Differential Effects of a Telemonitoring Platform in the Development of Chemotherapy-Associated Toxicity: A Randomized Trial Protocol
Abstract
:Simple Summary
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Objectives
3. Patients and Methods
- (a)
- Participants
- (b)
- Procedures
- (c)
- Study Intervention: Contigo Application Design and Development
- (d)
- Variables
- (e)
- Outcomes
- The information collected by the platform was useful for patient monitoring.
- The information collected by the platform improved communication with the patient.
- The information collected by the platform resulted in increased efficiency of patient care.
- The information collected by the platform improved the quality of patient care.
- I would like to use this platform to monitor future cancer patients.
- I would recommend this platform to my colleagues who monitor cancer patients.
- –
- What aspects did you find good in your experience with the application?
- –
- What aspects need improvement within the platform?
- (f)
- Statistical Analysis
3.1. Sample Size
3.2. Analysis Strategy
4. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Sung, H.; Ferlay, J.; Siegel, R.L.; Laversanne, M.; Soerjomataram, I.; Jemal, A.; Bray, F. Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries. CA Cancer J. Clin. 2021, 71, 209–249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wilson, B.E.; Jacob, S.; Yap, M.L.; Ferlay, J.; Bray, F.; Barton, M.B. Estimates of global chemotherapy demands and corresponding physician workforce requirements for 2018 and 2040: A population-based study. Lancet Oncol. 2019, 20, 769–780. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Livshits, Z.; Rao, R.B.; Smith, S.W. An approach to chemotherapy-associated toxicity. Emerg. Med. Clin. N. Am. 2014, 32, 167–203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Friese, C.R.; Harrison, J.M.; Janz, N.K.; Jagsi, R.; Morrow, M.; Li, Y.; Hamilton, A.S.; Ward, K.C.; Kurian, A.W.; Katz, S.J.; et al. Treatment-associated toxicities reported by patients with early-stage invasive breast cancer. Cancer 2017, 123, 1925–1934. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Le Saux, O.; Falandry, C. Toxicity of Cancer Therapies in Older Patients. Curr. Oncol. Rep. 2018, 20, 64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ingrand, I.; Defossez, G.; Lafay-Chebassier, C.; Chavant, F.; Ferru, A.; Ingrand, P.; Pérault-Pochat, M. Serious adverse effects occurring after chemotherapy: A general cancer registry-based incidence survey. Br. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 2020, 86, 711–722. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pearce, A.; Haas, M.; Viney, R.; Pearson, S.-A.; Haywood, P.; Brown, C.; Ward, R. Incidence and severity of self-reported chemotherapy side effects in routine care: A prospective cohort study. PLoS ONE 2017, 12, e0184360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Coates, A.; Abraham, S.; Kaye, S.B.; Sowerbutts, T.; Frewin, C.; Fox, R.M.; Tattersall, M.H. On the receiving end—Patient perception of the side-effects of cancer chemotherapy. Eur. J. Cancer Clin. Oncol. 1983, 19, 203–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Carelle, N.; Piotto, E.; Bellanger, A.; Germanaud, J.; Thuillier, A.; Khayat, D. Changing patient perceptions of the side effects of cancer chemotherapy. Cancer 2002, 95, 155–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, Z.; Krailo, M.D.; Azen, S.P.; Tighiouart, M. A novel toxicity scoring system treating toxicity response as a quasi-continuous variable in Phase I clinical trials. Contemp. Clin. Trials 2010, 31, 473–482. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kalsi, T.; Babic-Illman, G.; Fields, P.; Hughes, S.; Maisey, N.; Ross, P.; Wang, Y.; Harari, D. The impact of low-grade toxicity in older people with cancer undergoing chemotherapy. Br. J. Cancer 2014, 111, 2224–2228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Batlle, J.F.; Basterretxea, L.; Torregrosa, M.D.; Llabres, E.; Vila, B.L.; Jimenez-Munarriz, B.; Rebollo, M.A.; Custodio, A.B.; Girones, R.; Cruz, P.; et al. Predictive factors of grade 3-5 toxicity in older patients with cancer treated with chemotherapy: A prospective multicenter study. J. Clin. Oncol. 2020, 37, 11509. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kuo, S.-H.; Lien, H.-C.; You, S.-L.; Lu, Y.-S.; Lin, C.-H.; Chen, T.-Z.; Huang, C.-S. Dose variation and regimen modification of adjuvant chemotherapy in daily practice affect survival of stage I–II and operable stage III Taiwanese breast cancer patients. Breast 2008, 17, 646–653. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Zainal Abidin, M.N.; Omar, M.S.; Islahudin, F.; Mohamed Shah, N. The survival impact of palliative chemotherapy dose modifications on metastatic colon cancer. BMC Cancer 2022, 22, 731. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Aspinall, S.L.; Good, C.B.; Zhao, X.; Cunningham, F.E.; Heron, B.B.; Geraci, M.; Passero, V.; Stone, R.A.; Smith, K.J.; Rogers, R.; et al. Adjuvant chemotherapy for stage III colon cancer: Relative dose intensity and survival among veterans. BMC Cancer 2015, 15, 62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Żok, J.; Bieńkowski, M.; Radecka, B.; Korniluk, J.; Adamowicz, K.; Duchnowska, R. Impact of relative dose intensity of oxaliplatin in adjuvant therapy among stage III colon cancer patients on early recurrence: A retrospective cohort study. BMC Cancer 2021, 21, 529. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Krzyzanowska, M.K.; Julian, J.A.; Gu, C.-S.; Powis, M.; Li, Q.; Enright, K.; Howell, D.; Earle, C.C.; Gandhi, S.; Rask, S.; et al. Remote, proactive, telephone based management of toxicity in outpatients during adjuvant or neoadjuvant chemotherapy for early stage breast cancer: Pragmatic, cluster randomised trial. BMJ 2021, 375, e066588. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ward, Z.J.; Walbaum, M.; Walbaum, B.; Guzman, M.J.; de la Jara, J.J.; Nervi, B.; Atun, R. Estimating the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on diagnosis and survival of five cancers in Chile from 2020 to 2030: A simulation-based analysis. Lancet Oncol. 2021, 22, 1427–1437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mooney, K.H.; Beck, S.L.; Friedman, R.H.; Farzanfar, R.; Wong, B. Automated monitoring of symptoms during ambulatory chemotherapy and oncology providers’ use of the information: A randomized controlled clinical trial. Support. Care Cancer 2014, 22, 2343–2350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mooney, K.H.; Beck, S.L.; Friedman, R.H.; Farzanfar, R.; Mooney, A.K.H. Telephone-linked care for cancer symptom monitoring: A pilot study. Cancer Pr. 2002, 10, 147–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Basch, E.; Stover, A.M.; Schrag, D.; Chung, A.; Jansen, J.; Henson, S.; Carr, P.; Ginos, B.; Deal, A.; Spears, P.A.; et al. Clinical Utility and User Perceptions of a Digital System for Electronic Patient-Reported Symptom Monitoring During Routine Cancer Care: Findings from the PRO-TECT Trial. JCO Clin. Cancer Inform. 2020, 4, 947–957. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kearney, N.; McCann, L.; Norrie, J.; Taylor, L.; Gray, P.; McGee-Lennon, M.; Sage, M.; Miller, M.; Maguire, R. Evaluation of a mobile phone-based, advanced symptom management system (ASyMS) in the management of chemotherapy-related toxicity. Support. Care Cancer 2009, 17, 437–444. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Moher, D.; Hopewell, S.; Schulz, K.F.; Montori, V.; Gøtzsche, P.C.; Devereaux, P.; Elbourne, D.; Egger, M.; Altman, D.G. CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. Int. J. Surg. 2012, 10, 28–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Eysenbach, G.; CONSORT-EHEALTH Group. CONSORT-EHEALTH: Improving and standardizing evaluation reports of Web-based and mobile health interventions. J. Med. Internet Res. 2011, 13, e126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Smith, A.W.; Mitchell, S.A.; KDe Aguiar, C.; Moy, C.; Riley, W.T.; Wagster, M.V.; MWerner, E. News from the NIH: Person-centered outcomes measurement: NIH-supported measurement systems to evaluate self-assessed health, functional performance, and symptomatic toxicity. Transl. Behav. Med. 2016, 6, 470–474. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Arnold, B.; Mitchell, S.A.; Lent, L.; Mendoza, T.R.; Rogak, L.J.; Barragán, N.M.; Willis, G.; Medina, M.; Lechner, S.; Penedo, F.J.; et al. Linguistic validation of the Spanish version of the National Cancer Institute’s Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE). Support. Care Cancer 2016, 24, 2843–2851. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Zarate, V.; Kind, P.; Valenzuela, P.; Vignau, A.; Olivares-Tirado, P.; Munoz, A. Social Valuation of EQ-5D Health States: The Chilean Case. Value Health 2011, 14, 1135–1141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kind, P.; Brooks, R.; Rabin, R. EQ-5d Concepts and Methods: A Developmental History [Internet], 2005th ed.; Kind, P., Brooks, R., Rabin, R., Eds.; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2005; 240p; Available online: https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/1-4020-3712-0.pdf (accessed on the 15 March 2023).
- Saldivia, S.; Aslan, J.; Cova, F.; Vicente, B.; Inostroza, C.; Rincón, P. Psychometric characteristics of the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9). Rev. Méd. Chile 2019, 147, 53–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arraras, J.I.; Illarramendi, J.J.; Viudez, A.; Lecumberri, M.J.; de la Cruz, S.; Hernandez, B.; Zarandona, U.; Bredart, A.; Martinez, M.; Salgado, E.; et al. The cancer outpatient satisfaction with care questionnaire for chemotherapy, OUT-PATSAT35 CT: A validation study for Spanish patients. Support. Care Cancer 2012, 20, 3269–3278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Azam, F.; Latif, M.F.; Farooq, A.; Tirmazy, S.H.; AlShahrani, S.; Bashir, S.; Bukhari, N. Performance Status Assessment by Using ECOG (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group) Score for Cancer Patients by Oncology Healthcare Professionals. Case Rep. Oncol. 2019, 12, 728–736. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Scott, J.M.; Stene, G.; Edvardsen, E.; Jones, L.W. Performance Status in Cancer: Not Broken, But Time for an Upgrade? J. Clin. Oncol. 2020, 38, 2824–2829. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Gattani, S.; Noronha, V.; Ramaswamy, A.; Castelino, R.; Nair, V.; Nookala, M.; Patil, V.M.; Menon, N.; Gota, V.; Banavali, S.D.; et al. Accuracy of the CARG chemotherapy toxicity risk prediction tool in older Indian patients with cancer. J. Clin. Orthod. 2021, 39 (Suppl. S15), e24023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ostwal, V.; Ramaswamy, A.; Bhargava, P.; Hatkhambkar, T.; Swami, R.; Rastogi, S.; Mandavkar, S.; Ghosh, J.; Bajpai, J.; Gulia, S.; et al. Cancer Aging Research Group (CARG) score in older adults undergoing curative intent chemotherapy: A prospective cohort study. BMJ Open 2021, 11, e047376. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Suto, H.; Inui, Y.; Okamura, A. Validity of the Cancer and Aging Research Group Predictive Tool in Older Japanese Patients. Cancers 2022, 14, 2075. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Moth, E.B.; Kiely, B.E.; Stefanic, N.; Naganathan, V.; Martin, A.; Grimison, P.; Stockler, M.R.; Beale, P.; Blinman, P. Predicting chemotherapy toxicity in older adults: Comparing the predictive value of the CARG Toxicity Score with oncologists’ estimates of toxicity based on clinical judgement. J. Geriatr. Oncol. 2019, 10, 202–209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Minvielle, E.; Fierobe, A.; Fourcade, A.; Ferrua, M.; di Palma, M.; Scotté, F.; Mir, O. The use of patient-reported outcome and experience measures for health policy purposes: A scoping review in oncology. Health Policy 2023, 129, 104702. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- France, N.T.V.; Bosset, J.-F.; Monnier, A.; Fournier, J.; Perrin, V.; Baumann, C.; Brédart, A.; Mercier, M. Determinants of patient satisfaction in ambulatory oncology: A cross sectional study based on the OUT-PATSAT35 questionnaire. BMC Cancer 2011, 11, 526. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bizot, A.; Karimi, M.; Rassy, E.; Heudel, P.E.; Levy, C.; Vanlemmens, L.; Uzan, C.; Deluche, E.; Genet, D.; Saghatchian, M.; et al. Multicenter evaluation of breast cancer patients’ satisfaction and experience with oncology telemedicine visits during the COVID-19 pandemic. Br. J. Cancer 2021, 125, 1486–1493. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Balderas-Peña, L.M.; Sat-Muñoz, D.; Contreras-Hernández, I.; Solano-Murillo, P.; Hernández-Chávez, G.A.; Mariscal-Ramírez, I.; Lomelí-García, M.; Díaz-Cortés, M.A.; Mould-Quevedo, J.F.; Castro-Cervantes, J.M.; et al. Análisis de la Satisfacción con los Cuidados en Salud a Través del Cuestionario EORTC IN-PATSAT32 en Pacientes con Cáncer de Mama, Linfoma no Hodgkin y Cáncer Colo-Rectal en Diferentes Etapas Clínicas. Relación con las Características Socio-Demográficas, Estados Co-Mórbidos y Variables del Proceso de Atención en el Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social. Value Health 2011, 14, S96–S99. [Google Scholar]
Module | Questionnaires | Description |
---|---|---|
The Journey | No | Provides information about the process of caring for cancer patients. It includes a straightforward description of the diagnostic and therapeutic procedures that will be implemented. |
My Results | PRO-CTCAE [26] EQ-5D [27,28] PHQ-9 [29] | Allows for self-perception of health reporting through measures validated in Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) and Patient-Reported Experience Measures (PREMs). |
My Experience | OUTPATSAT-35 [30] | Allows for reporting experiences during healthcare and cancer treatment. |
Assistance | No | Contains a list of frequently asked questions expressed by patients during cancer treatment. |
Community | No | This module provides complementary information for non-clinical aspects that can help in daily life, such as where to obtain clothing, support groups, information and awareness activities, and others. |
Scheduling | No | Information for requesting medical appointments and procedures. |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Martínez, F.; Taramasco, C.; Espinoza, M.; Acevedo, J.; Goic, C.; Nervi, B. Differential Effects of a Telemonitoring Platform in the Development of Chemotherapy-Associated Toxicity: A Randomized Trial Protocol. Diagnostics 2024, 14, 619. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics14060619
Martínez F, Taramasco C, Espinoza M, Acevedo J, Goic C, Nervi B. Differential Effects of a Telemonitoring Platform in the Development of Chemotherapy-Associated Toxicity: A Randomized Trial Protocol. Diagnostics. 2024; 14(6):619. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics14060619
Chicago/Turabian StyleMartínez, Felipe, Carla Taramasco, Manuel Espinoza, Johanna Acevedo, Carolina Goic, and Bruno Nervi. 2024. "Differential Effects of a Telemonitoring Platform in the Development of Chemotherapy-Associated Toxicity: A Randomized Trial Protocol" Diagnostics 14, no. 6: 619. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics14060619
APA StyleMartínez, F., Taramasco, C., Espinoza, M., Acevedo, J., Goic, C., & Nervi, B. (2024). Differential Effects of a Telemonitoring Platform in the Development of Chemotherapy-Associated Toxicity: A Randomized Trial Protocol. Diagnostics, 14(6), 619. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics14060619