Implementation of telemedicine in cancer clinical trials: Connectpatienttodoctor study

Optimizing the management of immune-related adverse events and survival in patients with thoracic cancer receiving immunotherapy through artificial intelligence (electronic patient-reported outcomes): The IMPATHI study

INTRODUCTION

The lung cancer continues to be the primary cause of cancer-related deaths, despite significant advancements in treatment through the introduction of immunological checkpoint inhibitors (ICI). These inhibitors, initially used as monotherapy, are now employed in combined therapies, resulting in improved survival rates. The ICI function by restoring T-cell activity to target tumor cells, but may lead to undesirable immune-related adverse events (irAE), necessitating careful management.

METHODS

The IMPATHI study, a prospective observational study conducted at the Begin Military Hospital, evaluated patient adherence to ePRO-based telemonitoring using the Cureety platform. The study included patients with advanced thoracic cancer receiving immunotherapy. Minors and those who did not consent to digital surveillance were excluded. Patients filled out ePRO questionnaires, and their health status was classified into four levels. The primary objective was compliance evaluation, with secondary objectives including tolerance profile and impact on survival.

RESULTS

The study recruited 22 patients, with a median age of 66years. Adenocarcinoma was the most common diagnosis, and 91% of patients had metastatic disease. Patient adherence to the telemonitoring platform was 83.3%, with 64% of responses indicating stable conditions. Common adverse events included asthenia, dyspnea, and joint/muscle pain. The 24-month progression-free survival rate was 79%, and the overall survival rate was 71.1%.

CONCLUSION

The IMPATHI study demonstrates the potential of telemonitoring in the management of lung cancer patients receiving ICI therapy, with high compliance and promising survival outcomes. Telemonitoring offers significant benefits in early detection of adverse events and personalized care to patients. Future efforts should focus on expanding access to telemonitoring for all patients.

Clinical trial recruitment of people who speak languages other than English: a Children's Oncology Group report

BACKGROUND

Persons who speak languages other than English are underrepresented in clinical trials, likely in part because of inadequate multilevel resources. We conducted a survey of institutions affiliated with the Children's Oncology Group (COG) to characterize current research recruitment practices and resources regarding translation and interpretation services.

METHODS

In October 2022, a 20-item survey was distributed electronically to institutions affiliated with COG to assess consent practices and resources for recruiting participants who speak languages other than English to COG trials. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize responses; responses were compared by institution size and type as well as respondent role.

RESULTS

The survey was sent to 230 institutions, and the response rate was 60% (n = 139). In total, 60% (n = 83) of those respondents had access to short-form consent forms. Full consent form translation was required at 50% of institutions, and 12% of institutional review boards restricted use of centrally translated consent forms. Forty-six percent (n = 64) of institutions reported insufficient funding to support translation costs; 19% (n = 26) had access to no-cost translation services. Forty-four percent (n = 61) were required to use in-person interpreters for consent discussions; the most frequently cited barrier (56%) to obtaining consent was lack of available in-person interpreters. Forty-seven percent (n = 65) reported that recruiting persons who speak languages other than English to clinical trials was somewhat or very difficult.

CONCLUSIONS

Institutions affiliated with COG face resource-specific challenges that impede recruitment of participants who speak languages other than English for clinical trials. These findings indicate an urgent need to identify strategies aimed at reducing recruitment barriers to ensure equitable access to clinical trials.

What Is Ailing Oncology Clinical Trials? Can We Fix Them?

Evidence from phase three clinical trials helps shape clinical practice. However, a very small minority of patients with cancer participate in clinical trials and many trials are not completed on time due to slow accrual. Issues with restrictive eligibility criteria can severely limit the patients who can access trials, without any convincing evidence that these restrictions impact patient safety. Similarly, regulatory, organizational, and institutional hurdles can delay trial activation, ultimately making some studies irrelevant. Additional issues during trial conduct (e.g., mandatory in-person visits, central confirmation of standard biomarkers, and inflexible drug dosage modification) contribute to making trials non-patient-centric. These real-life observations from experienced clinical trialists can seem nonsensical to investigators and patients alike, who are trying to bring effective drugs to patients with cancer. In this review, we delve into these issues in detail, and discuss potential solutions to make clinical trials more accessible to patients.

Revolutionizing Rural Oncology: Innovative Models and Global Perspectives

For individuals living in rural areas, access to cancer care can be difficult. Barriers to access cross international boundaries and have a negative impact on treatment outcomes. Current models to increase rural access in the United States are reviewed, as is a system-wide approach to this problem in Australia. Ongoing efforts to increase access to clinical trials for patients in rural areas are also discussed.

Assessing health outcomes: a systematic review of electronic patient-reported outcomes in oncology

PURPOSE

This study investigates the clinical impact of electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) monitoring apps/web interfaces, aimed at symptom-management, in cancer patients undergoing outpatient systemic antineoplastic treatment. Additionally, it explores the advantages offered by these applications, including their functionalities and healthcare team-initiated follow-up programmes.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was conducted using a predefined search strategy in MEDLINE. Inclusion criteria encompassed primary studies assessing symptom burden through at-home ePRO surveys in adult cancer patients receiving outpatient systemic antineoplastic treatment, whenever health outcomes were evaluated. Exclusion criteria excluded telemedicine-based interventions other than ePRO questionnaires and non-primary articles or study protocols. To evaluate the potential bias in the included studies, an exhaustive quality assessment was conducted, as an additional inclusion filter.

RESULTS

Among 246 identified articles, 227 were excluded for non-compliance with inclusion/exclusion criteria. Of the remaining 19 articles, only eight met the rigorous validity assessment and were included for detailed examination and data extraction, presented in attached tables.

CONCLUSION

This review provides compelling evidence of ePRO monitoring's positive clinical impact across diverse cancer settings, encompassing various cancer types, including early and metastatic stages. These systems are crucial in enabling timely interventions and reducing communication barriers, among other functionalities. While areas for future ePRO innovation are identified, the primary limitation lies in comparing clinical outcomes of reviewed articles, due to scale variability and study population heterogeneity. To conclude, our results reaffirm the transformative potential of ePRO apps in oncology and their pivotal role in shaping the future of cancer care.

Researcher Experience and Comfort With Telemedicine and Remote Patient Monitoring in Cancer Treatment Trials

BACKGROUND

Since the onset of COVID-19, oncology practices across the US have integrated telemedicine (TM) and remote patient monitoring (RPM) into routine care and clinical trials. The extent of provider experience and comfort with TM/RPM in treatment trials, however, is unknown. We surveyed oncology researchers to assess experience and comfort with TM/RPM.

METHODS

Between April 10 and June 1, 2022, we distributed email surveys to US-based members of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) whose member records indicated interest or specialization in clinical research. We collected respondent demographic data, clinical trial experience, workplace characteristics, and comfort and experience with TM/RPM use across trial components in phase I and phase II/III trials. TM/RPM was defined as clinical trial-related healthcare and monitoring for patients geographically separated from trial site.

RESULTS

There were 141 surveys analyzed (5.1% response rate). Ninety percent of respondents had been Principal Investigators, 98% practiced in a norural site. Most respondents had enrolled patients in phase I (82%) and phase II/III trials (99%). Across all phases and trial components, there was a higher frequency of researcher comfort compared to experience. Regarding remote care in treatment trials, 75% reported using TM, RPM, or both. Among these individuals, 62% had never provided remote care to trial patients before the pandemic.

CONCLUSION

COVID-19 spurred the rise of TM/RPM in cancer treatment trials, and some TM/RPM use continues in this context. Among oncology researchers, higher levels of comfort compared with real-world experience with TM/RPM reveal opportunities for expanding TM/RPM policies and guidelines in oncology research.

Evaluation of the satisfaction and experiences of oncology patients and doctors using teleconsultation during the COVID-19 pandemic

INTRODUCTION

During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the Gustave Roussy Cancer Center introduced teleconsultation via telephone, as an alternative to face-to-face consultation to reduce patient hospital visits. This study was designed to assess patient and doctor satisfaction with this modality of care in oncology patient care during the period of the pandemic and beyond.

METHODS

We designed two questionnaires based on validated scores to assess satisfaction from teleconsultation in patients (EORTC OUT-PATSAT 35 and Telemedicine Satisfaction Questionnaire [TSQ] scores) and doctors (Telehealth Usability Questionnaire [TUQ]), and anxiety levels in both groups (anxiety section of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale [HADS], HADS-A). These were electronically sent to patients and doctors with experience of at least one remote consultation during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic.

RESULTS

239 patients and 32 doctors were eligible for the analyses. In the patient group, the mean satisfaction scores were 79.5 (SD 18.1) and 74.92 (SD 15.3) for EORTC OUT-PATSAT 35 and TSQ, respectively. In the doctor group, the mean satisfaction scores were 67.1 (SD 12.7) and 64.9 (SD 13.9) for TUQ and TUQ for Skype for Business, respectively. 65.7% of patients and 81.2% of doctors had no/low anxiety. Univariable analyses in patients showed correlation of the EORTC OUT-PATSAT 35 and TSQ scores with anxiety and gender, with lower mean scores in women compared to men. Multivariable analysis showed correlation of the EORTC OUT-PATSAT 35 and TSQ scores to anxiety in both patients and doctors.

CONCLUSIONS

Teleconsultation via telephone is an acceptable modality of care for oncology patients, with high satisfaction from its implementation during the pandemic reported by patients and doctors. This was consistent across responder groups with different characteristics. An individualized approach to patients should be implemented for the safe and effective use of teleconsultation in oncology beyond the pandemic.

Telemedicine and Cancer Clinical Research: Opportunities for Transformation

ABSTRACT

Telemedicine represents an established mode of patient care delivery that has and will continue to transform cancer clinical research. Through telemedicine, opportunities exist to improve patient care, enhance access to novel therapies, streamline data collection and monitoring, support communication, and increase trial efficiency. Potential challenges include disparities in technology access and literacy, physical examination performance, biospecimen collection, privacy and security concerns, coverage of services by insurance, and regulatory considerations. Coupled with artificial intelligence, telemedicine may offer ways to reach geographically dispersed candidates for narrowly focused cancer clinical trials, such as those targeting rare genomic subsets. Collaboration among clinical trial staff, clinicians, regulators, professional societies, patients, and their advocates is critical to optimize the benefits of telemedicine for clinical cancer research.

Time toxicity associated with early phase clinical trial participation

BACKGROUND

Early phase cancer clinical trials (EPCTs) involve experimental drugs being used for the first time in humans. These studies are designed for dose determination and safety, and represent the most time intensive of all clinical trials for both clinicians and patients. We sought to quantify the amount of patient time consumed through EPCT participation.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A retrospective audit of patients treated in the EPCT unit at Liverpool Hospital, Sydney was carried out from 2013 to 2023. We defined 'time toxicity' (TT) as a composite measure where time-toxic days were considered days with any health care system contact, including clinic visits, infusions, procedures or blood work.

RESULTS

A total of 219 patients across 36 EPCTs were included. The median age was 65 years (range 31-81 years). Patients spent a median of 29% (range 4%-100%) of their days in direct contact with the health care system during their study. Protocol-specified visits accounted for the greatest contribution to total TT in 101 (46%) patients. In 7% (n = 16) of patients, unscheduled visits due to either adverse events or cancer-related symptoms accounted for the greatest TT. TT reduced as patients completed additional cycles of treatment. Patients who completed >10 cycles spent 14% of their days interacting with health care systems compared with 35% for those who completed ≤2 cycles. No statistically significant difference in TT was noted between dose-expansion and dose-escalation studies or trials focusing on immune-oncology versus targeted therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study is the first to report TT in EPCTs with an extended follow-up. Clinicians should be aware of TT when discussing risks and benefits. TT also may not be the appropriate term when describing the time patients invest during EPCTs. Toxicity implies a negative impact, but for many patients, trial participation would be seen as positive. There should be efforts to streamline health care visits to limit TT in EPCTs.

Effectiveness of electronic patient reporting outcomes, by a digital telemonitoring platform, for prostate cancer care: the Protecty study

Research aim and purpose

The benefits of Electronic Patient -Reported Outcomes (e-PRO) for telemonitoring are well established, allowing early detection of illnesses and continuous monitoring of patients. The primary objective of the PROTECTY study was to assess the compliance with patient use of the telemonitoring platform Cureety. An exploratory objective was to assess if the first-month health status is a prognostic factor of progression free-survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for prostate cancer patient.

Methods

This prospective study was conducted at the Military Hospital Bégin on prostate cancer patients. Patients were allowed to respond to a symptomatology questionnaire based on CTCAE v.5.0, personalized to their pathology and treatment. An algorithm evaluates the health status of the patient based on the reported adverse events, with a classification into 2 different states: Good Health Status (GHS) and Poor Health status (PHS).

Results

Sixty-one patients were enrolled between July 1st, 2020 and September 30th, 2021. The median age was 74.0 (range 58.0-94.0). 78% presented a metastatic stage, and the most represented cancer was mHSPC. Overall, 2,457 questionnaires were completed by the patients, 4.0% resulted in a health classification in to monitor or critical state. 87% of patients were classified in the GHS group. The compliance was 72% in the overall population during the first month, 71% in GHS group and 75% in PHS group. The median follow-up was 8 months. PFS at 6 months was 84% in GHS group vs. 57% in PHS group, p = 0.19. OS at 6 months was 98% in GHS group vs. 83% in PHS group, p = 0.31.

Conclusions

Our study showed that compliance was satisfactory. The feasibility of remote monitoring for prostate cancer patients means that they should benefit from its implementation. Our study is also the first to assess the correlation between treatment tolerance and survival. The initial results suggest that e-PRO assessment could help identify in the early stages the patients that require further health assessment and potential therapeutic changes. While further follow-up of more patients will be required, our study highlights the importance of e-PRO in cancer patient care.

Access Denied: Disparities in Thyroid Cancer Clinical Trials

For thyroid cancer clinical trials, the inclusion of participants from diverse patient populations is uniquely important given existing racial/ethnic disparities in thyroid cancer care. Since 2011, a paradigm shift has occurred in the treatment of advanced thyroid cancer with the approval of multiple systemic therapies by the US Food and Drug Administration based on their use in the clinical trials setting. Although these clinical trials recruited patients from up to 164 sites in 25 countries, the inclusion of racial/ethnic minority patients remained low. In this mini-review, we provide an overview of barriers to accessing cancer clinical trials, framed in the context of why patients with thyroid cancer may be uniquely vulnerable. Multilevel interventions and increased funding for thyroid cancer research are necessary to increase access to and recruitment of under-represented patient populations into thyroid cancer clinical trials.

Effectiveness of a digital telemonitoring platform for cancer care of older patients: The ConnectElderlyPatientToDoctor study

While telemedicine has been shown to improve the quality of care for cancer patients, it remains underused for older patients (OP), partly due to the assumption that OPs are unabled or unwilling to use digital tools. However, more than 50% of new cancers are diagnosed in people over 70. The ConnectElderlyPatientToDoctor study aimed to evaluate the OP compliance with the use of the digital telemonitoring platform Cureety in oncology. All cancer patients followed at the Military Hospital Bégin were eligible for the study. Patients were invited to respond to a symptomatology questionnaire personalized to their pathology and treatment. An algorithm evaluated the health status of the patient based on the reported adverse events. The population was divided into two groups, OP and younger patients (YP), based on a cut-off at 70 years. The primary endpoint was to assess the compliance of OPs with the use of the digital oncology platform Cureety, compared to YP. From July 2020 to September 2021, a total of 117 patients were included in our study. We found that 66% of the patients were compliant, with no difference between the two groups (71.2% of YP, 61.7% of OP, P = .29). In OPs, progression free survival (PFS) ratio at 6-months was 64.6% in the tolerant patients vs 23.4% in the nontolerant patients (HR = 0.1980, 95% CI = 0.04431-0.8845, P = .0339). The median PFS was 23.3 months in the tolerant group vs 3.3 months in the nontolerant group (P = .0339). The data of overall survival are immature. OPs had a clear benefit from using this platform, similar to what was observed for YP. Patients felt less isolated and felt that they benefited from personalized care with early ambulatory medical care of adverse events. We also found that the health indicators collected with the platform in the first month of treatment are predictive of the progression of the disease. This solution makes it possible to streamline and improve the care pathway of OP.