Dataset Information

Evaluation of Technology-Enabled Monitoring of Patient-Reported Outcomes to Detect and Treat Toxic Effects Linked to Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Immune checkpoint inhibitors can produce distinct toxic effects that require prompt recognition and timely management.

Objective

To develop a technology-enabled, dynamically adaptive protocol that can provide the accurate information needed to inform specific remedies for immune toxic effects in patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors.

Design, setting, and participants

An open-label cohort study was conducted at a single tertiary referral center from September 6, 2019, to September 3, 2020. The median follow-up duration was 63 (interquartile range, 35.5-122) days. Fifty patients with genitourinary cancers treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors were enrolled.

Interventions

A fit-for-purpose electronic platform was developed to enable active patient and care team participation. A smartphone application downloaded onto patients' personal mobile devices prompted them to report their symptoms at least 3 times per week. The set of symptoms and associated queries were paired with alert thresholds for symptoms requiring clinical action.

Main outcomes and measures

The primary end point of this interim analysis was feasibility, as measured by patient and care team adherence, and lack of increase in care team staffing. Operating characteristics were estimated for each symptom alert and used to dynamically adapt the alert thresholds to ensure sensitivity while reducing unnecessary alerts.

Results

Of the 50 patients enrolled, 47 had at least 1 follow-up visit and were included in the analysis. Median age was 65 years (range, 37-86), 39 patients (83%) were men, and 39 patients (83%) had metastatic cancer, with the most common being urothelial cell carcinoma and renal cell carcinoma (22 [47%] patients each). After initial onboarding, no further care team training or additional care team staffing was required. Patients had a median study adherence rate of 74% (interquartile range, 60%-86%) and 73% of automated alerts were reviewed within 3 days by the clinic team. Symptoms with the highest positive predictive value for adverse events requiring acute intervention included dizziness (21%), nausea/vomiting (26%), and shortness of breath (14%). The symptoms most likely to result in unnecessary alerts were arthralgia and myalgia, fatigue, and cough.

Conclusions and relevance

The findings of this cohort study suggest an acceptable and fiscally sound method can be developed to create a dynamic learning system to detect and manage immune-related toxic effects.

SUBMITTER: Msaouel P

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8406081 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionTechnology to enhance hypertension management is increasingly used in primary care; however, it has not been evaluated in an Asian primary care setting. We aimed to understand the clinical impact and cost-effectiveness of a technology-enabled home blood pressure monitor when deployed in primary care, and patients' perspectives about the technology.MethodsA quasi-experimental cohort study was conducted in a polyclinic in Singapore. In total, 120 patients with hypertension were assigned to the telemonitoring intervention group. Patients received a home blood pressure device connected to the clinical care team's dashboard through a mobile gateway. Tele-consultations and nurse-led tele-support were carried out using established clinical protocols. In total, 120 patients assigned to the control group continued to receive usual care in the polyclinic. Clinical outcomes, cost-effectiveness, and patient satisfaction were measured 6 months after recruitment.ResultsIn total, 217 patients completed 6 months of follow-up. Telemonitoring intervention patients had significantly increased odds of having controlled blood pressure by a factor of 2.69 (p = 0.01), with the greatest improvement in those whose blood pressure was uncontrolled at baseline (p < 0.05). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for all patients was S$23,935.14/quality-adjusted life year (<1 gross domestic product per capita), which was very cost-effective based on World Health Organization cost-effectiveness thresholds. There was greater satisfaction in telemonitoring intervention group relating to the convenience of recording and sharing blood pressure measurements with the health care team, consultation advice received, understanding by the health care team of their condition, and were more motivated to monitor their blood pressure.DiscussionTelemonitoring with tele-consultation improved blood pressure control and was more cost-effective than usual care. Patients receiving telemonitoring intervention were also more motivated and satisfied with their care.

Project description:ImportanceImmune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are now a mainstay of cancer treatment. Although rare, fulminant and fatal toxic effects may complicate these otherwise transformative therapies; characterizing these events requires integration of global data.ObjectiveTo determine the spectrum, timing, and clinical features of fatal ICI-associated toxic effects.Design, setting, and participantsWe retrospectively queried a World Health Organization (WHO) pharmacovigilance database (Vigilyze) comprising more than 16 000 000 adverse drug reactions, and records from 7 academic centers. We performed a meta-analysis of published trials of anti-programmed death-1/ligand-1 (PD-1/PD-L1) and anti-cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen-4 (CTLA-4) to evaluate their incidence using data from large academic medical centers, global WHO pharmacovigilance data, and all published ICI clinical trials of patients with cancer treated with ICIs internationally.ExposuresAnti-CTLA-4 (ipilimumab or tremelimumab), anti-PD-1 (nivolumab, pembrolizumab), or anti-PD-L1 (atezolizumab, avelumab, durvalumab).Main outcomes and measuresTiming, spectrum, outcomes, and incidence of ICI-associated toxic effects.ResultsInternationally, 613 fatal ICI toxic events were reported from 2009 through January 2018 in Vigilyze. The spectrum differed widely between regimens: in a total of 193 anti-CTLA-4 deaths, most were usually from colitis (135 [70%]), whereas anti-PD-1/PD-L1-related fatalities were often from pneumonitis (333 [35%]), hepatitis (115 [22%]), and neurotoxic effects (50 [15%]). Combination PD-1/CTLA-4 deaths were frequently from colitis (32 [37%]) and myocarditis (22 [25%]). Fatal toxic effects typically occurred early after therapy initiation for combination therapy, anti-PD-1, and ipilimumab monotherapy (median 14.5, 40, and 40 days, respectively). Myocarditis had the highest fatality rate (52 [39.7%] of 131 reported cases), whereas endocrine events and colitis had only 2% to 5% reported fatalities; 10% to 17% of other organ-system toxic effects reported had fatal outcomes. Retrospective review of 3545 patients treated with ICIs from 7 academic centers revealed 0.6% fatality rates; cardiac and neurologic events were especially prominent (43%). Median time from symptom onset to death was 32 days. A meta-analysis of 112 trials involving 19 217 patients showed toxicity-related fatality rates of 0.36% (anti-PD-1), 0.38% (anti-PD-L1), 1.08% (anti-CTLA-4), and 1.23% (PD-1/PD-L1 plus CTLA-4).Conclusions and relevanceIn the largest evaluation of fatal ICI-associated toxic effects published to date to our knowledge, we observed early onset of death with varied causes and frequencies depending on therapeutic regimen. Clinicians across disciplines should be aware of these uncommon lethal complications.

Project description:BackgroundChronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is the third leading cause of mortality worldwide. Reducing the number of COPD exacerbations is an important patient outcome and a major cost-saving approach. Both technology-enabled self-monitoring (SM) and remote monitoring (RM) programs have the potential to reduce exacerbations, but they have not been directly compared with each other. As RM is a more resource-intensive strategy, it is important to understand whether it is more effective than SM.ObjectiveThe objective of this study is to evaluate the impact of SM and RM on self-management behaviors, COPD disease knowledge, and respiratory status relative to standard care (SC).MethodsThis was a 3-arm open-label randomized controlled trial comparing SM, RM, and SC completed in an outpatient COPD clinic in a community hospital. Patients in the SM and RM groups recorded their vital signs (oxygen, blood pressure, temperature, and weight) and symptoms with the Cloud DX platform every day and were provided with a COPD action plan. Patients in the RM group also received access to a respiratory therapist (RT). The RT monitored their vital signs intermittently and contacted them when their vitals varied outside of predetermined thresholds. The RT also contacted patients once a week irrespective of their vital signs or symptoms. All patients were randomized to 1 of the 3 groups and assessed at baseline and 3 and 6 months after program initiation. The primary outcome was the Partners in Health scale, which measures self-management skills. Secondary outcomes included the St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire, Bristol COPD Knowledge Questionnaire, COPD Assessment Test, and modified-Medical Research Council Breathlessness Scale. Patients were also asked to self-report on health system usage.ResultsA total of 122 patients participated in the study, 40 in the SC, 41 in the SM, and 41 in the RM groups. Out of those patients, 7 in the SC, 5 in the SM, and 6 in the RM groups did not complete the study. There were no significant differences in the rates of study completion among the groups (P=.80).ConclusionsBoth SM and RM have shown promise in reducing acute care utilization and exacerbation frequencies. As far as we are aware, no studies to date have directly compared technology-enabled self-management with RM programs in COPD patients. We believe that this study will be an important contribution to the literature.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT03741855; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03741855.International registered report identifier (irrid)DERR1-10.2196/13920.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a leading cause of mortality and leads to frequent hospital admissions and emergency department (ED) visits. COPD exacerbations are an important patient outcome, and reducing their frequency would result in significant cost savings. Remote monitoring and self-monitoring could both help patients manage their symptoms and reduce the frequency of exacerbations, but they have different resource implications and have not been directly compared. OBJECTIVE:This study aims to compare the effectiveness of implementing a technology-enabled self-monitoring program versus a technology-enabled remote monitoring program in patients with COPD compared with a standard care group. METHODS:We conducted a 3-arm randomized controlled trial evaluating the effectiveness of a remote monitoring and a self-monitoring program relative to standard care. Patients with COPD were recruited from outpatient clinics and a pulmonary rehabilitation program. Patients in both interventions used a Bluetooth-enabled device kit to monitor oxygen saturation, blood pressure, temperature, weight, and symptoms, but only patients in the remote monitoring group were monitored by a respiratory therapist. All patients were assessed at baseline and at 3 and 6 months after program initiation. Outcomes included self-management skills, as measured by the Partners in Health (PIH) Scale; patient symptoms measured with the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ); and the Bristol COPD Knowledge Questionnaire (BCKQ). Patients were also asked to self-report on health system use, and data on health use were collected from the hospital. RESULTS:A total of 122 patients participated in the study: 40 in the standard care, 41 in the self-monitoring, and 41 in the remote monitoring groups. Although all 3 groups improved in PIH scores, BCKQ scores, and SGRQ impact scores, there were no significant differences among any of the groups. No effects were observed on the SGRQ activity or symptom scores or on hospitalizations, ED visits, or clinic visits. CONCLUSIONS:Despite regular use of the technology, patients with COPD assigned to remote monitoring or self-monitoring did not have any improvement in patient outcomes such as self-management skills, knowledge, or symptoms, or in health care use compared with each other or with a standard care group. This may be owing to low health care use at baseline, the lack of structured educational components in the intervention groups, and the lack of integration of the action plan with the technology. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03741855; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/ NCT03741855.

Project description:IntroductionIn a randomized controlled trial, we previously investigated if melanoma patients receiving checkpoint inhibitors had fewer severe immune-related adverse events (irAEs) when they reported symptoms using electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePRO) with triggered alerts as an add-on to standard care, compared to standard care alone. The aim of this study is to examine between-group differences in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and associations between irAEs severity and HRQoL.MethodsThe study population of 138 patients completed the EuroQol EQ-5D-5L Index and FACT-M questionnaires at baseline and weeks 24 and 48. We analyzed HRQoL from all patients who completed at least one questionnaire. Missing FACT-M items were imputed following existing guidelines.ResultsThere was no difference in HRQoL at baseline as measured EQ-5D-5L between the intervention and the control group. Between baseline and 48 weeks, mean EQ-5D-5L scores were unchanged among patients in the intervention group (p = 0.81) but decreased significantly among patients in the control group (p = 0.03). Consequently, patients in the intervention group had higher mean scores than those in the control group (p = 0.05) at 48 weeks. Mean FACT-M scores did not differ significantly between the two groups at any of the time points. There were observed no between-group differences in mean EQ-5D-5 and mean FACT-M scores between patients with severe irAEs and patients who had none.ConclusionMelanoma patients receiving CPIs who self-reported irAEs using ePRO with triggered alerts as a supplement to standard care maintained their HRQoL compared to patients who received standard care alone. Patients in the intervention group had a significantly better HRQoL measured by EQ-5D-5L than controls 48 weeks after baseline. The results suggest that including ePRO in standard care increases melanoma patients´ well-being. Further and larger studies are needed to confirm this finding and examine the impact of severe irAEs on cancer patients' HRQoL.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov NCT03073031 Registered 8 March 2017, Retrospectively registered https://clinicaltrials.gov/ .