Dataset Information

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

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.

SUBMITTER: Krzyzanowska MK

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8652580 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPopulation-based studies suggest that emergency department visits and hospitalizations are common among patients receiving chemotherapy and that rates in routine practice are higher than expected from clinical trials. Chemotherapy-related toxicities are often predictable and, consequently, acute care visits may be preventable with adequate treatment planning and support between visits to the cancer centre. We will evaluate the impact of proactive telephone-based toxicity management on emergency department visits and hospitalizations in women with early stage breast cancer receiving chemotherapy.MethodsIn this pragmatic covariate constraint-based cluster randomized trial, 20 centres in Ontario, Canada are randomly allocated to either proactive telephone toxicity management (intervention) or routine care (control). The primary outcome is the cluster-level mean number of ED + H visits per patient evaluated using Ontario administrative healthcare data. Participants are all patients with early stage (I-III) breast cancer commencing adjuvant or neo-adjuvant chemotherapy at participating institutions during the intervention period. At least 25 patients at each centre participate in a patient reported outcomes sub-study involving the collection of standardized questionnaires to measure: severity of treatment toxicities, self-care, self-efficacy, quality of life, and coordination of care. Patients participating in the patient reported outcomes (PRO) sub-study are asked to provide written consent to link their PRO data to administrative data. Unit costs will be applied to each per person resource utilized, and a total cost per population and patient will be generated. An incremental cost-effectiveness analysis will be undertaken to compare the incremental costs and outcomes between the intervention and control groups from the health system perspective.DiscussionThis study evaluates the effectiveness of a proactive toxicity management intervention in a routine care setting. The use of administrative healthcare data to evaluate the primary outcome enables an evaluation in a real world setting and at a much larger scale than previous studies.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov , NCT02485678. Registered 30 June 2015.

Project description:ImportanceDespite existing evidence of a benefit associated with cisplatin-based adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) after radical cystectomy (RC) for chemotherapy-naive patients with pT3/T4 and/or pN+ urothelial carcinoma of the bladder (UCB), to our knowledge, no studies have addressed the effectiveness of AC in those who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) before surgery.ObjectiveTo assess the comparative effectiveness of AC vs observation for patients with pT3/T4 and/or pN+ UCB previously treated with NAC and RC.Design, setting, and participantsThis observational cohort study used the National Cancer Data Base (January 1, 2006, through December 31, 2012) to identify individuals who received NAC and RC followed by AC or observation for pT3/T4 and/or pN+ UCB.Main outcomes and measuresAfter multiple imputation was used to handle missing data, inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW)-adjusted Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards regression analyses were performed with a 6-month conditional landmark to compare overall survival (OS) among patients who received NAC and RC followed by AC vs observation. In addition, exploratory analyses were conducted to examine the heterogeneity of the treatment effect according to age (continuous), sex (female vs male), Charlson comorbidity index (?1 vs 0), pT/N stage (pT3/T4N0 vs pTanyN+), and surgical margin status (positive vs negative) by testing interaction terms within the IPTW-adjusted Cox proportional hazards regression model.ResultsOf the 788 patients with pT3/T4 and/or pN+ UCB (mean [SD] age, 65.3 [9.4] years; 603 [76.5%] male and 185 [23.5%] female), 184 (23.4%) received NAC and RC followed by AC and 604 (76.6%) received NAC and RC followed by observation. The 6-month conditional landmark, IPTW-adjusted Kaplan-Meier curves showed that median OS was significantly longer for NAC and RC followed by AC (29.9 months; interquartile range, 15.1-85.4 months) vs NAC and RC followed by observation (24.2 months; interquartile range, 12.9-58.9 months) (P?=?.046). The 5-year IPTW-adjusted rates of OS were 36.8% for NAC and RC followed by AC vs 24.7% for NAC and RC followed by observation. In the IPTW-adjusted Cox proportional hazards regression analysis, NAC and RC followed by AC was associated with a significant OS benefit (hazard ratio, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.61-0.99; P?=?.046). Interaction term analyses indicated that the OS benefit of NAC and RC followed by AC decreased significantly with age (hazard ratio, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.95-0.99; P?=?.02), whereas no significant interaction was observed with sex (P?=?.82), Charlson comorbidity index (P?=?.51), pT/N stage (P?=?.95), and surgical margin status (P?=?.29).Conclusions and relevanceThis study found that AC after NAC and RC may be associated with an OS benefit for patients with pT3/T4 and/or pN+ UCB. The present findings should be considered as preliminary evidence to conduct a randomized clinical trial to address this association.

Project description:BackgroundConcurrent chemoradiotherapy followed by adjuvant chemotherapy (CCRT-AC) is currently recommended as the standard treatment for locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma (LA-NPC). Neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by concurrent chemoradiotherapy (NAC-CCRT) is an alternative strategy for decreasing tumor size and controlling micrometastases before main treatment. The aim of this study was to investigate and compare survival outcomes between LA-NPC patients treated with CCRT-AC and those treated with NAC-CCRT.MethodsThis retrospective cohort study included consecutive histologically confirmed LA-NPC patients that were treated with NAC-CCRT or CCRT-AC at Siriraj Hospital during the March 2010 to October 2014 study period. CCRT in both protocols consisted of 3-week cycles of cisplatin 100 mg/m2 with concurrent radiotherapy. Either NAC or AC consisted of 3-week cycles of cisplatin on day 1 and fluorouracil/leucovorin on days 1-4 for a maximum three cycles. The primary endpoint was 5-year overall survival (OS). Flexible parametric survival analysis was used, because the proportional hazards assumption of Cox regression was violated.ResultsOf the 266 LA-NPC patients that received treatment during the study period, 79 received NAC-CCRT and 187 received CCRT-AC. Median follow-up was 37 months. Significantly more patients with advanced clinical stage (stage IVA-IVB) received NAC-CCRT (86% in NAC-CCRT vs. 29% in CCRT-AC; p < 0.001). Compared to CCRT-AC in crude analysis, 3-year and 5-year OS of NAC-CCRT were 72% vs. 86% and 62% vs. 75% respectively (p = 0.059). Interestingly, the 3-year and 5-year post-estimation adjusted OS was 84% and 74% for NAC-CCRT and 81% and 70% for CCRT-AC, respectively (HR: 0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.45-1.56; p = 0.571). Also, adjusted analysis of distant-metastasis survival, NAC-CCRT showed HR was 0.79 (95% CI:0.37-1.72, p = 0.557). Conversely, adjusted analysis of locoregional relapse (LLR)-free survival revealed NAC-CCRT to have a significantly higher risk of LRR (HR: 2.18, 95% CI: 0.98-4.87; p = 0.057).ConclusionsThe results suggested that prognosis in the NAC-CCRT treated patients was not superior to that of the CCRT-AC treated individuals. In patients that receive neoadjuvant chemotherapy, locoregional relapse should be of concern. High-risk distant metastasis patients (N3 stage) that could achieve survival advantage from NAC-CCRT is an interesting and important topic for further study.