Search

BackgroundDespite the acceptability and efficacy of e–patient-reported outcome (ePRO) systems, implementation in routine clinical care remains challenging. ObjectiveThis pragmatic trial implemented the PROMPT-Care (Patient Reported Outcome Measures for Personalized Treatment and Care) web-based system into existing clinical workflows and evaluated its effectiveness among a diverse population of patients with cancer. MethodsAdult patients with solid tumors receiving active treatment or follow-up care in four cancer centers were enrolled. The PROMPT-Care intervention supported patient management through (1) monthly off-site electronic PRO physical symptom and psychosocial well-being assessments, (2) automated electronic clinical alerts notifying the care team of unresolved clinical issues following two consecutive assessments, and (3) tailored online patient self-management resources. Propensity score matching was used to match controls with intervention patients in a 4:1 ratio for patient age, sex, and treatment status. The primary outcome was a reduction in emergency department presentations. Secondary outcomes were time spent on chemotherapy and the number of allied health service referrals. ResultsFrom April 2016 to October 2018, 328 patients from four public hospitals received the intervention. Matched controls (n=1312) comprised the general population of patients with cancer, seen at the participating hospitals during the study period. Emergency department visits were significantly reduced by 33% (P=.02) among patients receiving the intervention compared with patients in the matched controls. No significant associations were found in allied health referrals or time to end of chemotherapy. At baseline, the most common patient reported outcomes (above-threshold) were fatigue (39%), tiredness (38.4%), worry (32.9%), general wellbeing (32.9%), and sleep (24.1%), aligning with the most frequently accessed self-management domain pages of physical well-being (36%) and emotional well-being (23%). The majority of clinical feedback reports were reviewed by nursing staff (729/893, 82%), largely in response to the automated clinical alerts (n=877). ConclusionsAlgorithm-supported web-based systems utilizing patient reported outcomes in clinical practice reduced emergency department presentations among a diverse population of patients with cancer. This study also highlighted the importance of (1) automated triggers for reviewing above-threshold results in patient reports, rather than passive manual review of patient records; (2) the instrumental role nurses play in managing alerts; and (3) providing patients with resources to support guided self-management, where appropriate. Together, these factors will inform the integration of web-based PRO systems into future models of routine cancer care. Trial RegistrationAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12616000615482; https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=370633 International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)RR2-10.1186/s12885-018-4729-3

BackgroundThere is an immunologic rationale to evaluate immunotherapy in the older glioblastoma population, who have been underrepresented in prior trials. The NUTMEG study evaluated the combination of nivolumab and temozolomide in patients with glioblastoma aged 65 years and older.MethodsNUTMEG was a multicenter 2:1 randomized phase II trial for patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma aged 65 years and older. The experimental arm consisted of hypofractionated chemoradiation with temozolomide, then adjuvant nivolumab and temozolomide. The standard arm consisted of hypofractionated chemoradiation with temozolomide, then adjuvant temozolomide. The primary objective was to improve overall survival (OS) in the experimental arm.ResultsA total of 103 participants were randomized, with 69 in the experimental arm and 34 in the standard arm. The median (range) age was 73 (65-88) years. After 37 months of follow-up, the median OS was 11.6 months (95% CI, 9.7-13.4) in the experimental arm and 11.8 months (95% CI, 8.3-14.8) in the standard arm. For the experimental arm relative to the standard arm, the OS hazard ratio was 0.85 (95% CI, 0.54-1.33). In the experimental arm, there were three grade 3 immune-related adverse events which resolved, with no unexpected serious adverse events.ConclusionsDue to insufficient evidence of benefit with nivolumab, the decision was made not to transition to a phase III trial. No new safety signals were identified with nivolumab. This complements the existing series of immunotherapy trials. Research is needed to identify biomarkers and new strategies including combinations.

Background We aimed to define levels of unmet supportive care needs in people with primary brain tumor and to reach expert consensus on feasibility of addressing patients' needs in clinical practice. Methods We conducted secondary analysis of a prospective cohort study of people diagnosed with high-grade glioma (n = 116) who completed the Supportive Care Needs Survey-Short Form during adjuvant chemoradiation therapy. Participants were allocated to 1 of 3 categories: no need ("no need" for help on all items), low need ("low need" for help on at least 1 item, but no "moderate" or "high" need), or moderate/high need (at least 1 "moderate" or "high" need indicated). Clinical capacity to respond to the proportion of patients needing to be prioritized was assessed. Results Overall, 13% (n = 5) were categorized as no need , 23% (n = 27) low need , and 64% (n = 74) moderate/high need. At least 1 moderate/high need was reported in the physical and daily living domain (42%) and the psychological (34%) domain. In recognition of health system capacity, the moderate/high need category was modified to distinguish between moderate need ("moderate" need indicated for at least 1 item but "high" need was not selected for any item) and high need (at least 1 "high" need indicated). Results revealed 24% (n = 28) moderate need and 40% (n = 46) high need. Those categorized as high need indicated needing assistance navigating the health system and information. Conclusions Using four step allocations resulted in 40% of patients indicating high need. Categories may facilitate appropriate triaging and guide stepped models of healthcare delivery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BackgroundHodgkin's lymphoma (HL) survivors who undergo radiotherapy experience increased risks of second cancers (SC) and cardiac sequelae. To reduce such risks, extended-field radiotherapy (RT) for HL has largely been replaced by involved field radiotherapy (IFRT). While it has generally been assumed that IFRT will reduce SC risks, there are few data that quantify the reduction in dose to normal tissues associated with modern RT practice for patients with mediastinal HL, and no estimates of the expected reduction in SC risk.MethodsOrgan-specific dose-volume histograms (DVH) were generated for 41 patients receiving 35 Gy mantle RT, 35 Gy IFRT, or 20 Gy IFRT, and integrated organ mean doses were compared for the three protocols. Organ-specific SC risk estimates were estimated using a dosimetric risk-modeling approach, analyzing DVH data with quantitative, mechanistic models of radiation-induced cancer.ResultsDose reductions resulted in corresponding reductions in predicted excess relative risks (ERR) for SC induction. Moving from 35 Gy mantle RT to 35 Gy IFRT reduces predicted ERR for female breast and lung cancer by approximately 65%, and for male lung cancer by approximately 35%; moving from 35 Gy IFRT to 20 Gy IFRT reduces predicted ERRs approximately 40% more. The median reduction in integral dose to the whole heart with the transition to 35 Gy IFRT was 35%, with a smaller (2%) reduction in dose to proximal coronary arteries. There was no significant reduction in thyroid dose.ConclusionThe significant decreases estimated for radiation-induced SC risks associated with modern IFRT provide strong support for the use of IFRT to reduce the late effects of treatment. The approach employed here can provide new insight into the risks associated with contemporary IFRT for HL, and may facilitate the counseling of patients regarding the risks associated with this treatment.

Background: Cancer-related fatigue and its associated symptoms of sleep disorder and depression are prevalent in cancer survivors especially among breast, lung, and colorectal cancer survivors. While there is no gold standard for treating cancer-related fatigue currently, studies of mind-body exercises such as Qigong have reported promise in reducing symptoms. This study was designed to evaluate the feasibility and effect of Guolin Qigong on cancer-related fatigue and other symptoms in breast, lung and colorectal cancer survivors while exploring their perceptions and experiences of Guolin Qigong intervention. Methods: This is an open-label randomized controlled trial with 60 participants divided into 2 study groups in a 1:1 ratio. The intervention group will receive 12 weeks of Guolin Qigong intervention with a 4-week follow-up while control will receive usual care under waitlist. The primary outcome will be feasibility measured based on recruitment and retention rates, class attendance, home practice adherence, nature, and quantum of missing data as well as safety. The secondary subjective outcomes of fatigue, sleep quality and depression will be measured at Week-1 (baseline), Week-6 (mid-intervention), Week-12 (post-intervention), and Week-16 (4 weeks post-intervention) while an objective 24-hour urine cortisol will be measured at Week-1 (baseline) and Week-12 (post-intervention). We will conduct a semi-structured interview individually with participants within 3 months after Week-16 (4 weeks post-intervention) to obtain a more comprehensive view of practice adherence. Discussion: This is the first mixed-method study to investigate the feasibility and effect of Guolin Qigong on breast, lung, and colorectal cancer survivors to provide a comprehensive understanding of Guolin Qigong's intervention impact and participants' perspectives. The interdisciplinary collaboration between Western Medicine and Chinese Medicine expertise of this study ensures robust study design, enhanced participant care, rigorous data analysis, and meaningful interpretation of results. This innovative research contributes to the field of oncology and may guide future evidence-based mind-body interventions to improve cancer survivorship. Trial registration: This study has been registered with ANZCTR (ACTRN12622000688785p), was approved by Medical Research Ethic Committee of University Malaya Medical Centre (MREC ID NO: 2022323-11092) and recognized by Western Sydney University Human Research Ethics Committee (RH15124). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]