Follow-up of Cancer Patients Receiving Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Therapy by Electronic Patient Reported Outcomes-tool

February 23, 2021 updated by: Jussi Koivunen, Oulu University Hospital

Electronic patient reported outcome (ePRO) tools have improved survival and quality of life (QoL) of cancer patients receiving chemotherapy, and in the follow-up of lung cancer patients. Current study investigates electronic patient reported outcome tool in the follow-up of cancer patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy.

Current study aims to evaluate 1) patient reported symptoms and their severity, 2) Number of triggered alerts by the tool and their correlation to treatment side-effects, cancer progression, other medical events or survival, 3) Correlation between different symptoms and the correlation of symptoms to treatment side-effects, cancer progression, other medical events or survival,4) QoL of patients and correlation of changes in QoL to treatment side-effects, cancer progression, other medical events or survival, 5) Patient compliance, 6) Correlation of baseline laboratory values to treatment side-effects, cancer progression, other medical events or survival.

Study Overview

Status

Unknown

Conditions

Detailed Description

Please see the Brief summary

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Anticipated)

40

Phase

  • 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 Contact

Study Contact Backup

Study Locations

      • Helsinki, Finland, 00180
        • Recruiting
        • Docarates Cancer Center
        • Contact:
          • Tuomo Alanko, M.D., Ph.D
        • Principal Investigator:
          • Tuomo Alanko, M.D., Ph.D
      • Turku, Finland, 20521
        • Recruiting
        • Pia Vihinen
        • Contact:
          • Pia Vihinen, MD, Ph.D
        • Principal Investigator:
          • Pia Vihinen, MD, Ph.D

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

Ages Eligible for Study

18 years and older (ADULT, OLDER_ADULT)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  1. Signed informed consent
  2. Advanced cancers
  3. Immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy initiated within +/- 2wks
  4. Age >18y
  5. ECOG 0-3
  6. Patient compliant with the study procedures

Exclusion Criteria:

  1. Immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy initiated > 2wks ago
  2. General vulnerability affecting the participation in the trial
  3. No internet access

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: NA
  • Interventional Model: SINGLE_GROUP
  • Masking: NONE

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
EXPERIMENTAL: Electronic follow-up
Follow-up of cancer patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy using electronic patient reported outcomes-tool
Electronic patient reported outcomes-tool

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Change in the spectrum of patient reported symptoms
Time Frame: At Baseline, and at 2-3, 4-5, 6-7, 8-9, and 11-12weeks
Percentages of patient reported symptoms using KaikuHealth 17 symptom e-questionnaire. Individual questions evaluate the presence of a specific symptom e.g. nausea. Questions are answered yes or no.
At Baseline, and at 2-3, 4-5, 6-7, 8-9, and 11-12weeks
Change in Patient reported symptom severity
Time Frame: At Baseline, and at 2-3, 4-5, 6-7, 8-9, and 11-12weeks
Percentages of patient reported symptoms and their severity according NCI-CTCAE by KaikuHealth algorithm
At Baseline, and at 2-3, 4-5, 6-7, 8-9, and 11-12weeks
Change in the number of triggered alerts by the tool
Time Frame: At Baseline, and at 2-3, 4-5, 6-7, 8-9, and 11-12weeks
Number of triggered alerts by the tool and their correlation to treatment side-effects, cancer progression, other medical events in percentages or survival.
At Baseline, and at 2-3, 4-5, 6-7, 8-9, and 11-12weeks
Changes in Quality of Life according to QLQ-C30 Summary scores
Time Frame: At baseline, and at 4, 8, and 12weeks

The correlation of the Summary score of QLQ-C30 to treatment side-effects, cancer progression, or other medical events or survival.

The Core Quality of life questionnaire (QLQ-C30) is a validated cancer health-related quality-of-life questionnaire that includes five function domains (physical, emotional, social, role, cognitive), eight symptoms (fatigue, pain, nausea/vomiting, constipation, diarrhea, insomnia, dyspnea, and appetite loss), as well as global health/quality of life and financial impact. Subjects respond on a four-point-scale from "not at all" to "very much" for most items. Raw scores are linearly converted to a 0-100 scale. For the functioning scales and global QoL higher scores indicate better functioning; for the symptom scales higher scores indicate higher symptom burden. The summary score of QLQ-C30 is calculated from the mean of 13 of 15 QLQ-C30 scales (the Global Quality of Life scale and the Financial Impact scale are not included).

At baseline, and at 4, 8, and 12weeks
Correlation between changes in different symptoms and their severity to treatment side-effects, cancer progression, other medical events, or survival.
Time Frame: At 2-3, 4-5, 6-7, 8-9, and 11-12weeks
Correlation between different patient reported symptoms and their severity to treatment side-effects, cancer progression or other medical events in percentages or survival.
At 2-3, 4-5, 6-7, 8-9, and 11-12weeks
Changes in Patient compliance Questionnaire
Time Frame: At 4, 8, and 12weeks
Patient compliance using KaikuHealth e-questionnaire addressing usability (easiness to use from scale: very easy to very difficult; need of assistance to use the program: yes/no; how understandable are questions in symptom questionnaire from scale: totally agree to totally disagree) and user experience (use of the ePRO tool will better your cancer care: yes-no, do not know; use of the ePRO tool has been useful: yes-no-do not know; would you recommend the ePRO tool for cancer care: yes-no-do not know). Analysis is done on percentages of each answer choice at specific time point(s).
At 4, 8, and 12weeks
Changes in patient compliance according to answering rate to symptom questionnaires
Time Frame: At 4, 8, and 12weeks
Patient compliance using response rates (within one week) to symptom questionnaires in percentages from sent requests
At 4, 8, and 12weeks
Change in patient compliance according to answering rates to QLQ-C30 questionnaire
Time Frame: At 4, 8, and 12weeks
Patient compliance using response rates to QLQ-C30 questionnaires (within one week) in percentages from sent requests. The QLQ-C30 questionnaire includes five function domains (physical, emotional, social, role, cognitive), eight symptoms (fatigue, pain, nausea/vomiting, constipation, diarrhea, insomnia, dyspnea, and appetite loss), as well as global health/quality of life and financial impact. Subjects respond on a four-point-scale from "not at all" to "very much" for most items. Raw scores are linearly converted to a 0-100 scale. For the functioning scales and global QoL higher scores indicate better functioning; for the symptom scales higher scores indicate higher symptom burden. The summary score of QLQ-C30 is calculated from the mean of 13 of 15 QLQ-C30 scales (the Global Quality of Life scale and the Financial Impact scale are not included).
At 4, 8, and 12weeks
Correlation of change in baseline Hb values compared to control Hb values to treatment side-effects, cancer progression, other medical events or survival.
Time Frame: At Baseline, and at 2-3, 4-5, 6-7, 8-9, and 11-12weeks
Correlation of change in baseline Hb values compared to control Hb values at specific timepoints to treatment side-effects, cancer progression, other medical events or survival.
At Baseline, and at 2-3, 4-5, 6-7, 8-9, and 11-12weeks
Correlation of change in baseline leucocyte values compared to control leucocyte values to treatment side-effects, cancer progression, other medical events or survival.
Time Frame: At Baseline, and at 2-3, 4-5, 6-7, 8-9, and 11-12weeks
Correlation of change in baseline leucocyte compared to control leucocyte values at specific timepoints to treatment side-effects, cancer progression, other medical events or survival.
At Baseline, and at 2-3, 4-5, 6-7, 8-9, and 11-12weeks
Correlation of change in baseline lymphocyte values compared to control lymphocyte values to treatment side-effects, cancer progression, other medical events or survival.
Time Frame: At Baseline, and at 2-3, 4-5, 6-7, 8-9, and 11-12weeks
Correlation of change in baseline lymphocyte values compared to control lymphocyte values at specific timepoints to treatment side-effects, cancer progression, other medical events or survival.
At Baseline, and at 2-3, 4-5, 6-7, 8-9, and 11-12weeks
Correlation of change in baseline neutrophil values compared to control neutrophil values to treatment side-effects, cancer progression, other medical events or survival.
Time Frame: At Baseline, and at 2-3, 4-5, 6-7, 8-9, and 11-12weeks
Correlation of change in baseline neutrophil values compared to control neutrophil values at specific timepoints to treatment side-effects, cancer progression, other medical events or survival.
At Baseline, and at 2-3, 4-5, 6-7, 8-9, and 11-12weeks
Correlation of change in baseline CRP values compared to control CRP values to treatment side-effects, cancer progression, other medical events or survival.
Time Frame: At Baseline, and at 2-3, 4-5, 6-7, 8-9, and 11-12weeks
Correlation of change in baseline CRP values compared to control CRP values at specific timepoints to treatment side-effects, cancer progression, other medical events or survival.
At Baseline, and at 2-3, 4-5, 6-7, 8-9, and 11-12weeks

Collaborators and Investigators

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

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Jussi P Koivunen, M.D., Ph.D, Oulu University Hospital

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

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)

June 1, 2017

Primary Completion (ANTICIPATED)

May 30, 2021

Study Completion (ANTICIPATED)

December 30, 2021

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

January 29, 2019

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

April 23, 2019

First Posted (ACTUAL)

April 26, 2019

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (ACTUAL)

February 24, 2021

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

February 23, 2021

Last Verified

February 1, 2021

More Information

Terms related to this study

Other Study ID Numbers

  • 9/2017

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.

Clinical Trials on Cancer

Clinical Trials on Electronic patient reported outcomes

3
Subscribe