Implementing Electronic Patient-Reported Outcomes for Patients With New Oral Chemotherapy Prescriptions at an Academic Site and a Community Site

A budget impact analysis of a digital monitoring solution in patients treated with oral anticancer agents: a medico-economic analysis of the randomized phase 3 CAPRI trial

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

Remote patient monitoring (RPM) has demonstrated numerous benefits in cancer care, including improved quality of life, overall survival, and reduced medical resource use. This study presents a budget impact analysis of a nurse navigator-led RPM program, based on the CAPRI trial, from the perspective of the French national health insurance (NHI). The study aimed to assess the impact of the program on medical resource utilization and costs.

METHODS

Medical resource utilization data were collected from both medico-administrative sources and patient-reported questionnaires. Costs were calculated by applying unit costs to resource utilization and estimating the average monthly cost per patient. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to explore different perspectives and varying resource consumption.

RESULTS

The analysis included 559 cancer patients participating in the CAPRI program. From the NHI perspective, the program resulted in average savings of €377 per patient over the 4.58-month follow-up period, mainly due to reduced hospitalizations. The all-payers perspective yielded even greater savings of €504 per patient. Sensitivity analyses supported the robustness of the findings.

CONCLUSION

The budget impact analysis demonstrated that the CAPRI RPM program was associated with cost savings from the perspective of the NHI. The program's positive impact on reducing hospitalizations outweighed the additional costs associated with remote monitoring. These findings highlight the potential economic benefits of implementing RPM programs in cancer care. Further research is warranted to assess the long-term cost-effectiveness and scalability of such programs in the real-world settings.

Interventions for Concerning Patient-Reported Outcomes in Routine Cancer Care: A Systematic Review

IMPORTANCE

Collecting patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in routine cancer care improves patient-clinician communication, decision making, and overall patient satisfaction. Recommendations exist regarding standardized ways to collect, store, and interpret PRO data. However, evidence on incorporating PROs into cancer process of care, especially the type of HIs that are warranted after observing a concerning PRO and the effectiveness of these HIs are lacking.

OBJECTIVE

This study summarizes HIs triggered after PRO completion and their effectiveness in improving patient outcomes for adults being treated for cancer types that are resource intensive and associated with high symptom burden [i.e., gastrointestinal (GI), lung, and head and neck cancer (HNC)]. Secondary outcomes included factors associated with poor implementation of PROs.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

A literature search of peer-reviewed publications on MEDLINE, CINAHL Plus, APA PsycInfo, Scopus, and Cochrane was conducted following PRISMA guidelines from 1 January 2012, to 31 July 2022. Trial and real-world studies describing HIs after PRO completion for adult patients being treated for GI, lung, and HNC were included. Sixteen studies involving 144,496 patients were included. The Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal checklist was used to assess risk of bias.

FINDINGS

Of the 16 included studies, 5 included patients with HNC. Commonly used PRO measurement tools were the PRO-CTCAE and ESAS. Only three studies reported specific HIs delivered in response to concerning PROs and measured their effectiveness on patient outcomes. In all three studies, these HIs significantly improved cancer-related care. The most common HIs undertaken in response to concerning PROs were referrals to other specialists/allied healthcare professionals, medication changes, or self-management advice. Provider-related barriers to PRO measurement and delivery included the overwhelming number of alerts, the time required to address each PRO and the unclear role of healthcare providers in response to these alerts. Patient-related barriers included lower digital literacy and socioeconomic status, older age, rural living, and patients suffering from GI and HNC.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This review highlights that PRO-triggered HIs are heterogenous and can improve patient quality of life. Further studies are necessary to determine the types of interventions with the greatest impact on patient care and outcomes.

The advantages, disadvantages, threats, and opportunities of electronic patient-reported outcome systems in cancer: A systematic review

Objective

Electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) systems hold promise for revolutionizing communication between cancer patients and healthcare providers across various care settings. This systematic review explores the multifaceted landscape of ePROs in cancer care, encompassing their advantages, disadvantages, potential risks, and opportunities for improvement.

Methods

In our systematic review, we conducted a rigorous search in Scopus, Web of Science, and PubMed, employing comprehensive medical subject heading terms for ePRO and cancer, with no date limitations up to 2024. Studies were critically appraised and thematically analyzed based on inclusion and exclusion criteria, including considerations of advantages, disadvantages, opportunities, and threats.

Findings

Analyzing 85 articles revealed 69 themes categorized into four key areas. Advantages (n = 14) were dominated by themes like "improved quality of life and care." Disadvantages (n = 26) included "limited access and technical issues." Security concerns and lack of technical skills were prominent threats (n = 10). Opportunities (n = 19) highlighted advancements in symptom management and potential solutions for technical challenges.

Conclusion

This review emphasizes the crucial role of continuous exploration, integration, and innovation in ePRO systems for optimizing patient outcomes in cancer care. Beyond traditional clinical settings, ePROs hold promise for applications in survivorship, palliative care, and remote monitoring. By addressing existing limitations and capitalizing on opportunities, ePROs can empower patients, enhance communication, and ultimately improve care delivery across the entire cancer care spectrum.

Feasibility of Weekly Electronic Health Record-Embedded Patient-Reported Outcomes for Patients Starting Oral Cancer-Directed Therapy

PURPOSE

To examine the feasibility of integrating a symptom management platform into the electronic health record (EHR) using electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePROs) during oral cancer-directed therapy (OCDT) and explore the impact of prompting oncology nurse navigators (ONNs) to respond to severe symptomatic adverse events (SAEs).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Adults prescribed OCDT at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute were consecutively invited to participate. Participants received weekly messages to complete ePROs. The first half enrolled in a passive (P) group where ePROs responses could be viewed anytime, but outreach was not expected. The second half enrolled in an active (A) group where severe SAEs prompted emails to ONNs for outreach within 1 business day. Feasibility was the proportion of participants completing ≥2 ePROs during the first 30 days. Participants were followed for up to 90 days.

RESULTS

From June 25, 2019, to August 18, 2021, 100 participants enrolled, and 96 remained enrolled for at least 30 days. Overall, average age was 59 years, 80% female, and 9% used the platform in Spanish. Twenty-two A (45%) and 27 P (57%) participants met the feasibility threshold (P = .26). ePROs returned at 30 days were similar (P = .50): 0 ePROs 17 A, 13 P; 1 ePRO 10 A, 7 P; 2 ePROs 3 A, 5 P; 3 ePROs 1 A, 4 P; 4 ePROs 7 A, 8 P; and 5 ePROs 11 A, 10 P. Documented telephone encounters at 30 days were similar (109 A, 101 P; P = .86).

CONCLUSION

EHR-embedded ePROs administered weekly for people on OCDT was feasible, although many went incomplete. ePRO completion was not clearly affected by nursing calls for severe SAEs. Future efforts will investigate improving engagement and addressing symptoms proactively.

Independent Predictors for Hospitalization-Associated Radiotherapy Interruptions

Purpose

Radiation treatment interruption associated with unplanned hospitalization remains understudied. The intent of this study was to benchmark the frequency of hospitalization-associated radiation therapy interruptions (HARTI), characterize disease processes causing hospitalization during radiation, identify factors predictive for HARTI, and localize neighborhood environments associated with HARTI at our academic referral center.

Methods and Materials

This retrospective review of electronic health records provided descriptive statistics of HARTI event rates at our institutional practice. Uni- and multivariable logistic regression models were developed to identify significant factors predictive for HARTI. Causes of hospitalization were established from primary discharge diagnoses. HARTI rates were mapped according to patient residence addresses.

Results

Between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2017, 197 HARTI events (5.3%) were captured across 3729 patients with 727 total missed treatments. The 3 most common causes of hospitalization were malnutrition/dehydration (n = 28; 17.7%), respiratory distress/infection (n = 24; 13.7%), and fever/sepsis (n = 17; 9.7%). Factors predictive for HARTI included African-American race (odds ratio [OR]: 1.48; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.07-2.06; P = .018), Medicaid/uninsured status (OR: 2.05; 95% CI, 1.32-3.15; P = .0013), Medicare coverage (OR: 1.7; 95% CI, 1.21-2.39; P = .0022), lung (OR: 5.97; 95% CI, 3.22-11.44; P < .0001), and head and neck (OR: 5.6; 95% CI, 2.96-10.93; P < .0001) malignancies, and prescriptions >20 fractions (OR: 2.23; 95% CI, 1.51-3.34; P < .0001). HARTI events clustered among Medicaid/uninsured patients living in urban, low-income, majority African-American neighborhoods, and patients from middle-income suburban communities, independent of race and insurance status. Only the wealthiest residential areas demonstrated low HARTI rates.

Conclusions

HARTI disproportionately affected socioeconomically disadvantaged urban patients facing a high treatment burden in our catchment population. A complementary geospatial analysis also captured the risk experienced by middle-income suburban patients independent of race or insurance status. Confirmatory studies are warranted to provide scale and context to guide intervention strategies to equitably reduce HARTI events.

Digital remote monitoring plus usual care versus usual care in patients treated with oral anticancer agents: the randomized phase 3 CAPRI trial

Strategies that individualize the care of cancer patients receiving oral anticancer agents offer opportunities to improve treatment adherence and patient care. However, the impact of digital remote monitoring systems in this setting has not been evaluated. Here, we report the results of a phase 3 trial (CAPRI, NCT02828462) to assess the impact of a nurse navigator-led program on treatment delivery for patients with metastatic cancer. Patients receiving approved oral anticancer agents were randomized (1:1) to an intervention combining a nurse navigator-led follow-up system and a web portal-smartphone application on top of usual care, or to usual symptom monitoring at the discretion of the treating oncologist, for a duration of 6 months. The primary objective included optimization of the treatment dose. Secondary objectives were grade ≥3 toxicities, patient experience, rates and duration of hospitalization, response and survival, and quality of life. In 559 evaluable patients the relative dose intensity was higher in the experimental arm (93.4% versus 89.4%, P = 0.04). The intervention improved the patient experience (Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care score, 2.94 versus 2.67, P = 0.01), reduced the days of hospitalization (2.82 versus 4.44 days, P = 0.02), and decreased treatment-related grade ≥3 toxicities (27.6% versus 36.9%, P = 0.02). These findings show that patient-centered care through remote monitoring of symptoms and treatment may improve patient outcomes and experience.

Assessment of Patient Reported Outcomes (PROs) in Outpatients Taking Oral Anticancer Drugs Included in the Real-Life Oncoral Program

Simple Summary

Patients receiving oral anticancer agents (OAAs) have a substantial symptom burden. Given the trend toward patient-centered care, the use of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) seems appropriate to secure medication management, and to improve clinical decision-making. The aim of this study was to assess symptoms potentially related to adverse events experienced by cancer outpatients treated by OAAs using PROs. In total, 407 questionnaires were completed by 63 patients, in which 2333 symptoms were reported. Almost three-quarters (74.6%) reported at least one high-level symptom. The symptoms most commonly experienced were fatigue, various psychological disorders and general pain. This initiative is the first step in the implementation of symptom assessment by PROs in patients treated by OAAs. The results highlight the need for close coordination between community and hospital health professionals, and the integration of patient self-reporting systems in oncologic clinical practice.

Abstract

Background In previous studies, patient-reported outcomes (PROs) have been shown to improve survival in cancer patients. The aim of the present study was to assess symptoms potentially related to adverse events experienced by cancer outpatients treated by oral anticancer agents (OAAs) using PROs. Methods Between September 2018 and May 2019, outpatients starting OAAs were included in a 12-week follow-up to assess 15 symptoms listed in the National Cancer Institute PRO Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, using a 5-point scale of severity or frequency. Patients were requested to alert a referral nurse or pharmacist when they self-assessed high-level (level 3 or 4) symptoms. Results 407 questionnaires were completed by 63 patients in which 2333 symptoms were reported. Almost three-quarters (74.6%) reported at least one high-level symptom. The symptoms that were most commonly experienced were fatigue (>9 in 10 patients; 13.2% of symptoms declared), various psychological disorders (>9 in 10 patients; 28.6% of symptoms declared) and general pain (>8 in 10 patients; 9.4% of symptoms declared). Conclusion PROs are appropriate to detect potential adverse events in cancer outpatients treated by OAAs. This study is the first step for integrating the patient’s perspective in a digital e-health device in routine oncology care.