Remote, proactive, telephone based management of toxicity in outpatients during adjuvant or neoadjuvant chemotherapy for early stage breast cancer: pragmatic, cluster randomised trial

Monika K Krzyzanowska, Jim A Julian, Chu-Shu Gu, Melanie Powis, Qing Li, Katherine Enright, Doris Howell, Craig C Earle, Sonal Gandhi, Sara Rask, Christine Brezden-Masley, Susan Dent, Leena Hajra, Orit Freeman, Silvana Spadafora, Caroline Hamm, Nadia Califaretti, Maureen Trudeau, Mark N Levine, Eitan Amir, Louise Bordeleau, James A Chiarotto, Christine Elser, Juhi Husain, Nicole Laferriere, Yasmin Rahim, Andrew G Robinson, Ted Vandenberg, Eva Grunfeld, Monika K Krzyzanowska, Jim A Julian, Chu-Shu Gu, Melanie Powis, Qing Li, Katherine Enright, Doris Howell, Craig C Earle, Sonal Gandhi, Sara Rask, Christine Brezden-Masley, Susan Dent, Leena Hajra, Orit Freeman, Silvana Spadafora, Caroline Hamm, Nadia Califaretti, Maureen Trudeau, Mark N Levine, Eitan Amir, Louise Bordeleau, James A Chiarotto, Christine Elser, Juhi Husain, Nicole Laferriere, Yasmin Rahim, Andrew G Robinson, Ted Vandenberg, Eva Grunfeld

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of remote proactive management of toxicities during chemotherapy for early stage breast cancer.

Design: Pragmatic, cluster randomised trial.

Setting: 20 cancer centres in Ontario, Canada, allocated by covariate constrained randomisation to remote management of toxicities or routine care.

Participants: All patients starting adjuvant or neoadjuvant chemotherapy for early stage breast cancer at each centre. 25 patients from each centre completed patient reported outcome questionnaires.

Interventions: Proactive, standardised, nurse led telephone management of common toxicities at two time points after each chemotherapy cycle.

Main outcome measures: The primary outcome, cluster level mean number of visits to the emergency department or admissions to hospital per patient during the whole course of chemotherapy treatment, was evaluated with routinely available administrative healthcare data. Secondary patient reported outcomes included toxicity, self-efficacy, and quality of life.

Results: Baseline characteristics of participants were similar in the intervention (n=944) and control arms (n=1214); 22% were older than 65 years. Penetration (that is, the percentage of patients who received the intervention at each centre) was 50-86%. Mean number of visits to the emergency department or admissions to hospital per patient was 0.91 (standard deviation 0.28) in the intervention arm and 0.94 (0.40) in the control arm (P=0.94); 47% (1014 of 2158 patients) had at least one visit to the emergency department or a hospital admission during chemotherapy. Among 580 participants who completed the patient reported outcome questionnaires, at least one grade 3 toxicity was reported by 48% (134 of 278 patients) in the intervention arm and by 58% (163 of 283) in the control arm. No differences in self-efficacy, anxiety, or depression were found. Compared with baseline, the functional assessment of cancer therapy trial outcome index decreased by 6.1 and 9.0 points in the intervention and control participants, respectively.

Conclusions: Proactive, telephone based management of toxicities during chemotherapy did not result in fewer visits to the emergency department or hospital admissions. With the rapid rise in remote care because of the covid-19 pandemic, identifying scalable strategies for remote management of patients during cancer treatment is particularly relevant.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02485678.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form at www.icmje.org/disclosure-of-interest/ and declare: support from the Ontario Institute for Cancer Research (OICR) for the submitted work; no financial relationships with any organisations that might have an interest in the submitted work in the previous three years; CCE and EG hold appointments at the OICR Health Services Research Programme; no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work.

© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1
CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) diagram
Fig 2
Fig 2
Distribution of visits to the emergency department or admissions to hospital per patient by size of centre and overall

References

    1. Enright K, Grunfeld E, Yun L, et al. . Population-based assessment of emergency room visits and hospitalizations among women receiving adjuvant chemotherapy for early breast cancer. J Oncol Pract 2015;11:126-32. 10.1200/JOP.2014.001073
    1. Pittman NM, Hopman WM, Mates M. Emergency room visits and hospital admission rates after curative chemotherapy for breast cancer. J Oncol Pract 2015;11:120-5. 10.1200/JOP.2014.000257
    1. Eskander A, Krzyzanowska MK, Fischer HD, et al. . Emergency department visits and unplanned hospitalizations in the treatment period for head and neck cancer patients treated with curative intent: A population-based analysis. Oral Oncol 2018;83:107-14. 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2018.06.011
    1. Prince RM, Powis M, Zer A, Atenafu EG, Krzyzanowska MK. Hospitalisations and emergency department visits in cancer patients receiving systemic therapy: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl) 2019;28:e12909. 10.1111/ecc.12909
    1. Mooney KH, Beck SL, Friedman RH, Farzanfar R. Telephone-linked care for cancer symptom monitoring: a pilot study. Cancer Pract 2002;10:147-54. 10.1046/j.1523-5394.2002.103006.x
    1. Mooney KH, Beck SL, Friedman RH, Farzanfar R, Wong B. Automated monitoring of symptoms during ambulatory chemotherapy and oncology providers’ use of the information: a randomized controlled clinical trial. Support Care Cancer 2014;22:2343-50. 10.1007/s00520-014-2216-1
    1. Basch E, Deal AM, Kris MG, et al. . Symptom monitoring with patient-reported outcomes during routine cancer treatment: a randomized controlled trial. J Clin Oncol 2016;34:557-65. 10.1200/JCO.2015.63.0830
    1. Kearney N, McCann L, Norrie J, et al. . Evaluation of a mobile phone-based, advanced symptom management system (ASyMS) in the management of chemotherapy-related toxicity. Support Care Cancer 2009;17:437-44. 10.1007/s00520-008-0515-0
    1. Maguire R, Fox PA, McCann L, et al. . The eSMART study protocol: a randomised controlled trial to evaluate electronic symptom management using the advanced symptom management system (ASyMS) remote technology for patients with cancer. BMJ Open 2017;7:e015016. 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-015016
    1. Basch E. Electronic Patient Reporting of Symptoms During Cancer Treatment (PRO-TECT). US National Library of Medicine: ; 2017. .
    1. Krzyzanowska MK, MacKay C, Han H, et al. . Ambulatory Toxicity Management (AToM) Pilot: results of a pilot study of a pro-active, telephone-based intervention to improve toxicity management during chemotherapy for breast cancer. Pilot Feasibility Stud 2019;5:39. 10.1186/s40814-019-0404-y
    1. Krzyzanowska MK, Julian JA, Powis M, et al. . Ambulatory Toxicity Management (AToM) in patients receiving adjuvant or neo-adjuvant chemotherapy for early stage breast cancer - a pragmatic cluster randomized trial protocol. BMC Cancer 2019;19:884. 10.1186/s12885-019-6099-x
    1. Kim SY, Miller FG. Informed consent for pragmatic trials--the integrated consent model. N Engl J Med 2014;370:769-72. 10.1056/NEJMhle1312508
    1. Clarke EA, Marrett LD, Kreiger N. Cancer registration in Ontario: a computer approach. IARC Sci Publ 1991;(95):246-57.
    1. Carroll C, Patterson M, Wood S, Booth A, Rick J, Balain S. A conceptual framework for implementation fidelity. Implement Sci 2007;2:40. 10.1186/1748-5908-2-40
    1. Basch E, Reeve BB, Mitchell SA, et al. . Development of the National Cancer Institute’s patient-reported outcomes version of the common terminology criteria for adverse events (PRO-CTCAE). J Natl Cancer Inst 2014;106:dju244. 10.1093/jnci/dju244
    1. Bennett AV, Dueck AC, Mitchell SA, et al. National Cancer Institute PRO-CTCAE Study Group . Mode equivalence and acceptability of tablet computer-, interactive voice response system-, and paper-based administration of the U.S. National Cancer Institute’s Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE). Health Qual Life Outcomes 2016;14:24. 10.1186/s12955-016-0426-6
    1. Basch E, Becker C, Rogak LJ, et al. . Composite grading algorithm for the National Cancer Institute’s Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE). Clin Trials 2021;18:104-14. 10.1177/1740774520975120
    1. Ritter PL, Lorig K. The English and Spanish Self-Efficacy to Manage Chronic Disease Scale measures were validated using multiple studies. J Clin Epidemiol 2014;67:1265-73. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.06.009
    1. EuroQol Group . EuroQol--a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Policy 1990;16:199-208. 10.1016/0168-8510(90)90421-9
    1. Smith AB, Rush R, Wright P, Stark D, Velikova G, Sharpe M. Validation of an item bank for detecting and assessing psychological distress in cancer patients. Psychooncology 2009;18:195-9. 10.1002/pon.1423
    1. Löwe B, Decker O, Müller S, et al. . Validation and standardization of the Generalized Anxiety Disorder Screener (GAD-7) in the general population. Med Care 2008;46:266-74. 10.1097/MLR.0b013e318160d093
    1. Brady MJ, Cella DF, Mo F, et al. . Reliability and validity of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast quality-of-life instrument. J Clin Oncol 1997;15:974-86. 10.1200/JCO.1997.15.3.974
    1. National Research Corporation . Ontario Hospital Association N.R.C. Development and Validation of the Picker Ambulatory Oncology Survey Instrument in Canada. National Research Corporation, 2003.
    1. Husain A, Barbera L, Howell D, Moineddin R, Bezjak A, Sussman J. Advanced lung cancer patients’ experience with continuity of care and supportive care needs. Support Care Cancer 2013;21:1351-8. 10.1007/s00520-012-1673-7
    1. Johns Hopkins. ACG System White Paper.
    1. Bhasin S, Gill TM, Reuben DB, et al. STRIDE Trial Investigators . A randomized trial of a multifactorial strategy to prevent serious fall injuries. N Engl J Med 2020;383:129-40. 10.1056/NEJMoa2002183
    1. Barbera L, Moody L. A decade in review: cancer care Ontario’s approach to symptom assessment and management. Med Care 2019;57(Suppl 1):S80-4. 10.1097/MLR.0000000000001084
    1. Ontario CC. Connecting Care 24/7. Cancer Care Ontario, 2019. .
    1. Ontario CC. Quality Person-Centred Systemic Treatment in Ontario. Cancer Care Ontario, 2014. .
    1. Hamilton Health Science. Rapid Evaluation and Symptom Support Cancer Unit (Resscu). Ontario: Hamilton Health Science; 2019.
    1. Jayadevappa R, Cook R, Chhatre S. Minimal important difference to infer changes in health-related quality of life-a systematic review. J Clin Epidemiol 2017;89:188-98. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.06.009
    1. Beck SL, Eaton LH, Echeverria C, Mooney KH. SymptomCare@Home: Developing an integrated symptom monitoring and management system for outpatients receiving chemotherapy. Comput Inform Nurs 2017;35:520-9. 10.1097/CIN.0000000000000364
    1. Absolom K, Warrington L, Hudson E, et al. . Phase III randomized controlled trial of eRAPID: eHealth intervention during chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 2021;39:734-47. 10.1200/JCO.20.02015
    1. Mc Cord KA, Ewald H, Agarwal A, et al. . Treatment effects in randomised trials using routinely collected data for outcome assessment versus traditional trials: meta-research study. BMJ 2021;372:n450. 10.1136/bmj.n450
    1. Enright KA, Krzyzanowska MK. Benefits and pitfalls of using administrative data to study hospitalization patterns in patients with cancer treated with chemotherapy. J Oncol Pract 2016;12:140-1. 10.1200/JOP.2015.008482
    1. Goel V, Williams JI, Anderson GM, Blackstien‐Hirsch P, Fooks C, Naylor CD, eds. A summary of studies on the quality of healthcare administrative databases in Canada. Patterns of Healthcare in Ontario: The ICES Practice Atlas. Canadian Medical Association, 1996.
    1. O’Brien MA, Cornacchi S, Makuwaza T, et al. Implementation of an ambulatory toxicity management (AToM) intervention for patients with breast cancer. Canadian Cancer Research Conference, November 3-5, 2019, Ottawa, ON.
    1. Berlin A, Lovas M, Truong T, et al. . Implementation and outcomes of virtual care across a tertiary cancer center during COVID-19. JAMA Oncol 2021;7:597-602. 10.1001/jamaoncol.2020.6982
    1. Grant RC, Moineddin R, Yao Z, Powis M, Kukreti V, Krzyzanowska MK. Development and validation of a score to predict acute care use after initiation of systemic therapy for cancer. JAMA Netw Open 2019;2:e1912823. 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.12823

Source: PubMed

3
S'abonner