Design and Testing of a Web-Based Tool for the Improvement of End-of-Life Planning in Patients With Advanced Cancer

September 30, 2026 updated by: Megan Shen, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center

Testing the Utility of a Novel Website to Help Cancer Patients Plan for Their Future - Phase 2

This clinical trial examines a web-based tool, in partnership with Peacefully, Inc, designed to improve end-of-life planning among patients with advanced cancers. This program helps users prepare comprehensively for end-of-life (e.g., medical wishes, legal estate planning, financial planning and transfer of accounts, legacy building, and emotional support). It is expected that this web-based end-of-life planning program may reduce distress and improve end-of-life preparation among advanced cancer patients.

Study Overview

Status

Status

Indicates the current recruitment status or the expanded access status.
Completed

Conditions

Conditions

The disease, disorder, syndrome, illness, or injury that is being studied. On ClinicalTrials.gov, conditions may also include other health-related issues, such as lifespan, quality of life, and health risks.

Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.

Detailed Description

OUTLINE:

Patients are randomized to 1 of 2 groups and their engagement in end-of-life planning is assessed at baseline and four weeks post-randomization.

Group I (intervention): Patients receive Peacefully's web-based tool to help with end-of-life planning on day 7.

Group II (control): Patients receive standard of care.

After completion of study, patients are followed up at 4, 12, and 24 weeks post-randomization.

Study Type

Study Type

Describes the nature of a clinical study. Study types include interventional studies (also called clinical trials), observational studies (including patient registries), and expanded access.
Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

Enrollment

The number of participants in a clinical study. The "anticipated" enrollment is the target number of participants that the researchers need for the study.
100

Phase

Phase

The stage of a clinical trial studying a drug or biological product, based on definitions developed by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The phase is based on the study's objective, the number of participants, and other characteristics. There are five phases: Early Phase 1 (formerly listed as Phase 0), Phase 1, Phase 2, Phase 3, and Phase 4. Not Applicable is used to describe trials without FDA-defined phases, including trials of devices or behavioral interventions.
  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

  • United States
    • Washington
      • Seattle, Washington, United States, 98109
        • Fred Hutch/University of Washington Cancer Consortium

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

The key requirements that people who want to participate in a clinical study must meet or the characteristics they must have. Eligibility criteria consist of both inclusion criteria (which are required for a person to participate in the study) and exclusion criteria (which prevent a person from participating). Types of eligibility criteria include whether a study accepts healthy volunteers, has age or age group requirements, or is limited by sex.

Ages Eligible for Study

18 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Diagnosis of poor prognosis advanced cancer defined as locally advanced or metastatic cancer and/or disease progression following at least first line systemic therapy
  • Access to a computer or mobile device
  • The ability to provide informed consent

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Not fluent in English
  • Severely cognitively impaired (as measured by Short Portable Mental Status Questionnaire scores of < 6)
  • Too ill or weak to complete the interviews (as judged by the interviewer)

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Supportive Care
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: Double

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm

Participant Group / Arm

A group or subgroup of participants in a clinical trial that receives a specific intervention/treatment, or no intervention, according to the trial's protocol.
Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.
Experimental: Group I (Peacefully's)

Patients receive Peacefully's web-based tool to help with end-of-life planning on day 7.
Other: Questionnaire Administration

Ancillary studies

Other: Internet-Based Intervention

Receive Peacefully's end-of-life planning program
Active Comparator: Group II (standard of care)

Patients receive standard care.
Other: Questionnaire Administration

Ancillary studies

Other: Best Practice

Receive standard of care

Other Names:
  • standard of care
  • standard therapy

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Primary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, the planned outcome measure that is the most important for evaluating the effect of an intervention/treatment. Most clinical studies have one primary outcome measure, but some have more than one.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Change in Comprehensive End-of-life Planning, From Baseline to 4 Weeks Post-randomization
Time Frame: Baseline and Week 4 post-randomization

Will be measured using a 14-item checklist of all completed tasks from the checklists/tasks on the website (eg, gather important documents, create a will). Scores are computed by summing together the total number of planning items completed. Scores can range from 0 to 14, with higher scores indicating increases in completion of end-of-life planning tasks. Change scores can range from -14 to +14.
Baseline and Week 4 post-randomization
Change in Comprehensive End-of-life Planning, From Baseline to 12 Weeks Post-randomization
Time Frame: Baseline and Week 12 post-randomization

Will be measured using a 14-item checklist of all completed tasks from the checklists/tasks on the website (eg, gather important documents, create a will). Scores are computed by summing together the total number of planning items completed. Scores can range from 0 to 14, with higher scores indicating increases in completion of end-of-life planning tasks. Change scores can range from -14 to +14.
Baseline and Week 12 post-randomization
Change in Comprehensive End-of-life Planning, From Baseline to 24 Weeks Post-randomization
Time Frame: Baseline and Week 24 post-randomization

Will be measured using a 14-item checklist of all completed tasks from the checklists/tasks on the website (eg, gather important documents, create a will). Scores are computed by summing together the total number of planning items completed. Scores can range from 0 to 14, with higher scores indicating increases in completion of end-of-life planning tasks. Change scores can range from -14 to +14.
Baseline and Week 24 post-randomization

Secondary Outcome Measures

Secondary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, a planned outcome measure that is not as important as the primary outcome measure for evaluating the effect of an intervention but is still of interest. Most clinical studies have more than one secondary outcome measure.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Change in Patients' Engagement in Advance Care Planning, as Measured by the Decision Maker Subscale of the Advance Care Planning Engagement Survey: Action Measures, From Baseline to 4 Weeks Post-randomization
Time Frame: Baseline and Week 4 post-randomization

Change in patient engagement in advance care planning will be assessed in patients using the reliable and valid Decision Maker (four items) subscale of the Advance Care Planning Engagement Survey: Action Measures. Response options include: yes=1, no=0. Questions include those asking about whether patients have engaged in a decision around advance care planning (e.g., "Have you already decided who you want your medical decision maker to be?") Individual scores can range from 0 to 4, with higher scores indicating that more decisions have been made around advance care planning. Change scores can range from -4 to +4.
Baseline and Week 4 post-randomization
Change in Patients' Engagement in Advance Care Planning, as Measured by the Decision Maker Subscale of the Advance Care Planning Engagement Survey: Action Measures, From Baseline to 12 Weeks Post-randomization
Time Frame: Baseline and Week 12 post-randomization

Change in patient engagement in advance care planning will be assessed in patients using the reliable and valid Decision Maker (four items) subscale of the Advance Care Planning Engagement Survey: Action Measures. Response options include: yes=1, no=0. Questions include those asking about whether patients have engaged in a decision around advance care planning (e.g., "Have you already decided who you want your medical decision maker to be?") Individual scores can range from 0 to 4, with higher scores indicating that more decisions have been made around advance care planning. Change scores can range from -4 to +4.
Baseline and Week 12 post-randomization
Change in Patients' Engagement in Advance Care Planning, as Measured by the Decision Maker Subscale of the Advance Care Planning Engagement Survey: Action Measures, From Baseline to 24 Weeks Post-randomization
Time Frame: Baseline and Week 24 post-randomization

Change in patient engagement in advance care planning will be assessed in patients using the reliable and valid Decision Maker (four items) subscale of the Advance Care Planning Engagement Survey: Action Measures. Response options include: yes=1, no=0. Questions include those asking about whether patients have engaged in a decision around advance care planning (e.g., "Have you already decided who you want your medical decision maker to be?") Individual scores can range from 0 to 4, with higher scores indicating that more decisions have been made around advance care planning. Change scores can range from -4 to +4.
Baseline and Week 24 post-randomization
Change in Patients' Engagement in Advance Care Planning, as Measured by the Quality of Life Subscale of the Advance Care Planning Engagement Survey: Action Measures, From Baseline to 4 Weeks Post-randomization
Time Frame: Baseline and Week 4 post-randomization

Change in patient engagement in advance care planning will be assessed in patients using the reliable and valid Quality of Life (four items) subscale of the Advance Care Planning Engagement Survey: Action Measures. Response options include: yes=1, no=0. Questions include those asking about whether patients have engaged in a decision around quality of life in advance care planning (e.g., "Have you already decided whether or not certain health situations would make your life not worth living?") Individual scores can range from 0 to 4, with higher scores indicating that more decisions have been made around advance care planning as it pertains to quality of life. Change scores can range from -4 to +4.
Baseline and Week 4 post-randomization
Change in Patients' Engagement in Advance Care Planning, as Measured by the Quality of Life Subscale of the Advance Care Planning Engagement Survey: Action Measures, From Baseline to 12 Weeks Post-randomization
Time Frame: Baseline and Week 12 post-randomization

Change in patient engagement in advance care planning will be assessed in patients using the reliable and valid Quality of Life (four items) subscale of the Advance Care Planning Engagement Survey: Action Measures. Response options include: yes=1, no=0. Questions include those asking about whether patients have engaged in a decision around quality of life in advance care planning (e.g., "Have you already decided whether or not certain health situations would make your life not worth living?") Individual scores can range from 0 to 4, with higher scores indicating that more decisions have been made around advance care planning as it pertains to quality of life. Change scores can range from -4 to +4.
Baseline and Week 12 post-randomization
Change in Patients' Engagement in Advance Care Planning, as Measured by the Quality of Life Subscale of the Advance Care Planning Engagement Survey: Action Measures, From Baseline to 24 Weeks Post-randomization
Time Frame: Baseline and Week 24 post-randomization

Change in patient engagement in advance care planning will be assessed in patients using the reliable and valid Quality of Life (four items) subscale of the Advance Care Planning Engagement Survey: Action Measures. Response options include: yes=1, no=0. Questions include those asking about whether patients have engaged in a decision around quality of life in advance care planning (e.g., "Have you already decided whether or not certain health situations would make your life not worth living?") Individual scores can range from 0 to 4, with higher scores indicating that more decisions have been made around advance care planning as it pertains to quality of life. Change scores can range from -4 to +4.
Baseline and Week 24 post-randomization
Change in Advance Care Planning Engagement: Conversations Discussing EoL Care, Living Will, HCP, and DNR Orders With Family Members/Loved Ones and Doctors, From Baseline to 4 Weeks Post-randomization
Time Frame: Baseline and Week 4 post-randomization

Engagement in ACP with family members/loved ones and doctors will be assessed in patients. This outcome will consist of documentation of ACP conversations using the investigators' previously utilized 8-item measure of discussing EoL care, living will, HCP, and DNR orders with family (4 items) and doctors (4 items). Scores for the subscale are computed by summing together the total number of ACP topic discussed with the patient's family members/loved ones and doctors. Scores can range from 0 to 8, with higher scores indicating increases in engagement in ACP conversations with family members/loved ones and doctors. Change scores can range from -8 to +8.
Baseline and Week 4 post-randomization
Change in Advance Care Planning Engagement: Conversations Discussing EoL Care, Living Will, HCP, and DNR Orders With Family Members/Loved Ones and Doctors, From Baseline to 12 Weeks Post-randomization
Time Frame: Baseline and Week 12 post-randomization

Engagement in ACP with family members/loved ones and doctors will be assessed in patients. This outcome will consist of documentation of ACP conversations using the investigators' previously utilized 8-item measure of discussing EoL care, living will, HCP, and DNR orders with family (4 items) and doctors (4 items). Scores for the subscale are computed by summing together the total number of ACP topic discussed with the patient's family members/loved ones and doctors. Scores can range from 0 to 8, with higher scores indicating increases in engagement in ACP conversations with family members/loved ones and doctors. Change scores can range from -8 to +8.
Baseline and Week 12 post-randomization
Change in Advance Care Planning Engagement: Conversations Discussing EoL Care, Living Will, HCP, and DNR Orders With Family Members/Loved Ones and Doctors, From Baseline to 24 Weeks Post-randomization
Time Frame: Baseline and Week 24 post-randomization

Engagement in ACP with family members/loved ones and doctors will be assessed in patients. This outcome will consist of documentation of ACP conversations using the investigators' previously utilized 8-item measure of discussing EoL care, living will, HCP, and DNR orders with family (4 items) and doctors (4 items). Scores for the subscale are computed by summing together the total number of ACP topic discussed with the patient's family members/loved ones and doctors. Scores can range from 0 to 8, with higher scores indicating increases in engagement in ACP conversations with family members/loved ones and doctors. Change scores can range from -8 to +8.
Baseline and Week 24 post-randomization
Change in Advance Care Planning Engagement: Completion of Advance Directives, From Baseline to 4 Weeks Post-randomization
Time Frame: Baseline and Week 4 post-randomization

Completion of advance directives will be assessed by asking patients whether they completed a do-not-resuscitate order, a living will, and/or identified a health care proxy; data will be verified through the patient's electronic health record. Change in these numbers will be assessed at baseline and post-intervention. Scores are computed by summing together the total number of advance directives completed. Scores can range from 0 to 3, with higher scores indicating increases in completion of advance directives. Change scores can range from -3 to +3.
Baseline and Week 4 post-randomization
Change in Advance Care Planning Engagement: Completion of Advance Directives, From Baseline to 12 Weeks Post-randomization
Time Frame: Baseline and Week 12 post-randomization

Completion of advance directives will be assessed by asking patients whether they completed a do-not-resuscitate order, a living will, and/or identified a health care proxy; data will be verified through the patient's electronic health record. Change in these numbers will be assessed at baseline and post-intervention. Scores are computed by summing together the total number of advance directives completed. Scores can range from 0 to 3, with higher scores indicating increases in completion of advance directives. Change scores can range from -3 to +3.
Baseline and Week 12 post-randomization
Change in Advance Care Planning Engagement: Completion of Advance Directives, From Baseline to 24 Weeks Post-randomization
Time Frame: Baseline and Week 24 post-randomization

Completion of advance directives will be assessed by asking patients whether they completed a do-not-resuscitate order, a living will, and/or identified a health care proxy; data will be verified through the patient's electronic health record. Change in these numbers will be assessed at baseline and post-intervention. Scores are computed by summing together the total number of advance directives completed. Scores can range from 0 to 3, with higher scores indicating increases in completion of advance directives. Change scores can range from -3 to +3.
Baseline and Week 24 post-randomization
Change in Anxiety, as Measured by the Anxiety Subscale of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS-A), From Baseline to 4 Weeks Post-randomization
Time Frame: Baseline and Week 4 post-randomization

Anxiety will be measured using the anxiety subscale of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS-A), a valid and reliable 7-item, Likert-type self-report measure of mood disturbance commonly used with cancer patients. Each item on this scale is rated on a 4-point scale (0 to 3), and all items are summed to create a HADS-A total score. Total scores can range from 0 to 21, with higher numbers indicating higher levels of anxiety. Change in anxiety will be assessed at baseline and 4 weeks post-randomization. Change scores can range from -21 to +21.
Baseline and Week 4 post-randomization
Change in Anxiety, as Measured by the Anxiety Subscale of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS-A), From Baseline to 12 Weeks Post-randomization
Time Frame: Baseline and Week 12 post-randomization

Anxiety will be measured using the anxiety subscale of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS-A), a valid and reliable 7-item, Likert-type self-report measure of mood disturbance commonly used with cancer patients. Each item on this scale is rated on a 4-point scale (0 to 3), and all items are summed to create a HADS-A total score. Total scores can range from 0 to 21, with higher numbers indicating higher levels of anxiety. Change in anxiety will be assessed at baseline and post-randomization. Change scores can range from -21 to +21.
Baseline and Week 12 post-randomization
Change in Anxiety, as Measured by the Anxiety Subscale of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS-A), From Baseline to 24 Weeks Post-randomization
Time Frame: Baseline and Week 24 post-randomization

Anxiety will be measured using the anxiety subscale of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS-A), a valid and reliable 7-item, Likert-type self-report measure of mood disturbance commonly used with cancer patients. Each item on this scale is rated on a 4-point scale (0 to 3), and all items are summed to create a HADS-A total score. Total scores can range from 0 to 21, with higher numbers indicating higher levels of anxiety. Change in anxiety will be assessed at baseline and post-randomization. Change scores can range from -21 to +21.
Baseline and Week 24 post-randomization
Change in Psychological Distress, as Measured by the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (CESD), From Baseline to 4 Weeks Post-randomization
Time Frame: Baseline and Week 4 post-randomization

Psychological Distress will be measured using the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (CESD), a valid and reliable 20-item, Likert-type self-report measure of frequency and severity of depressive symptoms over the previous week. Each item on this scale is rated on a 4-point scale (0 to 3), and all items are summed to create a total score. Total scores can range from 0 to 60, with higher numbers indicating higher levels of psychological distress. Change in psychological distress will be assessed at baseline and 4 weeks post-randomization. Change scores can range from -60 to +60.
Baseline and Week 4 post-randomization
Change in Psychological Distress, as Measured by the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (CESD), From Baseline to 12 Weeks Post-randomization
Time Frame: Baseline and week 12 post-randomization

Psychological Distress will be measured using the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (CESD), a valid and reliable 20-item, Likert-type self-report measure of frequency and severity of depressive symptoms over the previous week. Each item on this scale is rated on a 4-point scale (0 to 3), and all items are summed to create a total score. Total scores can range from 0 to 60, with higher numbers indicating higher levels of psychological distress. Change in psychological distress will be assessed at baseline and 12 weeks post-randomization. Change scores can range from -60 to +60.
Baseline and week 12 post-randomization
Change in Psychological Distress, as Measured by the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (CESD), From Baseline to 24 Weeks Post-randomization
Time Frame: Baseline and Week 24 post-randomization

Psychological Distress will be measured using the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (CESD), a valid and reliable 20-item, Likert-type self-report measure of frequency and severity of depressive symptoms over the previous week. Each item on this scale is rated on a 4-point scale (0 to 3), and all items are summed to create a total score. Total scores can range from 0 to 60, with higher numbers indicating higher levels of psychological distress. Change in psychological distress will be assessed at baseline and 24 weeks post-randomization. Change scores can range from -60 to +60.
Baseline and Week 24 post-randomization
Change in Emotional Social Well-being, as Measured by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) Scale, From Baseline to 4 Weeks Post-randomization
Time Frame: Baseline and Week 4 post-randomization

Emotional and social well-being will be measured using the 27-item Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) scale. The FACT-G scale contains 27 items that ask patients to rate the degree to which they agree to statements about their well-being. Each item on this scale is rated on a 5-point Likert scale (0 = not at all, 4 = very much), with higher scores indicating better well-being. Total scores can range from 0-108. Change in emotional and social well-being will be assessed at baseline and 4 weeks post-randomization. Change scores can range from -108 to +108.
Baseline and Week 4 post-randomization
Change in Emotional Social Well-being, as Measured by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) Scale, From Baseline to 12 Weeks Post-randomization
Time Frame: Baseline and Week 12 post-randomization

Emotional and social well-being will be measured using the 27-item Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) scale. The FACT-G scale contains 27 items that ask patients to rate the degree to which they agree to statements about their well-being. Each item on this scale is rated on a 5-point Likert scale (0 = not at all, 4 = very much), with higher scores indicating better well-being. Total scores can range from 0-108. Change in emotional and social well-being will be assessed at baseline and 12 weeks post-randomization. Change scores can range from -108 to +108.
Baseline and Week 12 post-randomization
Change in Emotional Social Well-being, as Measured by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) Scale, From Baseline to 24 Weeks Post-randomization
Time Frame: Baseline and Week 24 post-randomization

Emotional and social well-being will be measured using the 27-item Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) scale. The FACT-G scale contains 27 items that ask patients to rate the degree to which they agree to statements about their well-being. Each item on this scale is rated on a 5-point Likert scale (0 = not at all, 4 = very much), with higher scores indicating better well-being. Total scores can range from 0-108. Change in emotional and social well-being will be assessed at baseline and 24 weeks post-randomization. Change scores can range from -108 to +108.
Baseline and Week 24 post-randomization
Change in Spiritual Well-being, as Measured by the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Spiritual Well-Being Scale (FACIT-Sp), From Baseline to 4 Weeks Post-randomization
Time Frame: Baseline and Week 4 post-randomization

Spiritual well-being will be measured using the validated, 12-item Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Spiritual Well-Being Scale (FACIT-Sp). The FACIT-Sp asks patients to indicate the degree to which they agree with statements about their spiritual well-being. Each item on this scale is rated on a 5-point Likert scale (0 = not at all, 4 = very much), with higher scores indicating greater spiritual well-being. Total scores range from 0 to 48. Change in spiritual well-being will be assessed at baseline and 4 weeks post-randomization. Change scores can range from -48 to +48.
Baseline and Week 4 post-randomization
Change in Spiritual Well-being, as Measured by the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Spiritual Well-Being Scale, From Baseline to 12 Weeks Post-randomization
Time Frame: Baseline and Week 12 post-randomization

Spiritual well-being will be measured using the validated, 12-item Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Spiritual Well-Being Scale (FACIT-Sp). The FACIT-Sp asks patients to indicate the degree to which they agree with statements about their spiritual well-being. Each item on this scale is rated on a 5-point Likert scale (0 = not at all, 4 = very much), with higher scores indicating greater spiritual well-being. Total scores range from 0 to 48. Change in spiritual well-being will be assessed at baseline and 12 weeks post-randomization. Change scores can range from -48 to +48.
Baseline and Week 12 post-randomization
Change in Spiritual Well-being, as Measured by the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Spiritual Well-Being Scale, From Baseline to 24 Weeks Post-randomization
Time Frame: Baseline and Week 24 post-randomization

Spiritual well-being will be measured using the validated, 12-item Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Spiritual Well-Being Scale (FACIT-Sp). The FACIT-Sp asks patients to indicate the degree to which they agree with statements about their spiritual well-being. Each item on this scale is rated on a 5-point Likert scale (0 = not at all, 4 = very much), with higher scores indicating greater spiritual well-being. Total scores range from 0 to 48. Change in spiritual well-being will be assessed at baseline and 24 weeks post-randomization. Change scores can range from -48 to +48.
Baseline and Week 24 post-randomization
Change in Financial Well-being, as Measured by the InCharge Financial Distress/Financial Well-Being Scale, From Baseline to 4 Weeks Post-randomization
Time Frame: Baseline and Week 4 post-randomization

Financial well-being will be measured using the validated, 8-item InCharge Financial Distress/Financial Well-Being scale. This scale asks patients to rate their financial wellness (stress, satisfaction, etc.) on a 10-point Likert scale that varies for each response but for which 1 indicates the lowest financial well-being and 10 indicates the highest (e.g., 1=overwhelming stress to 10 = not stress at all; 1 = worry all the time, 10 - never worry). Total scores range from 8 to 80, with higher scores indicating greater financial well-being. Change in financial well-being will be assessed at baseline and 4 weeks post-randomization. Change scores can range from -72 to +72.
Baseline and Week 4 post-randomization
Change in Financial Well-being, as Measured by the InCharge Financial Distress/Financial Well-Being Scale, From Baseline to 12 Weeks Post-randomization
Time Frame: Baseline and Week 12 post-randomization

Financial well-being will be measured using the validated, 8-item InCharge Financial Distress/Financial Well-Being scale. This scale asks patients to rate their financial wellness (stress, satisfaction, etc.) on a 10-point Likert scale that varies for each response but for which 1 indicates the lowest financial well-being and 10 indicates the highest (e.g., 1=overwhelming stress to 10 = not stress at all; 1 = worry all the time, 10 - never worry). Total scores range from 8 to 80, with higher scores indicating greater financial well-being. Change in financial well-being will be assessed at baseline and 12 weeks post-randomization. Change scores can range from -72 to +72.
Baseline and Week 12 post-randomization
Change in Financial Well-being, as Measured by the InCharge Financial Distress/Financial Well-Being Scale, From Baseline to 24 Weeks Post-randomization
Time Frame: Baseline and Week 24 post-randomization

Financial well-being will be measured using the validated, 8-item InCharge Financial Distress/Financial Well-Being scale. This scale asks patients to rate their financial wellness (stress, satisfaction, etc.) on a 10-point Likert scale that varies for each response but for which 1 indicates the lowest financial well-being and 10 indicates the highest (e.g., 1=overwhelming stress to 10 = not stress at all; 1 = worry all the time, 10 - never worry). Total scores range from 8 to 80, with higher scores indicating greater financial well-being. Change in financial well-being will be assessed at baseline and 24 weeks post-randomization. Change scores can range from -72 to +72.
Baseline and Week 24 post-randomization

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

Sponsor

The organization or person who initiates the study and who has authority and control over the study.
Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center

Collaborators

Collaborators

An organization other than the sponsor that provides support for a clinical study. This support may include activities related to funding, design, implementation, data analysis, or reporting.
National Institute of Nursing Research (NINR)
Peacefully, Inc.

Investigators

Investigators

A researcher involved in a clinical study. Related terms include site principal investigator, site sub-investigator, study chair, study director, and study principal investigator.
  • Principal Investigator: Megan J. Shen, Fred Hutch/University of Washington Cancer Consortium

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

Study Start

The actual date on which the first participant was enrolled in a clinical study. The "anticipated" study start date is the date that the researchers think will be the study start date.
May 21, 2024

Primary Completion (Actual)

Primary Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention to collect final data for the primary outcome measure. Whether the clinical study ended according to the protocol or was terminated does not affect this date. For clinical studies with more than one primary outcome measure with different completion dates, this term refers to the date on which data collection is completed for all the primary outcome measures. The "anticipated" primary completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the primary completion date for the study.
November 26, 2025

Study Completion (Actual)

Study Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention/treatment to collect final data for the primary outcome measures, secondary outcome measures, and adverse events (that is, the last participant's last visit). The "anticipated" study completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the study completion date.
November 26, 2025

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

First Submitted

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submitted a study record to ClinicalTrials.gov. There is typically a delay of a few days between the first submitted date and the record's availability on ClinicalTrials.gov (the first posted date).
September 29, 2022

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submits a study record that is consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. The sponsor or investigator may need to revise and submit a study record one or more times before NLM's QC review criteria are met. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
September 29, 2022

First Posted (Actual)

First Posted

The date on which the study record was first available on ClinicalTrials.gov after National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review has concluded. There is typically a delay of a few days between the date the study sponsor or investigator submitted the study record and the first posted date.
October 3, 2022

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

Last Update Posted

The most recent date on which changes to a study record were made available on ClinicalTrials.gov. There may be a delay between when the changes were submitted to ClinicalTrials.gov by the study's sponsor or investigator (the last update submitted date) and the last update posted date.
October 2, 2026

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator submitted changes to a study record that are consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
September 30, 2026

Last Verified

Last Verified

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator confirmed the information about a clinical study on ClinicalTrials.gov as accurate and current. If a study with a recruitment status of recruiting; not yet recruiting; or active, not recruiting has not been confirmed within the past 2 years, the study's recruitment status is shown as unknown.
September 1, 2026

More Information

Terms related to this study

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

Other Study ID Numbers

Other Study ID Numbers

Identifiers or ID numbers other than the NCT number that are assigned to a clinical study by the study's sponsor, funders, or others. These numbers may include unique identifiers from other trial registries and National Institutes of Health grant numbers.
  • RG1123556
  • R44NR020341 (U.S. NIH Grant/Contract)
  • NCI-2024-03279 (Registry Identifier: CTRP (Clinical Trial Reporting Program))
  • 20230 (Other Identifier: Fred Hutch/University of Washington Cancer Consortium)

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

NO

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Cookie Settings

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. For more details carefully read our Privacy and Cookies Policy. ...>>>You can change your preferences or withdraw your consent at any time by deleting the cookies from your website or computer as described in the policy. Please accept it and choose your preferences by ticking the corresponding boxes in the "Manage Settings" section below. Please carefully read our Terms of Service before you proceed with using any part of this website.
«Manage Settings