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

Design and Testing of a Web-Based Tool to Improve End-of-Life Planning Among Advanced Cancer Patients

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: Not yet recruiting
• Conditions: Hematopoietic and Lymphoid System Neoplasm; Locally Advanced Malignant Solid Neoplasm; Metastatic Malignant Solid Neoplasm
• Intervention / Treatment: Other: Questionnaire Administration; Other: Best Practice; Other: Internet-Based Intervention

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: Interventional
• Enrollment (Estimated): 100
• Phase: Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

• Study Contact: Name: Megan J. Shen; Phone Number: 206-667-4172; Email: mshen2@fredhutch.org

Study Locations

• United States
  • Washington
    • Seattle, Washington, United States, 98109
      • Fred Hutch/University of Washington Cancer Consortium
      • Contact: Megan J. Shen; Phone Number: 206-667-4172; Email: mshen2@fredhutch.org
      • Principal Investigator: Megan J. Shen

Participation Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

• Ages Eligible for Study: 18 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)
• Accepts Healthy Volunteers: No

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 chemotherapy
• Clinician estimated prognosis of =< 12 months
• 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

How is the study designed?

Design Details

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

Number of Arms

2

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm	Intervention / Treatment
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

Outcome Measure	Measure Description	Time Frame
Accrual	The number of participants enrolled during the recruitment period.	Up to 36 months
Retention rates	The number of participants who completed all study activities.	Up to 36 months
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	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	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	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	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	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	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 and loved ones, from baseline to 4 weeks post-randomization	Engagement in ACP with family members and loved ones 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 family subscale are computed by summing together the total number of ACP topic discussed with the patient's family members and loved ones. Scores can range from 0 to 4, with higher scores indicating increases in engagement in ACP conversations with family members and loved ones.	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 and loved ones, from baseline to 12 weeks post-randomization	Engagement in ACP with family members and loved ones 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 family subscale are computed by summing together the total number of ACP topic discussed with the patient's family members and loved ones. Scores can range from 0 to 4, with higher scores indicating increases in engagement in ACP conversations with family members and loved ones.	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 and loved ones, from baseline to 24 weeks post-randomization	Engagement in ACP with family members and loved ones 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 family subscale are computed by summing together the total number of ACP topic discussed with the patient's family members and loved ones. Scores can range from 0 to 4, with higher scores indicating increases in engagement in ACP conversations with family members and loved ones.	Baseline and Week 24 post-randomization
Change in advance care planning engagement: conversations discussing EoL care, living will, HCP, and DNR orders with doctors, from baseline to 4 weeks post-randomization	Engagement in ACP with 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 doctor subscale are computed by summing together the total number of ACP topic discussed with the patient's doctors. Scores can range from 0 to 4, with higher scores indicating increases in engagement in ACP conversations with doctors.	Baseline and Week 4 post-randomization
Change in advance care planning engagement: conversations discussing EoL care, living will, HCP, and DNR orders with doctors, from baseline to 12 weeks post-randomization	Engagement in ACP with 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 doctor subscale are computed by summing together the total number of ACP topic discussed with the patient's doctors. Scores can range from 0 to 4, with higher scores indicating increases in engagement in ACP conversations with doctors.	Baseline and Week 12 post-randomization
Change in advance care planning engagement: conversations discussing EoL care, living will, HCP, and DNR orders with doctors, from baseline to 24 weeks post-randomization	Engagement in ACP with 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 doctor subscale are computed by summing together the total number of ACP topic discussed with the patient's doctors. Scores can range from 0 to 4, with higher scores indicating increases in engagement in ACP conversations with doctors.	Baseline and Week 24 post-randomization
Change in advance care planning engagement: completion of advance directives, from baseline to 4 weeks 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	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	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

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Measure Description	Time Frame
Change in comprehensive end-of-life planning, from baseline to 4 weeks post-randomization	Will be measured using a 15-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 15, with higher scores indicating increases in completion of end-of-life planning tasks. Change scores can range from -15 to +15.	Baseline and Week 4 post-randomization
Change in comprehensive end-of-life planning, from baseline to 12 weeks post-randomization	Will be measured using a 15-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 15, with higher scores indicating increases in completion of end-of-life planning tasks. Change scores can range from -15 to +15.	Baseline and Week 12 post-randomization
Change in comprehensive end-of-life planning, from baseline to 24 weeks post-randomization	Will be measured using a 15-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 15, with higher scores indicating increases in completion of end-of-life planning tasks. Change scores can range from -15 to +15.	Baseline and Week 24 post-randomization
Change in psychological distress, as measured by the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), from baseline to 4 weeks post-randomization	Psychological distress will be measured using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), a valid and reliable 14-item, Likert-type self-report measure of mood disturbance commonly used with cancer patients. The HADS contains two seven-item subscales: 1) anxiety and 2) depressive symptoms. Each item on this scale is rated on a 4-point scale (0 to 3), and all items are summed to create a HADS total score. Total scores can range from 0 to 42, with higher numbers indicating higher levels of distress. Change in psychological distress will be assessed at baseline and post-randomization.	Baseline and Week 4 post-randomization
Change in psychological distress, as measured by the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), from baseline to 12 weeks post-randomization	Psychological distress will be measured using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), a valid and reliable 14-item, Likert-type self-report measure of mood disturbance commonly used with cancer patients. The HADS contains two seven-item subscales: 1) anxiety and 2) depressive symptoms. Each item on this scale is rated on a 4-point scale (0 to 3), and all items are summed to create a HADS total score. Total scores can range from 0 to 42, with higher numbers indicating higher levels of distress. Change in psychological distress will be assessed at baseline and post-randomization.	Baseline and Week 12 post-randomization
Change in psychological distress, as measured by the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), from baseline to 24 weeks post-randomization	Psychological distress will be measured using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), a valid and reliable 14-item, Likert-type self-report measure of mood disturbance commonly used with cancer patients. The HADS contains two seven-item subscales: 1) anxiety and 2) depressive symptoms. Each item on this scale is rated on a 4-point scale (0 to 3), and all items are summed to create a HADS total score. Total scores can range from 0 to 42, with higher numbers indicating higher levels of distress. Change in psychological distress will be assessed at baseline and post-randomization.	Baseline and Week 24 post-randomization
Change in emotional well-being, as measured by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) scale, from baseline to 4 weeks post-randomization	Emotional well-being will be measured using the emotional well-being subscale of the 27-item Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) scale. The FACT-G scale contains 27 items, of which 6 measure emotional well-being. Items on the FACT-G 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 (1 = not at all, 5 = very much), with higher scores indicating better well-being. Total scores for the emotional well-being subscale can range from 6 to 30. Change in emotional well-being will be assessed at baseline and 4 weeks post-randomization.	Baseline and Week 4 post-randomization
Change in emotional well-being, as measured by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) scale, from baseline to 12 weeks post-randomization	Emotional well-being will be measured using the emotional well-being subscale of the 27-item Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) scale. The FACT-G scale contains 27 items, of which 6 measure emotional well-being. Items on the FACT-G 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 (1 = not at all, 5 = very much), with higher scores indicating better well-being. Total scores for the emotional well-being subscale can range from 6 to 30. Change in emotional well-being will be assessed at baseline and 4 weeks post-randomization.	Baseline and Week 12 post-randomization
Change in emotional well-being, as measured by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) scale, from baseline to 24 weeks post-randomization	Emotional well-being will be measured using the emotional well-being subscale of the 27-item Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) scale. The FACT-G scale contains 27 items, of which 6 measure emotional well-being. Items on the FACT-G 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 (1 = not at all, 5 = very much), with higher scores indicating better well-being. Total scores for the emotional well-being subscale can range from 6 to 30. Change in emotional well-being will be assessed at baseline and 4 weeks post-randomization.	Baseline and Week 24 post-randomization
Change in social/family well-being, as measured by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General scale, from baseline to 4 weeks post-randomization	Social well-being will be measured using the social well-being subscale of the 27-item Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) scale. The FACT-G scale contains 27 items, of which 7 measure social/family well-being. Items on the FACT-G 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 (1 = not at all, 5 = very much), with higher scores indicating better well-being. Total scores for the social/family well-being subscale can range from 6 to 35. Change in social/family well-being will be assessed at baseline and 4 weeks post-randomization.	Baseline and Week 4 post-randomization
Change in social/family well-being, as measured by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General scale, from baseline to 12 weeks post-randomization	Social well-being will be measured using the social well-being subscale of the 27-item Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) scale. The FACT-G scale contains 27 items, of which 7 measure social/family well-being. Items on the FACT-G 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 (1 = not at all, 5 = very much), with higher scores indicating better well-being. Total scores for the social/family well-being subscale can range from 6 to 35. Change in social/family well-being will be assessed at baseline and 4 weeks post-randomization.	Baseline and Week 12 post-randomization
Change in social/family well-being, as measured by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General scale, from baseline to 24 weeks post-randomization	Social well-being will be measured using the social well-being subscale of the 27-item Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) scale. The FACT-G scale contains 27 items, of which 7 measure social/family well-being. Items on the FACT-G 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 (1 = not at all, 5 = very much), with higher scores indicating better well-being. Total scores for the social/family well-being subscale can range from 6 to 35. Change in social/family well-being will be assessed at baseline and 4 weeks post-randomization.	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	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.	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	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.	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	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.	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	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.	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	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.	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	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.	Baseline and Week 24 post-randomization

Collaborators and Investigators

• Sponsor: Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center
• Collaborators: National Institute of Nursing Research (NINR); Peacefully, Inc.
• Investigators: Principal Investigator: Megan J. Shen, Fred Hutch/University of Washington Cancer Consortium

Study record dates

Study Major Dates

• Study Start (Estimated): June 1, 2024
• Primary Completion (Estimated): May 31, 2025
• Study Completion (Estimated): July 31, 2025

Study Registration Dates

• First Submitted: September 29, 2022
• First Submitted That Met QC Criteria: September 29, 2022
• First Posted (Actual): October 3, 2022

Study Record Updates

• Last Update Posted (Actual): May 6, 2024
• Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria: May 3, 2024
• Last Verified: August 1, 2023

More Information

Terms related to this study

• Additional Relevant MeSH Terms: Pathologic Processes; Neoplasms; Death
• Other Study ID Numbers: RG1123556; R44NR020341 (U.S. NIH Grant/Contract); NCI-2024-03279 (Registry Identifier: CTRP (Clinical Trial Reporting Program))

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