The rationale for patient-reported outcomes surveillance in cancer and a reproducible method for achieving it

Breast-cancer specific comprehensive archive of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) for clinical research and clinical practice in oncology: Results from the PRO4All project

BACKGROUND

Inclusion of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in oncology clinical trials is strongly recommended. However, selecting the most appropriate patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) is not easy. This study aimed to develop a breast cancer (BC) specific comprehensive archive of PROMs.

METHODS

As part of the PRO4All project, we identified available PROMs in oncology by searching facit.org, eortc.org, eprovide.mapi-trust.org, PubMed, ema.europa.eu (European Public Assessment Reports) and published reviews. For this analysis, only BC tools were extracted. We described information about PROM name, type of questionnaire, questionnaire variant(s), recall period, number of items, and presence of minimum clinically important difference (MCID) reference in literature. Then, we assigned each item to a specific domain according to a predefined taxonomy of 38 items for outcome classification.

RESULTS

We identified and analyzed 383 PROMs. Of these, 29 were BC specific, but 2 were excluded because the questionnaires description was not available. 6 (22.2 %) were variants of another questionnaire. All questionnaires were self-reported. In 6 cases (22.2 %) the recall period to consider was the "last week". The mean number of items per questionnaire was 25.81 (range 6-71). 602 items were assigned to an outcome domain: emotional functioning/wellbeing in 26.6 % of cases, physical functioning in 14.1 %, delivery of care in 10.8 %, and general outcomes in 10.5 %. MCID reference was found only in 4 (14.8 %) cases.

CONCLUSIONS

The newly developed archive represents a useful tool to optimize the use of PROMs in the evaluation of treatments in BC patients, promoting a patient-centered approach both in clinical research and practice.

The Nigerian Dietary Screening Tool: A Step toward Improved Patient-Clinician Communication in Nigerian Hospitals: A Pilot Implementation Study

Implementing dietary screening tools into clinical practice has been challenging, including in Nigeria. This study evaluated the impact of the Nigerian dietary screening tool (NiDST) on patient-clinician communication and barriers to and facilitators of implementation. A mixed methods approach was used to collect data from patients (n = 151) and clinicians (n = 20) from outpatient clinics in Nigeria. Patients completed the validated 25-item NiDST prior to outpatient consultations. Both patients and clinicians completed the Measurement Instrument for Determinants of Innovations (MIDI) questionnaire to assess implementation determinants post-consultation. Semi-structured interviews were conducted for in-depth feedback. The fidelity of implementation was 92% for NiDST-reported dietary discussion, with a mean completion time of <6 min and an accepted marginal increase in consultation time (<10 min). For clinicians, 25% reported time constraints and their additional nutritional knowledge as barriers, while facilitators of NiDST implementation were the clarity and completeness of the NiDST, clinical relevance and improved patient-clinician communication, as reported by all the clinicians. Over 96% of patients reported the NiDST as quick to complete, with 90.7% reporting self-reflection on dietary intake. This study demonstrated the NiDST's potential to enhance patient-clinician communication and highlighted major facilitators of implementation in clinical practice to improve dietary discussion in Nigeria.

Health-related quality of life, needs, and concerns among cancer survivors referred to rehabilitation in primary healthcare setting

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

There is a growing need for rehabilitation services beyond hospitals. This study aims to describe challenges faced by cancer survivors (CSs) referred for rehabilitation in primary healthcare, employing standardized scales measuring health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and open-ended questions. Furthermore, the study explores the applicability of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in comprehensively understanding challenges encountered by CSs.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This cross-sectional study involves CSs referred for cancer rehabilitation in a primary healthcare setting, including those participating in PROs as a part of routine practice. HRQOL was assessed using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G). The International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) framed the analysis of responses to open-ended questions 'what concerns you the most?' and 'what matters to you?'  Results: FACT-G showed the lowest scores for functional well-being (14.4) and emotional well-being (16.6), with higher scores for physical well-being (18.9) and social/family well-being (21.1). Responses to open-ended questions unveiled worries about everyday life and how cancer will impact family well-being presently and in the future. Furthermore, CSs reported a need to maintain normality and proactively address the challenges posed by the disease.

INTERPRETATION

CSs referred for rehabilitation in primary healthcare experience comprehensive challenges necessitating a holistic rehabilitation approach. This includes interventions supporting CSs in dealing with uncertainty, regaining a sense of control, and addressing family well-being concerns. When using PROs for need assessment, the combination of validated HRQOL scales and open-ended questions is crucial for an in-depth understanding of CSs' challenges.

A long-term retrospective observational study at a medium-sized medical oncology service in Switzerland: comparison of overall survival with a national cohort and adherence to treatment guidelines

AIMS

There is a lack of national and international publicly available long-term survival outcome data from individual healthcare providers in medical oncology. In this study, the overall survival at a medium-sized medical oncology service at Olten Cantonal Hospital was evaluated and compared as a local benchmark report with national data from the Swiss Cancer Registries. Furthermore, adherence to treatment guidelines was investigated as an additional quality indicator.

METHODS

The 1- and 5-year overall survival of all patients with breast cancer, testicular cancer, colon cancer, non-small-cell lung cancer, Hodgkin lymphoma, and diffuse large B-cell lymphoma in Switzerland from 2008 to 2017 with at least one outpatient visit at the in-house medical oncology service at Olten Cantonal Hospital was analysed and compared with the specific overall population-based outcome data provided by the National Agency for Cancer Registration (NACR), which were set as a national benchmark. Until 2020, no data from the Canton of Solothurn, to which Olten belongs, were reported to the NACR. Further, adherence to internationally recognized clinical guidelines for stage-specific treatment was assessed.

RESULTS

Until September 8, 2020, data on 842 patients with a median follow-up period of 70 months were collected and analysed. The 1- and 5-year overall survival for colon and non-small cell cancer, Hodgkin lymphoma, and diffuse large B-cell lymphoma and the 5-year overall survival for testicular cancer in the Olten cohort did not significantly differ from the NACR data. The 1-year overall survival for testicular cancer was not comparable statistically. The 5-year overall survival for breast cancer (unadjusted for stage) was significantly higher in the NACR collective (84.5%) than in the Olten collective (79.7%) but not for the individual breast cancer stages. The Olten collective included approximately 2.5 times as many patients with stage 4 breast cancer (17.5%) as the NACR collective (6.9%). Approximately 92.4% of the patients in the curative setting and 85.8% of the patients in the palliative setting received first-line treatment according to guidelines.

CONCLUSIONS

The statistically comparable local 1- and 5-year overall survival of the analysed malignancies, with adjustment for stage for the 5-year overall survival for breast cancer, is in line with the national benchmark. Adherence to treatment guidelines is high.

The value of perioperative physical activity in older patients undergoing surgery for lung cancer

INTRODUCTION

With a median age at diagnosis of 70, lung cancer represents an enormous public health problem among older Americans. An estimated 19,000 people age 65 and older undergo lung cancer surgery annually in the US. Older adults undergoing lung cancer surgery are often frail with limited physiologic reserves, multi-morbidities, and functional impairments. Physical function, dyspnea, and quality of life return to baseline slower in older adults compared with younger adults after lung surgery.

AREAS COVERED

In this review, we summarize available data about perioperative physical activity interventions that may improve outcomes for older adults undergoing lung cancer surgery. We also review the limitations of existing studies and discuss emerging data on the roles of telehealth and family caregiver inclusion in peri-operative physical activity interventions.

EXPERT OPINION

We propose that future perioperative physical activity interventions in older adults undergoing lung cancer surgery should include a comprehensive geriatric assessment to guide personalized interventions. Interventions should be conceptually based, with a focus on enhancing self-efficacy, motivation, and adherence through classic behavior change strategies that are proven to impact outcomes. Finally, interventions should be designed with attention to feasibility and scalability. Exercise programs delivered via telehealth (telephone or tele-video) may improve access and convenience for patients.

Cancer treatment and survivorship statistics, 2022

The number of cancer survivors continues to increase in the United States due to the growth and aging of the population as well as advances in early detection and treatment. To assist the public health community in better serving these individuals, the American Cancer Society and the National Cancer Institute collaborate triennially to estimate cancer prevalence in the United States using incidence and survival data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results cancer registries, vital statistics from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Center for Health Statistics, and population projections from the US Census Bureau. Current treatment patterns based on information in the National Cancer Database are presented for the most prevalent cancer types by race, and cancer-related and treatment-related side-effects are also briefly described. More than 18 million Americans (8.3 million males and 9.7 million females) with a history of cancer were alive on January 1, 2022. The 3 most prevalent cancers are prostate (3,523,230), melanoma of the skin (760,640), and colon and rectum (726,450) among males and breast (4,055,770), uterine corpus (891,560), and thyroid (823,800) among females. More than one-half (53%) of survivors were diagnosed within the past 10 years, and two-thirds (67%) were aged 65 years or older. One of the largest racial disparities in treatment is for rectal cancer, for which 41% of Black patients with stage I disease receive proctectomy or proctocolectomy compared to 66% of White patients. Surgical receipt is also substantially lower among Black patients with non-small cell lung cancer, 49% for stages I-II and 16% for stage III versus 55% and 22% for White patients, respectively. These treatment disparities are exacerbated by the fact that Black patients continue to be less likely to be diagnosed with stage I disease than White patients for most cancers, with some of the largest disparities for female breast (53% vs 68%) and endometrial (59% vs 73%). Although there are a growing number of tools that can assist patients, caregivers, and clinicians in navigating the various phases of cancer survivorship, further evidence-based strategies and equitable access to available resources are needed to mitigate disparities for communities of color and optimize care for people with a history of cancer. CA Cancer J Clin. 2022;72:409-436.

A review of the barriers to using Patient-Reported Outcomes (PROs) and Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) in routine cancer care

INTRODUCTION

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are direct reports from patients about the status of their health condition without amendment or interpretation by others. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are the tools used to measure PROs; they are usually validated questionnaires patients complete by self-assessing their health status. Whilst the benefits of using PROs and PROMs to guide real-time patient care are well established, they have not been adopted by many oncology institutions worldwide. This literature review aimed to examine the barriers associated with using PROs and PROMs in routine oncology care.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted across EMBASE, Medline and CINAHL databases. Studies detailing barriers to routine PRO use for real-time patient care were included; those focusing on PRO collection in the research setting were excluded.

RESULTS

Of 1165 records captured, 14 studies informed this review. At the patient level, patient time, incapacity and difficulty using electronic devices to complete PROMs were prominent barriers. At the health professional level, major barriers included health professionals' lack of time and knowledge to meaningfully interpret and integrate PRO data into their clinical practice and the inability for PRO data to be acted upon. Prominent barriers at the service level included difficulties integrating PROs and PROMs into clinical workflows and inadequate information technology (IT) infrastructures for easy PRO collection.

CONCLUSION

This review has outlined potential barriers to routine PRO use in the oncology setting. Such barriers should be considered when implementing PROs into routine clinical practice.

A core set of patient-reported outcomes for population-based cancer survivorship research: a consensus study

PURPOSE

Core outcome sets aim to improve the consistency and quality of research by providing agreed-upon recommendations regarding what outcomes should be measured as a minimum for a population and setting. This study aimed to identify a core set of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) representing the most important issues impacting on cancer survivors' long-term health, functioning, and quality of life, to inform population-based research on cancer survivorship.

METHODS

In phase I, a list of 46 outcomes was generated through focus groups (n = 5) with cancer survivors (n = 40) and a review of instruments for assessing quality of life in cancer survivorship. In phase II, 69 national experts in cancer survivorship practice, research, policy, and lived experience participated in a two-round Delphi survey to refine and prioritise the listed outcomes into a core outcome set. A consensus meeting was held with a sub-sample of participants to discuss and finalise the included outcomes.

RESULTS

Twelve outcome domains were agreed upon for inclusion in the core outcome set: depression, anxiety, pain, fatigue, cognitive problems, fear of cancer recurrence or progression, functioning in everyday activities and roles, financial toxicity, coping with cancer, overall bother from side effects, overall quality of life, and overall health status.

CONCLUSIONS

We established a core set of PROs to standardise assessment of cancer survivorship concerns at a population level.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

Adoption of the core outcome set will ensure that survivorship outcomes considered important by cancer survivors are assessed as a minimum in future studies. Furthermore, its routine use will optimise the comparability, quality, and usefulness of the data cancer survivors provide in population-based research.

Geospatial analysis of multiple cancers in individuals in the US, 2004-2014

BACKGROUND

There is a projected rapid increase in cancer survivors in the US population, from 15.5 million in 2016 to 26.1 million by 2040. Improvements in treatment and detection have led to increased survival, however, there is now a risk of developing new cancers as a result of environment toxins, behavioral risk factors, genetic predisposition, and late-term effects of radiation and chemotherapeutic treatments. This study takes a geospatial approach to examining the place of occurrence of multiple cancers originating in the population of four screenable cancers-female breast, colorectal, prostate, and cervical cancers-among the US population.

METHODS

During 2004-2014, 6,523,532 primary cancer patients with one of these four screenable cancers were examined, and subsequent primary cancers (multiple cancers of any type) were noted. Individual level analyses estimated the odds of diagnosis with multiple cancers controlling for age, sex, and race-ethnicity. Change in effects on odds of multiple cancer diagnoses with age, sex, and race-ethnicity were evaluated controlling separately for late-stage diagnosis of the primary cancer or each primary cancer diagnosis type. County-level spatial cluster analysis was employed to identify and visualize higher than average multiple cancer rates.

RESULTS

Over half of the study population were female and almost 30% of the study population were diagnosed at late-stage for their first cancer. Multiple occurrences of all cancers increased during the time period for patients with initial breast or colorectal cancers. Among BC primary cancer cases, subsequent multiple cancers were mostly new breast cancers. By contrast, for CRC primary cancer cases, subsequent multiple cancers were about equally likely to be new CRC cases or other cancer types. Sex, age and race-ethnicity were all significantly associated with multiple cancers. In the model controlling for CRC as the primary type, the age and race-ethnicity effects were somewhat different than for all the other models. Thus, there was something distinctly different about the multiple cancer incidence among patients with CRC as their primary cancer as compared to patients with BC, CVC, or PC primaries. In subsequent analyses by county, there were distinct geospatial patterns in multiple cancer rates with most high-rate clusters occurring in the north- and mid-west US.

CONCLUSIONS

There were distinct individual level and geospatial disparities in multiple cancer diagnoses for the study population of all primary breast, colorectal, cervical, or prostate cancer patients during the decade studied. It is importance to emphasize continued screening for cancer survivors and research on personal and environmental drivers of multiple primary cancers.

Measuring Self-Reported Cancer-Related Cognitive Impairment: Recommendations From the Cancer Neuroscience Initiative Working Group

Cancer and its treatments are associated with increased risk for cancer-related cognitive impairment (CRCI). Methods and measures used to study and assess self-reported CRCI (sr-CRCI), however, remain diverse, resulting in heterogeneity across studies. The Patient-Reported Outcomes Working Group has been formed to promote homogeneity in the methods used to study sr-CRCI. In this report, using a psychometric taxonomy, we inventory and appraise instruments used in research to measure sr-CRCI, and we consider advances in patient-reported outcome methodology. Given its psychometric properties, we recommend the Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System Cognitive Function Short Form 8a for measurement of sr-CRCI in cancer patients and survivors, at a minimum, to increase scientific rigor and progress in addressing CRCI.

Symptom and functional recovery monitoring in thoracic surgery

Curative-intent surgery is the treatment of choice for thoracic malignancies, including lung cancer. There is significant complexity and uncertainty associated with the diagnosis, prognosis, and surgical treatment decision-making in thoracic surgery. From a patient point of view, this complexity and uncertainty can be overwhelming. Therefore, for high-quality cancer care, an emphasis on patient-centered care-including the improvement in quality of life (QOL) through symptom and functional monitoring-is essential. Using the current literature and our previous research, the purpose of this paper is to: (I) review the current evidence on symptom and functional monitoring in surgery; (II) describe strategies to monitor symptoms and functional recovery in surgery; and (III) describe a model of patient-centered care in thoracic surgery.

Sudden Cardiac Arrest Survivorship: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association

Cardiac arrest systems of care are successfully coordinating community, emergency medical services, and hospital efforts to improve the process of care for patients who have had a cardiac arrest. As a result, the number of people surviving sudden cardiac arrest is increasing. However, physical, cognitive, and emotional effects of surviving cardiac arrest may linger for months or years. Systematic recommendations stop short of addressing partnerships needed to care for patients and caregivers after medical stabilization. This document expands the cardiac arrest resuscitation system of care to include patients, caregivers, and rehabilitative healthcare partnerships, which are central to cardiac arrest survivorship.

Predicting Patient Reported Outcomes of Cognitive Function Using Connectome-Based Predictive Modeling in Breast Cancer

Being able to predict who will likely experience cancer related cognitive impairment (CRCI) could enhance patient care and potentially reduce economic and human costs associated with this adverse event. We aimed to determine if post-treatment patient reported CRCI could also be predicted from baseline resting state fMRI in patients with breast cancer. 76 newly diagnosed patients (n = 42 planned for chemotherapy; n = 34 not planned for chemotherapy) and 50 healthy female controls were assessed at 3 times points [T1 (prior to treatment); T2 (1 month post chemotherapy); T3 (1 year after T2)], and at yoked intervals for controls. Data collection included self-reported executive dysfunction, memory function, and psychological distress and resting state fMRI data converted to connectome matrices for each participant. Statistical analyses included linear mixed modeling, independent t tests, and connectome-based predictive modeling (CPM). Executive dysfunction increased over time in the chemotherapy group and was stable in the other two groups (p < 0.001). Memory function decreased over time in both patient groups compared to controls (p < 0.001). CPM models successfully predicted executive dysfunction and memory function scores (r > 0.31, p < 0.002). Support vector regression with a radial basis function (SVR RBF) showed the highest performance for executive dysfunction and memory function (r = 0.68; r = 0.44, p's < 0.001). Baseline neuroimaging may be useful for predicting patient reported cognitive outcomes which could assist in identifying patients in need of surveillance and/or early intervention for treatment-related cognitive effects.

Complementing clinical cancer registry data with patient reported outcomes: A feasibility study on routine electronic patient-reported outcome assessment for the Austrian Myelome Registry

OBJECTIVES

Routinely assessed patient-reported outcomes (PROs), such as quality of life (QOL), are important to supplement clinical cancer data but requires rigorous implementation. This study aims at depicting the implementation procedure and evaluating the feasibility of routine electronic PRO monitoring (ePRO) for collecting data supplementing the Austrian Myeloma Registry (AMR).

METHODS

Integration of ePRO monitoring into clinical routine was planned according to the Replicating Effective Programs framework. QOL data were assessed regularly during treatment and aftercare at the hematooncological outpatient unit at the Medical University of Innsbruck with the EORTC QLQ-C30/ +MY20 and the EQ-5D-5L. Feasibility and usability testing were performed via a multimethod approach.

RESULTS

Within the first year, 94.4% of the MM patients (N = 142, mean age 65.4, SD 11.8, 60% male) provided 748 PRO assessment time points overall. Patients and clinicians were satisfied with ePRO monitoring and indicated no to little disruption in clinical routine. Patient preference on assessment time points and completion frequency became evident.

CONCLUSIONS

Complementing the AMR with ePRO data proved to be feasible. Our findings provide useful insights for healthcare providers considering introducing ePRO monitoring to their units for informing clinical registries as well as individualised feedback to patients alike.

Cancer treatment and survivorship statistics, 2019

The number of cancer survivors continues to increase in the United States because of the growth and aging of the population as well as advances in early detection and treatment. To assist the public health community in better serving these individuals, the American Cancer Society and the National Cancer Institute collaborate every 3 years to estimate cancer prevalence in the United States using incidence and survival data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results cancer registries; vital statistics from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Center for Health Statistics; and population projections from the US Census Bureau. Current treatment patterns based on information in the National Cancer Data Base are presented for the most prevalent cancer types. Cancer-related and treatment-related short-term, long-term, and late health effects are also briefly described. More than 16.9 million Americans (8.1 million males and 8.8 million females) with a history of cancer were alive on January 1, 2019; this number is projected to reach more than 22.1 million by January 1, 2030 based on the growth and aging of the population alone. The 3 most prevalent cancers in 2019 are prostate (3,650,030), colon and rectum (776,120), and melanoma of the skin (684,470) among males, and breast (3,861,520), uterine corpus (807,860), and colon and rectum (768,650) among females. More than one-half (56%) of survivors were diagnosed within the past 10 years, and almost two-thirds (64%) are aged 65 years or older. People with a history of cancer have unique medical and psychosocial needs that require proactive assessment and management by follow-up care providers. Although there are growing numbers of tools that can assist patients, caregivers, and clinicians in navigating the various phases of cancer survivorship, further evidence-based resources are needed to optimize care.

Perceptions of Patients With Breast and Colon Cancer of the Management of Cancer-Related Pain, Fatigue, and Emotional Distress in Community Oncology

PURPOSE

Pain, fatigue, and distress are common among patients with cancer but are often underassessed and undertreated. We examine the prevalence of pain, fatigue, and emotional distress among patients with cancer, as well as patient perceptions of the symptom care they received.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Seventeen Commission on Cancer-accredited cancer centers across the United States sampled patients with local/regional breast (82%) or colon (18%) cancer. We received 2,487 completed surveys (61% response rate).

RESULTS

Of patients, 76%, 78%, and 59% reported talking to a clinician about pain, fatigue, and distress, respectively, and 70%, 61%, and 54% reported receiving advice. Sixty-one percent of patients experienced pain, 74% fatigue, and 46% distress. Among those patients experiencing each symptom, 58% reported getting the help they wanted for pain, 40% for fatigue, and 45% for distress. Multilevel logistic regression models revealed that patients experiencing symptoms were significantly more likely to have talked about and received advice on coping with these symptoms. In addition, patients who were receiving or recently completed curative treatment reported more symptoms and better symptom care than did those who were further in time from curative treatment.

CONCLUSION

In our sample, 30% to 50% of patients with cancer in community cancer centers did not report discussing, getting advice, or receiving desired help for pain, fatigue, or emotional distress. This finding suggests that there is room for improvement in the management of these three common cancer-related symptoms. Higher proportions of talk and advice among those experiencing symptoms imply that many discussions may be patient initiated. Lower rates of talk and advice among those who are further in time from treatment suggest the need for more assessment among longer-term survivors, many of whom continue to experience these symptoms. These findings seem to be especially important given the high prevalence of these symptoms in our sample.

Equitably improving outcomes for cancer survivors and supporting caregivers: A blueprint for care delivery, research, education, and policy

Cancer care delivery is being shaped by growing numbers of cancer survivors coupled with provider shortages, rising costs of primary treatment and follow-up care, significant survivorship health disparities, increased reliance on informal caregivers, and the transition to value-based care. These factors create a compelling need to provide coordinated, comprehensive, personalized care for cancer survivors in ways that meet survivors' and caregivers' unique needs while minimizing the impact of provider shortages and controlling costs for health care systems, survivors, and families. The authors reviewed research identifying and addressing the needs of cancer survivors and caregivers and used this synthesis to create a set of critical priorities for care delivery, research, education, and policy to equitably improve survivor outcomes and support caregivers. Efforts are needed in 3 priority areas: 1) implementing routine assessment of survivors' needs and functioning and caregivers' needs; 2) facilitating personalized, tailored, information and referrals from diagnosis onward for both survivors and caregivers, shifting services from point of care to point of need wherever possible; and 3) disseminating and supporting the implementation of new care methods and interventions.

Patient-Reported Outcomes Can Be Used to Identify Patients at Risk for Total Knee Arthroplasty Revision and Potentially Individualize Postsurgery Follow-Up

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported outcomes are increasingly used as complementary measures to clinical outcomes in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). However, their prognostic importance has yet to be established. We aimed to determine whether the long-term revision risk in TKA relates to pain and Knee Society Score (KSS) measures at baseline, 1, and 2 years.

METHODS

This was a registry-based study of primary TKA procedures at a large tertiary care institution between 1995 and 2010. Patients completed pain and KSS questionnaires both preoperatively and at 1 and 2 years of follow-up. Clinical information including revision outcomes and mortality was collected and recorded by trained registry personnel. Age and gender-adjusted Cox regression models were used to assess the association between pain and KSS measures and revisions and mortality as outcomes.

RESULTS

Both the 1-year and 2-year pain and KSSs were significantly associated with the risk for revisions (P < .0001 for trend). The risk for revision was 50%-100% higher among individuals reporting poor or fair KSS at 1 year. Similarly, ≥10 points worsening on the KSS was associated with about 2-fold higher risk for revision (hazard ratio, 2.50; 95% confidence interval, 1.25-5.47). The predictive power of the 1- and 2-year KSS diminished but persisted for revisions that occurred furthest from the reporting time points. The results with pain scores were similar but stronger than the KSS.

CONCLUSION

Patient-reported outcomes in TKA have long-term prognostic importance and should be taken into account when planning frequency of aftercare of TKA patients.

Mobile Application to Promote Adherence to Oral Chemotherapy and Symptom Management: A Protocol for Design and Development

Background

Oral chemotherapy is increasingly used in place of traditional intravenous chemotherapy to treat patients with cancer. While oral chemotherapy includes benefits such as ease of administration, convenience, and minimization of invasive infusions, patients receive less oversight, support, and symptom monitoring from clinicians. Additionally, adherence is a well-documented challenge for patients with cancer prescribed oral chemotherapy regimens. With the ever-growing presence of smartphones and potential for efficacious behavioral intervention technology, we created a mobile health intervention for medication and symptom management.

Objective

The objective of this study was to develop and evaluate the usability and acceptability of a smartphone app to support adherence to oral chemotherapy and symptom management in patients with cancer.

Methods

We used a 5-step development model to create a comprehensive mobile app with theoretically informed content. The research and technical development team worked together to develop and iteratively test the app. In addition to the research team, key stakeholders including patients and family members, oncology clinicians, health care representatives, and practice administrators contributed to the content refinement of the intervention. Patient and family members also participated in alpha and beta testing of the final prototype to assess usability and acceptability before we began the randomized controlled trial.

Results

We incorporated app components based on the stakeholder feedback we received in focus groups and alpha and beta testing. App components included medication reminders, self-reporting of medication adherence and symptoms, an education library including nutritional information, Fitbit integration, social networking resources, and individually tailored symptom management feedback. We are conducting a randomized controlled trial to determine the effectiveness of the app in improving adherence to oral chemotherapy, quality of life, and burden of symptoms and side effects. At every stage in this trial, we are engaging stakeholders to solicit feedback on our progress and next steps.

Conclusions

To our knowledge, we are the first to describe the development of an app designed for people taking oral chemotherapy. The app addresses many concerns with oral chemotherapy, such as medication adherence and symptom management. Soliciting feedback from stakeholders with broad perspectives and expertise ensured that the app was acceptable and potentially beneficial for patients, caregivers, and clinicians. In our development process, we instantiated 7 of the 8 best practices proposed in a recent review of mobile health app development. Our process demonstrated the importance of effective communication between research groups and technical teams, as well as meticulous planning of technical specifications before development begins. Future efforts should consider incorporating other proven strategies in software, such as gamification, to bolster the impact of mobile health apps. Forthcoming results from our randomized controlled trial will provide key data on the effectiveness of this app in improving medication adherence and symptom management.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02157519; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02157519 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6prj3xfKA)

Real-world implementation of electronic patient-reported outcomes in outpatient pediatric cancer care

OBJECTIVE

The KLIK method is an online tool that monitors and discusses electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePROs), which has been shown to enhance outcomes. This study aimed (1) to determine the fidelity (ie, extent to which used as intended) of the KLIK method as implemented in outpatient pediatric cancer care and (2) to study health care professional (HCP)-reported barriers and facilitators for implementation.

METHODS

Two hundred five children with newly diagnosed cancer (enrollment rate 85%) participated. At 1 (T1), 3 (T2), and 6 (T3) months after diagnosis, patients (8-18 years) or parents (of patients 0-7 years) completed health-related quality of life (HRQoL) questionnaires, which were transformed into an ePROfile and discussed by their HCP during consultations. Fidelity was determined by the following: percentage of website registrations, HRQoL questionnaires completed, and ePROfiles discussed. Implementation determinants were assessed with HCPs after the final T3 with the Measurement Instrument for Determinants of Innovations.

RESULTS

Depending on the time point (T1-T3), fidelity was 86% to 89% for website registration, 66-85% for completed HRQoL questionnaires, and 56% to 62% for ePROfile discussion. Barriers were mainly related to organizational issues (eg, organizational change) and less frequently to users (eg, motivation to comply) or the intervention (compatibility). Facilitators were related to the user (eg, positive outcome expectations) and intervention (simplicity) but not to the organization.

CONCLUSIONS

When implementing ePROs in outpatient pediatric oncology practice, HCPs report determinants that influence ePRO integration. To improve implementation and outcomes, tailored organizational (eg, formal ratification by management and time) and specific local (eg, individualized assessments) strategies should be developed to achieve optimal ePRO discussion.

The health-related quality of life journey of gynecologic oncology surgical patients: Implications for the incorporation of patient-reported outcomes into surgical quality metrics

OBJECTIVE

To report the changes in patient-reported quality of life for women undergoing gynecologic oncology surgeries.

METHODS

In a prospective cohort study from 10/2013-10/2014, women were enrolled pre-operatively and completed comprehensive interviews at baseline, 1, 3, and 6months post-operatively. Measures included the disease-specific Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-GP), general Patient Reported Outcome Measure Information System (PROMIS) global health and validated measures of anxiety and depression. Bivariate statistics were used to analyze demographic groups and changes in mean scores over time.

RESULTS

Of 231 patients completing baseline interviews, 185 (80%) completed 1-month, 170 (74%) 3-month, and 174 (75%) 6-month interviews. Minimally invasive (n=115, 63%) and laparotomy (n=60, 32%) procedures were performed. Functional wellbeing (20 → 17.6, p<0.0001) decreased at 1-month, and recovered by 3 and 6months. Emotional wellbeing increased (16.3 → 20.1, p<0.0001) and anxiety decreased (54.2 → 49.0, p<0.0001) at 1-month, and were stable at 3 and 6months. Physical wellbeing scales were not sensitive to surgery. These patterns were consistent across procedure type, cancer diagnosis, and adjuvant therapy administration. In an exploratory analysis of the interaction of QOL and quality, patients with increased postoperative healthcare resource use were noted to have higher baseline levels of anxiety.

CONCLUSIONS

For women undergoing gynecologic oncology procedures, temporary declines in functional wellbeing are balanced by improvements in emotional wellbeing and decreased anxiety symptoms after surgery. Not all commonly used QOL surveys are sensitive to changes during the perioperative period and may not be suitable for use in surgical quality metrics.