Physicians' Use of Patients' Daily Reports of Quality of Life to Evaluate Treatment Response in Phase I Cancer Trials

Intensive Longitudinal Methods Among Adults With Breast or Lung Cancer: Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

Intensive longitudinal methods offer a powerful tool for capturing daily experiences of individuals. However, its feasibility, effectiveness, and optimal methodological approaches for studying or monitoring experiences of oncology patients remain uncertain.

OBJECTIVE

This scoping review aims to describe to what extent intensive longitudinal methods with daily electronic assessments have been used among patients with breast or lung cancer and with which methodologies, associated outcomes, and influencing factors.

METHODS

We searched the electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, and PsycINFO) up to January 2024 and included studies reporting on the use of these methods among adults with breast or lung cancer. Data were extracted on population characteristics, intensive monitoring methodologies used, study findings, and factors influencing the implementation of these methods in research and clinical practice.

RESULTS

We identified 1311 articles and included 52 articles reporting on 41 studies. Study aims and intensive monitoring methodologies varied widely, but most studies focused on measuring physical and psychological symptom constructs, such as pain, anxiety, or depression. Compliance and attrition rates seemed acceptable for most studies, although complete methodological reporting was often lacking. Few studies specifically examined these methods among patients with advanced cancer. Factors influencing implementation were linked to both patient (eg, confidence with intensive monitoring system) and methodology (eg, option to use personal devices).

CONCLUSIONS

Intensive longitudinal methods with daily electronic assessments hold promise to provide unique insights into the daily lives of patients with cancer. Intensive longitudinal methods may be feasible among people with breast or lung cancer. Our findings encourage further research to determine optimal conditions for intensive monitoring, specifically in more advanced disease stages.

Testing the feasibility of mobile ecological momentary assessment for symptom burden and management among metastatic cancer patients

Background

Individuals who have metastatic cancer experience substantial physical and psychological distress (e.g., pain, depression, anxiety) from their disease and its treatment compared to patients with less advanced disease. As the burden of symptoms varies over time, ecological momentary assessment (EMA) may be used to better understand patients' symptom trajectories, complimenting traditional longitudinal data collection methods. However, few have used EMA in patients with metastatic disease. The current study adds to the existing literature by exploring interrelated, common cancer-related symptoms of pain, anxiety, and depression and use of cannabis-based products, opioid medications, other (nonopioid) pain medications, and medications for anxiety or depression.

Methods

An eight-day prospective observational feasibility study was conducted among 50 patients with metastatic cancer recruited from seven solid cancer clinics at The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center. Participants completed a week of interval-contingent mobile EMA, administered daily at 9 a.m., 3 p.m., and 8 p.m., and a comprehensive interviewer-administered questionnaire on Day 8. Participants were queried on their symptom burden and management strategies (i.e., use of medications and cannabis). We considered EMA to be feasible if a priori retention (80%) and adherence goals (75%) were met.

Results

Seventy-nine percent of eligible patients contacted enrolled in the study (n = 50 of 63). Among those enrolled, 92% were retained through Day 8 and 80% completed >90% of EMAs, exceeding a priori objectives. Participants' average pain, anxiety, and depressive symptoms across the week of EMA ranged from 1.7 to 1.8 (1 to 5 scale). Symptoms varied little by day or time of administration. On Day 8, significant proportions of participants reported past-week use of medications and cannabis for symptom management.

Conclusions

Participants exceeded a priori adherence and retention objectives, indicating that mobile EMA is feasible among metastatic cancer patients, addressing a gap in the existing literature and informing future research. Restricting eligibility to participants with a minimum cutoff of symptom burden may be warranted to increase observations of symptom variability and provide opportunities for future health interventions. Future research is needed to test the acceptability and quality of data over a longer study period in this patient population.

Current Landscape of Ecological Momentary Assessment (Real-Time Data) Methodology in Cancer Research: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

To critically synthesize and describe the use and methods of ecological momentary assessment (EMA) in cancer research.

DATA SOURCES

A systematic review was conducted and has been reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) Guideline. Electronic databases (APA PsycINFO, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science Core Collection) were searched using a variety of keywords and subject headings by an expert systematic review librarian. All publications were double screened by two reviewers using predetermined exclusion and inclusion criteria throughout the full review process. The review used Covidence Systematic Review Software. Methodological quality assessment and data extraction were performed. A narrative synthesis was conducted to examine the aim for EMA, the characteristics of the study samples, the EMA sampling procedures, EMA completion rates, outcome measures, and any implications of findings for survivorship care.

CONCLUSION

A total of 42 EMA studies in cancer were included. Most studies used an electronic mobile device to capture EMA data apart from several that used paper diaries. Existing studies were found to have significant heterogeneity in methods and widely varying approaches to design and self-report measurements. While EMA in cancer research holds significant promise to advance cancer care research into the future by increasing ecological validity and reducing retrospective bias and can capture the unique idiographic within-person change over time, in real-time, further research is needed to develop standardized EMA self-report questionnaires.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE

This is the first comprehensive systematic review to describe the use and methods of EMA in cancer research. There is significant heterogeneity in methods and widely varying approaches to design and self-report measurements in EMA cancer research. People affected by cancer found taking part in EMA studies reported benefit from the experience. However, researchers must engage with cancer survivors in the development and co-design of future EMA questionnaires to ensure relevant and acceptability of EMA data collection protocols.