GIST in Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation/Bone Marrow Transplantation

Giving Information Strategically and Transparently in Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation/Bone Marrow Transplantation

The purpose of this study is to assess the efficacy of using GIST language when speaking to patients about bone marrow and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation.

Study Overview

• Status: Withdrawn
• Conditions: Cancer; Psychological Feedback; Liquid Tumor
• Intervention / Treatment: Behavioral: GIST

Detailed Description

Hematopoietic stem cell/bone marrow transplantation (HSCT/BMT) is a high-risk, complicated procedure that is poorly understood by patients, posing a challenge for informed decision-making. One study found that 69.7% of patients needed more information about HSCT to make an informed decision. Furthermore, for most patients who seek HSCT/BMT as treatment, transplantation is the only viable option for long-term, disease-free survival. In light of limited options, it is often assumed that patients will choose to undergo transplantation by default, which might undermine efforts to ensure that patients are fully informed. Given the context in which the decision to undergo transplantation are made, there is a clear and present need to ensure that patients are properly informed about HSCT/BMT.

Unfortunately, this need does not seem to be adequately met. For example, studies have shown that patients tend not to remember rates of risks and complications. One study found that after completing HSCT, patients recalled a mortality risk rate lower than those provided by physicians at their initial consultation (20% vs. 30%, respectively). Findings such as this highlight the need to improve the informed consent process for patients confronting the decision to undergo HSCT/BMT.

The present study aims to improve the informed consent process by proposing a new approach to patient-physician communication, called Giving Information Simply and Transparently (GIST), that will train physicians to speak more understandably, with the goal of improving patients understanding of the procedures they intend to pursue. This approach is based upon Dr. Valerie Reyna's Fuzzy Trace Theory which posits that patients focus on the bottom-line gist of information when formulating their treatment preferences. Patient understanding will be tested via assessments administered after their consultation visit, 30 days after initiation of chemotherapy, and 100 days after initiation of chemotherapy.

• Study Type: Interventional
• Phase: Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

Study Locations

• United States
  • New York
    • New York, New York, United States, 10021
      • Weill Cornell Medical Center

Participation Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

• Ages Eligible for Study: 21 years to 99 years (Adult, Older Adult)
• Accepts Healthy Volunteers: No

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

• acute myeloid leukemia with high or intermediate risk in first complete remission acute myeloid leukemia OR myelodysplastic syndrome beyond first remission chronic myeloid leukemia with accelerated phase or blast crisis acute lymphocytic leukemia Myeloma lymphoma with a sensitive relapse lymphoma with a resistant relapse first time undergoing consultation at this institution's HSCT/BMT program Fluent in English

Exclusion Criteria:

• Cognitively impaired
• Not fluent in English

Study Plan

How is the study designed?

Design Details

• Primary Purpose: Supportive Care
• Allocation: Non-Randomized
• Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
• Masking: Single

Number of Arms

2

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm	Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: GIST; GIST is an alternative way of speaking to patients. In order for patients to get the "gist," Hematologists will ensure that patients walk away from their initial consultation understanding: why they are candidates for bone marrow transplant (BMT), what the process for BMT is, and the major risks involved.	Behavioral: GIST; The GIST intervention will train physicians in an alternative way of communicating with their patients.
No Intervention: Usual Care; These are physician and patient participants that will communicate in their normal, unchanged way.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Measure Description	Time Frame
Change from 1 week post baseline understanding at 3 months	Evidence that patients assigned to physicians trained in the GIST approach will have improved recall of information and be able to answer more questions correctly about HSCT/BMT than those assigned to care as usual. The researchers have developed a brief assessment of patient knowledge of: a) why the participants are a candidate for HSCT/BMT; b) what the procedure involves; c) risks and benefits posed by HSCT/BMT. The assessment will consist of multiple choice questions, with one fill-in-the-diagram question. The high score is 90, and the low score is 18. A score of 90 means that the participant fully understands the three points listed above. A score of 18 means that the participant has little to no understanding of the three points listed above.	1 week, 1 month and 3 months from baseline (T2, T3, and T4)

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Measure Description	Time Frame
Patient's emotional acceptance of their illness	We will use 5 relevant items from the validated PEACE scale which asks patients about how accepting they are of their illness. Responses include "not at all", "to a slight extent", "to some extent", "to a large extent". The questionnaire is composed of two combined subscales: a 2-item "Peaceful Acceptance" and a 3-item "Struggle with Illness" subscale. Both subscales are associated with patients' self-reported peacefulness "Struggle with Illness" scores are associated with acknowledgement of cognitive terminal illness. The low score for this scale is 5 (indicating little acceptance) and the high score is 20 (indicating high acceptance).	1 week, 1 month and 3 months from baseline (T2, T3, and T4)
Patient's emotional acceptance of their lives	The MEPSI is an 8 item questionnaire (shortened from the original) that asks patients to respond to phrases regarding how they view their lives. Responses include "not at all", "to a slight extent", "to some extent", "to a large extent". The questionnaire is composed of two combined subscales: a 4 item "Positive" subscale and a 4-item "Negative" subscale. The low score for this scale is 8 (indicating little acceptance) and the high score is 32 (indicating high acceptance).	1 week, 1 month and 3 months from baseline (T2, T3, and T4)

Other Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Measure Description	Time Frame
The Human Connection (THC) Scale	The effect on changing physician communication on patient-physician relationships will be measured by The Human Connection (THC) scale. THC is a validated 16 item questionnaire that measures the extent to which patients felt a sense of mutual understanding, caring, and trust with their physicians. Patients are asked to circle one of four phrases that answers the questions. The 16-item THC questionnaire was internally consistent (Cronbach's α =.90) and valid, based on its expected positive association with emotional acceptance of the terminal illness (r=.31, P<.0001). Scores range from 16 (the lowest score, indicating a weak therapeutic alliance) and 64 (the high score, indicating a strong therapeutic alliance).	One week, one month and three months from baseline (T2, T3, and T4)
Levels of anxiety and depression in patients	levels of anxiety and depression will be assessed via the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). It is a verified and brief 14-item tool that asks patients to choose a 1 out of 4 possible responses to each statement, with each response being assigned to a score of 0, 1, 2, or 3. 7 statements correspond to measuring depression, while the other 7 corresponding to measuring anxiety. Score of 0-7 indicates that the patient is "normal; 8-10 indicates the patient is borderline; and 11-21 indicates abnormal.	1 week, 1 month and 3 months from baseline (T2, T3, and T4)
Health Literacy in older adults compared to younger adults	The researchers have developed a brief assessment of patient knowledge of: a) why the participants are a candidate for HSCT/BMT; b) what the procedure involves; c) risks and benefits posed by HSCT/BMT. The assessment will consist of multiple choice questions, with one fill-in-the-diagram question. The high score is 90, and the low score is 18. A score of 90 means that the participant fully understands the three points listed above. A score of 18 means that the participant has little to no understanding of the three points listed above. We will compare the scores of older adults (>65) to younger adults (<65) to see which group overall has a higher score.	Baseline, 1 week, 1 month and 3 months from baseline (T1, T2, T3, and T4)
Assessment of patient's health literacy	Assessment of patient's health literacy via Rapid Estimate of Adult Literacy in Medicine - Short Form(REALM-SF) will be administered to control for variable health literacy. REALM-SF is a validated and brief literacy assessment tool of a patient's health literacy. REALM-SF consists of a list of 7 medically related words that is shown to the patient. Patients are asked to read the words out loud in order of the list, with the option of saying "pass" when they encounter a word that they do not recognize, allowing them to move onto the next word; alternatively, patients taking longer than 5 seconds to read a word will be told to move onto the next word by the interviewer. Each word a patient recognizes is a point that is used to score the assessment. 0 points is equivalent to a 3rd grade reading level, 1-3 points is equivalent to a 4th to 6th grade level, 4-6 points is equivalent to a 7th to 8th grade level, and 7 points is equivalent to at least a high school level.	1 week, 1 month and 3 months from baseline (T2, T3, and T4)

Collaborators and Investigators

• Sponsor: Weill Medical College of Cornell University
• Collaborators: National Cancer Institute (NCI); National Institutes of Health (NIH)
• Investigators: Principal Investigator: Holly G Prigerson, PhD, Weill Medical College of Cornell University

Study record dates

Study Major Dates

• Study Start (Estimated): June 1, 2021
• Primary Completion (Estimated): June 1, 2021
• Study Completion (Estimated): June 1, 2021

Study Registration Dates

• First Submitted: May 14, 2019
• First Submitted That Met QC Criteria: May 20, 2019
• First Posted (Actual): May 22, 2019

Study Record Updates

• Last Update Posted (Actual): February 15, 2024
• Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria: February 14, 2024
• Last Verified: June 1, 2021

More Information

Terms related to this study

• Other Study ID Numbers: 1807019470; 5R35CA197730 (U.S. NIH Grant/Contract)

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

• Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?: YES
• IPD Plan Description: Individual participant data that underlie the results reported in this article, after deidentification (text, tables, figures, and appendices). Results will be presented at scientific meetings in the form of posters and oral presentations
• IPD Sharing Time Frame: Data will be available after the final analysis is completed. No end date.
• IPD Sharing Access Criteria: Upon request, we will provide the dataset to qualified investigators under a Data Use Agreement that provides for: (1) a commitment to using the data only for research purposes and not to identify any individual participant; (2) a commitment to securing the data using appropriate computer technology; and (3) a commitment to destroying or returning the data after analyses are completed.

Drug and device information, study documents

• Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product: No
• Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product: No