January 2012 and January 2022 in English, which yielded 675 results, of which 40 (5.9%) studies met the inclusion criteria. The PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines and the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions were followed to ensure a systematic process. Extracted data were analyzed using NVivo (QSR International), with a thematic analysis and narrative synthesis of emergent themes.

RESULTS

Similar measures from the different papers, frameworks, and initiatives were aggregated into 36 unique criteria grouped into 13 clusters. Using the sociotechnical approach, we classified the relevant criteria into technical, social, and organizational assessment criteria. Technical assessment criteria were grouped into 5 clusters: technical aspects, functionality, content, data management, and design. Social assessment criteria were grouped into 4 clusters: human centricity, health outcomes, visible popularity metrics, and social aspects. Organizational assessment criteria were grouped into 4 clusters: sustainability and scalability, health care organization, health care context, and developer.

CONCLUSIONS

This review builds on the growing body of research that investigates the criteria used to assess the quality and impact of eHealth tools and highlights the complexity and challenges facing these initiatives. It demonstrates that there is no single framework that is used uniformly to assess the quality and impact of eHealth tools. It also highlights the need for a more comprehensive approach that balances the social, organizational, and technical assessment criteria in a way that reflects the complexity and interdependence of the health care ecosystem and is aligned with the factors affecting users' adoption to ensure uptake and adherence in the long term.

From testers to co-creators: the value and approaches to successful patient engagement in the development of eHealth solutions - Qualitative Expert Interviews Study

Background

Research has shown that patient engagement is most commonly done at the beginning of research or to test readily available prototypes and less commonly done in other phases such as the execution phases. Previous studies have reported that patients are usually assigned a consultative rather than a decision-making role in health service planning and evaluation.

Objective

This study had 2 objectives: to better understand the challenges and opportunities in the inclusion of patients in the development of eHealth technologies and ideas on how to overcome the identified gaps and to create a research-based end-to-end practical blueprint that can guide the relevant stakeholders to successfully engage patients as cocreators in all human-centered design phases rather than mere testers of preplanned prototypes.

Methods

Key informant interviews were conducted using in-depth semistructured interviews with 20 participants from 6 countries across Europe. This was followed by a focus group to validate the initial findings. Participants encompassed all the relevant stakeholder groups including patient experts, eHealth experts, health technology providers, clinicians, pharma executives, and health insurance experts.

Results

This study shows that engaging patients in eHealth development can help provide different types of value; namely, identifying unmet needs, better usability and desirability, better fit into the patient journey, better adoption and stickiness, better health outcomes, advocacy and trust, a sense of purpose, and better health equity and access. However, the participants agreed that patients are usually engaged too late in the development process, mostly assuming a sounding role in testing a ready-made prototype. The justification for these gaps in engagement is driven by some prominent barriers, notably compliance risks, patient-related factors, power dynamics, patient engagement as lip service, poor value perception, lack of resources, mistrust, and inflexibility. On the positive side, the participants also reflected on facilitators for better patient engagement; for instance, engaging through engagement partners, novel approaches such as the rise of professional patient experts, embedding patients in development teams, expectation management, and professional moderation services.

Conclusions

Overcoming the current gaps in patient engagement in eHealth development requires consolidated efforts from all stakeholders in a complex health care ecosystem. The shift toward more patient-driven eHealth development requires education and awareness; frameworks to monitor and evaluate the value of patient engagement; regulatory clarity and simplification; platforms to facilitate patient access and identification; patient incentivization, transparency, and trust; and a mindset shift toward value-based health care.

Needs of Lung Cancer Patients Receiving Immunotherapy and Acceptance of Digital and Sensor-Based Scenarios for Monitoring Symptoms at Home—A Qualitative-Explorative Study

Background: The development of immunotherapy in the treatment for lung cancer has changed the outlook for both patients and health care practitioners. However, reporting and management of side effects are crucial to ensure effectiveness and safety of treatment. The aim of this study was to learn about the subjective experiences of patients with lung cancer receiving immunotherapy and to explore their potential acceptance of digital and sensor-based systems for monitoring treatment-related symptoms at home. Methods: A qualitative-explorative interview study with patients with lung cancer (n = 21) applying qualitative content analysis. Results: Participants had trouble to classify and differentiate between symptoms they experienced and it seemed challenging to assess whether symptoms are serious enough to be reported and to figure out the right time to report symptoms to health care practitioners. We identified four basic needs: (1) the need to be informed, (2) the need for a trustful relationship, (3) the need to be taken seriously, and (4) the need for needs-oriented treatment concepts. The idea of digital and sensor-based monitoring initially provoked rejection, but participants expressed more differentiated attitudes during the interviews, which could be integrated into a preliminary model to explain the acceptance of digital and sensor-based monitoring scenarios. Conclusions: Supporting lung cancer patients and their health care providers in communicating about treatment-related symptoms is important. Technology-based monitoring systems are considered to be potentially beneficial. However, in view of the many unfulfilled information needs and the unsatisfactory reporting of symptoms, it must be critically questioned what these systems can and should compensate for, and where the limits of such monitoring lie.

Application Effect of Doctor-Nurse-Patient Integration Model Based on Heart Rate Management Strategies in Middle-Aged and Young Outpatients with Hypertension

Objective

In this study, a doctor-nurse-patient integration management scheme based on heart rate (HR) management strategies was constructed to explore its application effect in the health management of young and middle-aged outpatients with hypertension.

Methods

A total of 75 young and middle-aged patients with essential hypertension admitted to the Outpatient Department of Cardiology of Heji Hospital Affiliated to Changzhi Medical College, Shanxi Province, from October 2019 to July 2020 were selected and divided into an observation group (n = 37) and a control group (n = 38) according to different treatment methods. The control group was treated with routine health education, basis on which, the observation group was additionally intervened by the doctor-nurse-patient integration model established upon HR management strategies. The resting heart rate (RHR) awareness, medication compliance, RHR, systolic/diastolic blood pressure (SBP/DBP), and self-management ability were compared between the two groups before and 3 months after intervention. The diet control rate, hypertension awareness rate, and regular review rate were also compared.

Results

The RHR awareness and medication compliance were significantly higher in the observation group compared with the control group after intervention (P < 0.05). There were 29 patients with high compliance in the observation group and 19 in the control group, with a significant difference between the two groups (P < 0.05). The mean RHR, as well as the mean SBP and DBP in the observation group, were significantly lower than those in the control group (P < 0.05). In terms of health behavior assessment, the observation group outperformed the control group in the score of each dimension of self-actualization, health responsibility, stress management, interpersonal support, exercise, and nutrition (P < 0.05). In addition, the self-management ability of diet, exercise, medication, blood pressure (BP) monitoring, and disease awareness was significantly higher in the observation group compared with the control group.

Conclusions

For middle-aged and young outpatients with hypertension, the doctor-nurse-patient integration model based on HR management strategies can improve the RHR awareness of patients and improve their medication compliance and self-management ability, thus better controlling the levels of RHR and BP.

Exploring Noona Using Passively-Collected Data and Satisfaction/Loyalty Ratings

Background

Electronic patient-reported outcomes’ real time communication of treatment-related symptoms is increasingly associated with better outcomes including longer survival and less health care resource use, but the primary method of collecting this information, static questionnaires, has not evolved.

Objective

The aim of this paper is to describe the use of Noona’s three methods of communicating treatment-related symptoms, which are as follows: (1) Noona symptom questionnaires (NSQ), which incorporate branching logic; (2) a diary; and (3) secure messaging, the last two of which have NSQ reporting functionality. It also aims to explore, using multivariable analyses, whether patients find value using these features.

Methods

Noona users (N=1081) who have an active account for more than 30 days, who responded to the satisfaction/loyalty item, and who were undergoing active cancer treatment (systemic or radiotherapy) in the United States were included in this study. All study data were collected via software embedded within Noona code. This includes metadata, patient activities (measured in clicks), and responses to a satisfaction/loyalty question (“How likely are you to recommend Noona to another patient”) displayed on the Noona home page.

Results

Noona users expressed a high degree of satisfaction/loyalty when asked to rate how likely they would recommend Noona to another patient. Multivariable analyses indicate small but significant effects for some of the analyses. Use of NSQs were significantly related to satisfaction/loyalty, users of NSQs had significantly higher satisfaction/loyalty than those who did not use any, and secure communication use was significantly higher for those who rated the app highly compared to those who did not. These relationships will likely be further explicated with the use of satisfaction/loyalty questions that focus specifically on feature use.

Conclusions

Noona is well liked by respondents, and exploratory multivariable analyses demonstrate the potential for using passively and minimally invasive data to demonstrate value.

The Effect of Collaborative Reviews of Electronic Patient-Reported Outcomes on the Congruence of Patient- and Clinician-Reported Toxicity in Cancer Patients Receiving Systemic Therapy: Prospective, Multicenter, Observational Clinical Trial

Background

Electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePRO) are a relatively novel form of data and have the potential to improve clinical practice for cancer patients. In this prospective, multicenter, observational clinical trial, efforts were made to demonstrate the reliability of patient-reported symptoms.

Objective

The primary objective of this study was to assess the level of agreement κ between symptom ratings by physicians and patients via a shared review process in order to determine the future reliability and utility of self-reported electronic symptom monitoring.

Methods

Patients receiving systemic therapy in a (neo-)adjuvant or noncurative intention setting captured ePRO for 52 symptoms over an observational period of 90 days. At 3-week intervals, randomly selected symptoms were reviewed between the patient and physician for congruency on severity of the grading of adverse events according to the Common Terminology Criteria of Adverse Events (CTCAE). The patient-physician agreement for the symptom review was assessed via Cohen kappa (κ), through which the interrater reliability was calculated. Chi-square tests were used to determine whether the patient-reported outcome was different among symptoms, types of cancer, demographics, and physicians’ experience.

Results

Among the 181 patients (158 women and 23 men; median age 54.4 years), there was a fair scoring agreement (κ=0.24; 95% CI 0.16-0.33) for symptoms that were entered 2 to 4 weeks before the intended review (first rating) and a moderate agreement (κ=0.41; 95% CI 0.34-0.48) for symptoms that were entered within 1 week of the intended review (second rating). However, the level of agreement increased from moderate (first rating, κ=0.43) to substantial (second rating, κ=0.68) for common symptoms of pain, fever, diarrhea, obstipation, nausea, vomiting, and stomatitis. Similar congruency levels of ratings were found for the most frequently entered symptoms (first rating: κ=0.42; second rating: κ=0.65). The symptom with the lowest agreement was hair loss (κ=–0.05). With regard to the latency of symptom entry into the review, hardly any difference was demonstrated between symptoms that were entered from days 1 to 3 and from days 4 to 7 before the intended review (κ=0.40 vs κ=0.39, respectively). In contrast, for symptoms that were entered 15 to 21 days before the intended review, no congruency was demonstrated (κ=–0.15). Congruency levels seemed to be unrelated to the type of cancer, demographics, and physicians’ review experience.

Conclusions

The shared monitoring and review of symptoms between patients and clinicians has the potential to improve the understanding of patient self-reporting. Our data indicate that the integration of ePRO into oncological clinical research and continuous clinical practice provides reliable information for self-empowerment and the timely intervention of symptoms.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03578731; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03578731

eHealth intervention to manage symptoms for patients with cancer on immunotherapy (SOFIA): a study protocol for a randomised controlled external pilot trial

INTRODUCTION

Immune checkpoint therapy (ICT) is associated with a distinct pattern of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) caused by inadvertently redirecting immune responses to healthy tissues. IrAEs can occur at any time; however, in most cases, they arise during the first 14 weeks of the beginning of immune checkpoint blockade. In many cases, immunotherapy must be discontinued due to irAEs. Early detection of irAEs triggers the temporary withholding of ICT or initiation of short-term immunosuppressive treatment, is crucial in preventing further aggravation of irAEs and enables safe re-exposure to ICT. This prospective study aims to evaluate the feasibility of an eHealth intervention for patients under immunotherapy (managing symptoms of immunotherapy, SOFIA). The SOFIA-App consists of two components: SOFIA-Monitoring, a tool to rate patient-reported outcomes (PROs) including irAEs, and SOFIA-Coaching, which provides important information about cancer-specific and immunotherapy-specific topics and the counselling services of the National Centre for Tumour Diseases (NCT) Heidelberg.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We outlined a patient-level two-arm randomised controlled pilot trial of the intervention (SOFIA) versus no-SOFIA for patients with cancer beginning an immunotherapy, aged ≥18 years, recruited from the NCT, Heidelberg. Feasibility outcomes include: recruitment rate; drop-out rate; reasons for refusal and drop-out; willingness to be randomised, utilisation rate of SOFIA-Monitoring and utilisation time of SOFIA-Coaching, physicians utilisation rate of the PROs; feasibility of the proposed outcome measures and optimal sample size estimation. The clinical outcomes are measures of quality of life, psychosocial symptoms, self-efficacy, physician-patient communication and medical process data, which are assessed at the beginning of the intervention, postintervention and at 6-month follow-up.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This trial protocol was approved by the Ethical Committee of Heidelberg University, Germany (Reference, S-581/2018).

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

We registered the study in the German Clinical Trial Register (Reference: DRKS00021064). Findings will be disseminated broadly via peer-reviewed empirical journals, articles and conference presentations.

Effect of Collaborative Review of Electronic Patient-Reported Outcomes for Shared Reporting in Breast Cancer Patients: Descriptive Comparative Study

Background

Digital monitoring of treatment-related symptoms and self-reported patient outcomes is important for the quality of care among cancer patients. As mobile devices are ubiquitous nowadays, the collection of electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePROs) is gaining momentum. So far, data are lacking on the modalities that contribute to the quantity and quality of ePROs.

Objective

The objective of our study was to compare the utilization of two versions of a subsequently employed mobile app for electronic monitoring of PROs and to test our hypothesis that a shared review of symptoms in patient-physician collaboration has an impact on the number of data entries.

Methods

The Consilium Care app engages cancer patients to standardize reporting of well-being and treatment-related symptoms in outpatient settings. For descriptive comparison of the utilization of two slightly different app versions, data were obtained from an early breast cancer trial (version 1 of the app, n=86) and an ongoing study including patients with advanced disease (version 2 of the app, n=106). In both app versions, patients and doctors were allowed to share the information from data entries during consultations. Version 2 of the app, however, randomly selected symptoms that required a detailed and shared regular patient-doctor review in order to focus on the collection and appropriate interpretation regarding awareness and guidance for severity grading. The numbers and types of symptom entries, satisfaction with both app versions, and patients’ perceived effects during consultations were included for analysis.

Results

Symptom severity grading was performed according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) using a horizontal slider and was indicated in descriptive terminology in both apps, while a graphical display facilitated the illustration of symptom history charts. In total, 192 patients electronically reported 11,437 data entries on well-being and 33,380 data entries on individual symptoms. Overall, 628 (of 872 intended) requested patient-doctor symptom reviews were performed in version 2 of the app. Both the amount of data entries per patient and day for well-being (version 1 vs version 2: 0.3 vs 1.0; P<.001) and symptoms (version 1 vs version 2: 1.3 vs 1.9; P=.04) appeared significantly increased in version 2 of the app. Overall satisfaction with both app versions was high, although version 2 of the app was perceived to be more helpful in general.

Conclusions

Version 2 of the app showed much better results than version 1 of the app. A request for collaborative patient-doctor symptom review is likely to affect the number of digital symptom data entries. This app shows high potential to improve the patient-doctor experience.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02004496; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02004496 and ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03578731; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03578731

Supportive Care: Low Cost, High Value

Supportive care aims to prevent and manage adverse effects of cancer and its treatment across the entire disease continuum. Research and clinical experience in dedicated centers have demonstrated that early appropriate supportive care interventions improve symptoms, quality of life, and overall survival in a cost-effective manner. The challenge is to assess symptoms and needs with validated tools regularly and, ideally, between clinic appointments; electronic patient-reported outcome measures and dedicated easily accessible supportive care units can help. As management of certain problems improves, others come to the fore. Cancer-related fatigue and malnutrition are very frequent and need regular screening, assessment of treatable causes, and early intervention to improve. Pharmacologic agents and phytopharmaceuticals are of little use, but other interventions are valuable: physical exercise, counseling on fatigue, and cognitive behavioral therapy/mind-body interventions (e.g., for fatigue). Nutrition should be oral, rich in proteins, and accompanied by muscle training adapted to the patient's condition. Psychological and societal counseling is often useful; nausea or other problems such as gastrointestinal dysmotility or metabolic derangements must be tackled. Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy frequently worsens quality of life and has no established prevention strategy (notwithstanding current interest in cryotherapy and compression therapy) and thus requires careful assessment of patient predisposition to develop it with the consideration of feasible dose and treatment alternatives. When painful, duloxetine helps. Nonpharmacologic strategies, including acupuncture, physical exercise, cryotherapy/compression, and scrambler therapy, are promising but require large phase III trials to become the accepted standard. Personalization of chemotherapy, dependent on realistic goals, is key.