Skip to main content

Impact of assessment frequency of patient-reported outcomes: an observational study using an eHealth platform in cancer patients

Abstract

Background and aim

The evaluation of patient-reported outcomes (PRO) in cancer has proven relevant positive clinical impact on patients’ communication with healthcare professionals, decision-making for management, well-being, and overall survival. However, the optimal frequency of PRO assessment has yet to be defined. Based on the assumption that more frequent sampling would enhance accuracy, we aimed at identifying the optimal sampling frequency that does not miss clinically relevant insight.

Methods

We used pilot data from 31 advanced cancer patients who completed once daily the 19-item MD Anderson Symptom Inventory at home. The resulting dataset allowed us to compare different PRO assessment frequencies to daily sampling, i.e., alternate days (q2d), every third day (q3d), or once a week (q1w). We evaluated the sampling frequencies for two main outcomes: average symptom intensity and identification of severe symptoms.

Results

The majority of the differences between corresponding averages of daily data and those for q2d, q3d, and q1w datasets were close to 0, yet the extremes exceeded 5. Clinically meaningful differences, i.e., > 1, were observed in 0.76% of patient items for q2d, in 2.72% for q3d, and in 11.93% for q1w. Moreover, median values of missed instances of a severe symptom (i.e., > 6) were 14.6% for q2d, 27.8% for q3d, and 55.6% for q1w.

Conclusions

Our analysis suggests that in patients receiving chemotherapy for advanced cancer, increasing the density of PRO collection enhances the accuracy of PRO assessment to a clinically meaningful extent. This is valid for both computations of averages symptom burden and for the recognition of episodes of severe symptom intensity.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1

Data availability

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author, PFI, upon reasonable request.

Code availability

N/A.

References

  1. 1.

    Absolom K, Warrington L, Hudson E, Hewison J, Morris C, Holch P, Carter R, Gibson A, Holmes M, Clayton B, Rogers Z, McParland L, Conner M, Glidewell L, Woroncow B, Dawkins B, Dickinson S, Hulme C, Brown J, Velikova G (2021) Phase III randomized controlled trial of eRAPID: eHealth Intervention During Chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 39(7):734–747. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.20.02015

  2. 2.

    Basch E, Deal AM, Dueck AC, Scher HI, Kris MG, Hudis C, Schrag D (2017) Overall survival results of a trial assessing patient-reported outcomes for symptom monitoring during routine cancer treatment. JAMA 318:197–198

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Basch E, Deal AM, Kris MG, Scher HI, Hudis CA, Sabbatini P, Rogak L, Bennett AV, Dueck AC, Atkinson TM, Chou JF, Dulko D, Sit L, Barz A, Novotny P, Fruscione M, Sloan JA, Schrag D (2016) Symptom monitoring with patient-reported outcomes during routine cancer treatment: a randomized controlled trial. J Clin Oncol 34:557–565

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Basch E, Stover AM, Schrag D, Chung A, Jansen J, Henson S, Carr P, Ginos B, Deal A, Spears PA, Jonsson M, Bennett AV, Mody G, Thanarajasingam G, Rogak LJ, Reeve BB, Snyder C, Kottschade LA, Charlot M, Weiss A, Bruner D, Dueck AC (2020) Clinical utility and user perceptions of a digital system for electronic patient-reported symptom monitoring during routine cancer care: findings from the PRO-TECT trial. JCO Clin Cancer Inform 4:947–957

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Bouchahda M, Komarzynski S, Ulusakarya A, Attari A, Duprès A, Breda G, Fritsch A, Adam R, Levi F (2020) Improving FOLFIRINOX safety in pancreatic cancer patients through multidimensional remote monitoring and proactive care using a domomedecine mobile platform. J Clin Oncol 38: TPS4673-TPS4673

  6. 6.

    Ciani O, Cucciniello M, Petracca F, Apolone G, Merlini G, Novello S, Pedrazzoli P, Zilembo N, Broglia C, Capelletto E, Garassino M, Nicod E, Tarricone R (2019) Lung Cancer App (LuCApp) study protocol: a randomised controlled trial to evaluate a mobile supportive care app for patients with metastatic lung cancer. BMJ Open 9:e025483

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Cleeland CS, Mendoza TR, Wang XS, Chou C, Harle MT, Morrissey M, Engstrom MC (2000) Assessing symptom distress in cancer patients: the M.D. Anderson Symptom Inventory Cancer 89:1634–1646

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Coens C, Pe M, Dueck AC, Sloan J, Basch E, Calvert M, Campbell A, Cleeland C, Cocks K, Collette L, Devlin N, Dorme L, Flechtner HH, Gotay C, Griebsch I, Groenvold M, King M, Kluetz PG, Koller M, Malone DC, Martinelli F, Mitchell SA, Musoro JZ, O’Connor D, Oliver K, Piault-Louis E, Piccart M, Quinten C, Reijneveld JC, Schurmann C, Smith AW, Soltys KM, Taphoorn MJB, Velikova G, Bottomley A, Setting International Standards in Analyzing Patient-Reported O, Quality of Life Endpoints Data C (2020) International standards for the analysis of quality-of-life and patient-reported outcome endpoints in cancer randomised controlled trials: recommendations of the SISAQOL Consortium. Lancet Oncol 21: e83-e96

  9. 9.

    Crafoord MT, Fjell M, Sundberg K, Nilsson M, Langius-Eklof A (2020) Engagement in an interactive app for symptom self-management during treatment in patients with breast or prostate cancer: mixed methods study. J Med Internet Res 22:e17058

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Giesinger JM, Blazeby J, Aaronson NK, Sprangers M, Fayers P, Sparano F, Rees J, Anota A, Wan C, Pezold M, Isharwal S, Cottone F, Efficace F, Group EQoL (2020) Differences in patient-reported outcomes that are most frequently detected in randomized controlled trials in patients with solid tumors: a pooled analysis of 229 trials. Value Health 23: 666-673

  11. 11.

    Greer JA, Jacobs JM, Pensak N, Nisotel LE, Fishbein JN, MacDonald JJ, Ream ME, Walsh EA, Buzaglo J, Muzikansky A, Lennes IT, Safren SA, Pirl WF, Temel JS (2020) Randomized trial of a smartphone mobile app to improve symptoms and adherence to oral therapy for cancer. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 18:133–141

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Innominato PF, Komarzynski S, Mohammad-Djafari A, Arbaud A, Ulusakarya A, Bouchahda M, Haydar M, Bossevot-Desmaris R, Plessis V, Mocquery M, Bouchoucha D, Afshar M, Beau J, Karaboue A, Morere JF, Fursse J, Rovira Simon J, Levi F (2016) Clinical relevance of the first domomedicine platform securing multidrug chronotherapy delivery in metastatic cancer patients at home: the inCASA European Project. J Med Internet Res 18:e305

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Jones HV, Smith H, Cooksley T, Jones P, Woolley T, Gwyn Murdoch D, Thomas D, Foster B, Wakefield V, Innominato P, Mullard A, Ghosal N, Subbe C (2020) Checklists for complications during systemic cancer treatment shared by patients, friends, and health care professionals: prospective interventional cohort study. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 8:e19225

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Karamanidou C, Natsiavas P, Koumakis L, Marias K, Schera F, Schafer M, Payne S, Maramis C (2020) Electronic patient-reported outcome-based interventions for palliative cancer care: a systematic and mapping review. JCO Clin Cancer Inform 4:647–656

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Komarzynski S, Huang Q, Levi FA, Palesh OG, Ulusakarya A, Bouchahda M, Haydar M, Wreglesworth NI, Morere JF, Adam R, Innominato PF (2019) The day after: correlates of patient-reported outcomes with actigraphy-assessed sleep in cancer patients at home (inCASA project) Sleep 42

  16. 16.

    Low CA, Dey AK, Ferreira D, Kamarck T, Sun W, Bae S, Doryab A (2017) Estimation of symptom severity during chemotherapy from passively sensed data: exploratory study. J Med Internet Res 19:e420

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Mouillet G, Falcoz A, Fritzsch J, Almotlak H, Jacoulet P, Pivot X, Villanueva C, Mansi L, Kim S, Curtit E, Meneveau N, Adotevi O, Jary M, Eberst G, Vienot A, Calcagno F, Pozet A, Djoumakh O, Borg C, Westeel V, Anota A, Paget-Bailly S (2021) Feasibility of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) assessment for cancer patients using electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) in daily clinical practice. Qual Life Res. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-020-02721-0

  18. 18.

    Osborn J, Ajakaiye A, Cooksley T, Subbe CP (2020) Do mHealth applications improve clinical outcomes of patients with cancer? A critical appraisal of the peer-reviewed literature. Support Care Cancer 28:1469–1479

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Osoba D, Rodrigues G, Myles J, Zee B, Pater J (1998) Interpreting the significance of changes in health-related quality-of-life scores. J Clin Oncol 16:139–144

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Wang XS, Zhao F, Fisch MJ, O’Mara AM, Cella D, Mendoza TR, Cleeland CS (2014) Prevalence and characteristics of moderate to severe fatigue: a multicenter study in cancer patients and survivors. Cancer 120:425–432

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are sincerely grateful to the patients who participated in the inCASA pilot, to the other oncologists who enrolled the patients under their care, to the nurses involved in data collection, and to the members of the inCASA European project. The clinical dataset used was collected within a pilot study from a research project supported by the European Union through the Seventh Framework Programme.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

P.F.I.: conception and design, data acquisition, analysis and interpretation, figure plotting; manuscript drafting, and final editing;

S.K.: data analysis and interpretation, manuscript drafting, and final editing;

R.D.: data interpretation, figure plotting, and manuscript final editing;

N.I.W.: data interpretation and manuscript final editing;

M.B.: data acquisition, manuscript drafting, and final editing;

A.K.: data acquisition and analysis and manuscript final editing;

A.U.: data acquisition and manuscript final editing;

C.P.S.: data interpretation and manuscript final editing;

D.S.: conception and design, data interpretation, manuscript drafting, and final editing;

F.A.L.: conception and design, data acquisition, analysis and interpretation, manuscript drafting, and final editing.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Pasquale F. Innominato.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval

No specific ethical approval was necessary for this study. The patient-generated dataset was part of a pilot study (inCASA: Integrated Network for Completely Assisted Senior Citizen’s Autonomy), which was approved by the local institutional review board (Villejuif, France).

Consent to participate

N/A

Consent for publication

N/A

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Innominato, P.F., Komarzynski, S., Dallmann, R. et al. Impact of assessment frequency of patient-reported outcomes: an observational study using an eHealth platform in cancer patients. Support Care Cancer (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-021-06262-1

Download citation

Keywords

  • Cancer
  • Patient-reported outcomes
  • MHealth
  • Digital oncology
  • Domomedicine
  • MDASI
  • Symptoms