1
|
Shakhnenko I, Husson O, Chuter D, van der Graaf W. Elements of successful patient involvement in clinical cancer trials: a review of the literature. ESMO Open 2024; 9:102947. [PMID: 38492274 PMCID: PMC10959641 DOI: 10.1016/j.esmoop.2024.102947] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/15/2023] [Revised: 02/16/2024] [Accepted: 02/19/2024] [Indexed: 03/18/2024] Open
Abstract
Patient involvement in clinical cancer research has gained much ground in the past few years and studies demonstrated positive outcomes of such involvement. Yet, they also indicated a lack of evidence around best methods and practices to achieve successful patient involvement. The aim of this literature review was to provide a synthesis of elements contributing to successful and meaningful ways of involving patients in oncology trials across different stages of research. This synthesis can offer practical support to researchers in their patient involvement journey. A PubMed literature search for original articles published between 2012 and early 2023 was carried out. In total, 3132 articles were identified, among which 152 were fully assessed for eligibility. Thirty-three articles met the predefined inclusion criteria and were subjected to a quality checklist. Patient involvement occurred most often in the development stage of cancer trials (85%) and was continuous and integrated throughout the entire lifecycle of research (67%). In total, 58 elements of successful patient involvement were identified, such as clearly defined roles and responsibilities of patient partners, input of multiple patients to ensure diversity, and regular touchpoints in the project. All these elements can be applied in future studies from the planning stage to the dissemination of study results. This review provides a set of practical recommendations that can be used by the cancer research community when planning to involve or already involving patients in their clinical trial activities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- I Shakhnenko
- European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC Headquarters), Brussels, Belgium
| | - O Husson
- Department of Medical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam; Department of Surgical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - D Chuter
- EORTC, Patient Panel, Brussels, Belgium; Digestive Cancers Europe (DiCE), UK
| | - W van der Graaf
- Department of Medical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam; Department of Medical Oncology, Erasmus Medical Centre Cancer Institute, Erasmus University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Westerink HJ, Bresser CC, Garvelink MM, van Uden-Kraan CF, Zouitni O, Bart HAJ, van der Wees PJ, van der Nat PB. The use of outcome data in patient consultations from the healthcare professionals' and patients' perspectives: A mixed methods study. PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING 2024; 118:108043. [PMID: 37925975 DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2023.108043] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/17/2023] [Revised: 10/23/2023] [Accepted: 10/28/2023] [Indexed: 11/07/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To gain insight into healthcare professionals' (HCPs') perspectives on the use of outcome data in consultations and to understand which aggregated outcomes patients find important. METHODS This study had a mixed-methods design and consisted of two steps: RESULTS: HCPs indicated that aggregated outcome data are not routinely used in consultations. They pointed out various barriers to using outcome data, e.g., low response rates of PROMs, and suggested actions to address these barriers, including training of HCPs in outcome data usage. Patients rated the majority of aggregated outcomes as important, although preferences differed between the studied health conditions. CONCLUSION Both HCPs and patients underscored the importance of discussing outcome data in consultations. Nevertheless, HCPs encountered several barriers to using outcome data. Furthermore, patients with different health conditions have somewhat different information needs. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS The study identified several actionable steps to enhance the collection and application of outcome data in consultations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Henrike J Westerink
- Department of Value Improvement, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, Utrecht, the Netherlands; Scientific Center for Quality of Healthcare (IQ healthcare), Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
| | - Cato C Bresser
- Department of Value Improvement, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, Utrecht, the Netherlands; Scientific Center for Quality of Healthcare (IQ healthcare), Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - Mirjam M Garvelink
- Department of Value Improvement, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | | | - Ouisam Zouitni
- Client Council, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | | | - Philip J van der Wees
- Scientific Center for Quality of Healthcare (IQ healthcare), Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - Paul B van der Nat
- Department of Value Improvement, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, Utrecht, the Netherlands; Scientific Center for Quality of Healthcare (IQ healthcare), Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Dobrijevic E, Scholes-Robertson N, Guha C, Howell M, Jauré A, Wong G, van Zwieten A. Patient-Centered Research and Outcomes in Cancer and Kidney Transplantation. Semin Nephrol 2024; 44:151499. [PMID: 38538454 DOI: 10.1016/j.semnephrol.2024.151499] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/30/2024]
Abstract
Cancer has been identified by kidney transplant recipients as a critically important outcome. The co-occurrence of cancer and kidney transplantation represents a complex intersection of diseases, symptoms, and competing priorities for treatments. Research that focuses on biochemical parameters and clinical events may not capture the priorities of patients. Patient-centered research can improve the relevance and efficiency of research and is particularly pertinent in the setting of cancer and kidney transplantation to facilitate shared decision-making in complex clinical situations. In addition, patient-reported outcomes can facilitate the assessment of patients' experiences, symptom burden, treatment side effects, and quality of life. This review discusses patient-centered research in the context of kidney transplantation and cancer, including consumer involvement in research and patient-centered outcomes and their measures and inclusion in core outcome sets.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ellen Dobrijevic
- Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia; Centre for Kidney Research, Kids Research Institute, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, Australia.
| | - Nicole Scholes-Robertson
- Centre for Kidney Research, Kids Research Institute, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, Australia; Rural and Remote Health NT, Flinders University, Alice Springs, Australia
| | - Chandana Guha
- Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia; Centre for Kidney Research, Kids Research Institute, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, Australia
| | - Martin Howell
- Centre for Kidney Research, Kids Research Institute, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, Australia; Menzies Centre for Health Policy and Economics, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Allison Jauré
- Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia; Centre for Kidney Research, Kids Research Institute, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, Australia
| | - Germaine Wong
- Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia; Centre for Kidney Research, Kids Research Institute, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, Australia; Centre for Transplant and Renal Research, Westmead Hospital, Westmead, Australia
| | - Anita van Zwieten
- Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia; Centre for Kidney Research, Kids Research Institute, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Richardson E, McEwen A, Newton-John T, Crook A, Jacobs C. Outcomes of Importance to Patients in Reproductive Genetic Carrier Screening: A Qualitative Study to Inform a Core Outcome Set. J Pers Med 2022; 12:jpm12081310. [PMID: 36013258 PMCID: PMC9409855 DOI: 10.3390/jpm12081310] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/09/2022] [Revised: 08/02/2022] [Accepted: 08/10/2022] [Indexed: 11/22/2022] Open
Abstract
There is significant heterogeneity in the outcomes assessed across studies of reproductive genetic carrier screening (RGCS). Only a small number of studies have measured patient-reported outcomes or included patients in the selection of outcomes that are meaningful to them. This study was a cross-sectional, qualitative study of 15 patient participants conducted to inform a core outcome set. A core outcome set is an approach to facilitate standardisation in outcome reporting, allowing direct comparison of outcomes across studies to enhance understanding of impacts and potential harms. The aim of this study was to incorporate the patient perspective in the development of a core outcome set by eliciting a detailed understanding of outcomes of importance to patients. Data were collected via online, semi-structured interviews using a novel method informed by co-design and the nominal group technique. Data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. Outcomes elicited from patient stakeholder interviews highlighted several under-explored areas for future research. This includes the role of grief and loss in increased risk couples, the role of empowerment in conceptualising the utility of RGCS, the impact of societal context and barriers that contribute to negative experiences, and the role of genetic counselling in ensuring that information needs are met and informed choice facilitated as RGCS becomes increasingly routine. Future research should focus on incorporating outcomes that accurately reflect patient needs and experience.
Collapse
|
5
|
Reply to Ruobing Lei, Yuehuan Li, and Yaolong Chen’s Letter to the Editor re: Katharina Beyer, Lisa Moris, Michael Lardas, et al. Updating and Integrating Core Outcome Sets for Localised, Locally Advanced, Metastatic, and Nonmetastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer: An Update from the PIONEER Consortium. Eur Urol 2022;81:503–14. Improving the Methodological Quality of Prostate Cancer Core Outcome Sets in Future Updates. Eur Urol 2022; 82:e68-e69. [DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2022.05.014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/09/2022] [Accepted: 05/19/2022] [Indexed: 11/23/2022]
|