Web-based patient-reported outcome measures for personalized treatment and care (PROMPT-Care) : multicenter pragmatic nonrandomized trial

Background: Despite the acceptability and efficacy of e–patient-reported outcome (ePRO) systems, implementation in routine clinical care remains challenging. Objective: This pragmatic trial implemented the PROMPT-Care (Patient Reported Outcome Measures for Personalized Treatment and Care) web-based system into existing clinical workflows and evaluated its effectiveness among a diverse population of patients with cancer. Methods: Adult patients with solid tumors receiving active treatment or follow-up care in four cancer centers were enrolled. The PROMPT-Care intervention supported patient management through (1) monthly off-site electronic PRO physical symptom and psychosocial well-being assessments, (2) automated electronic clinical alerts notifying the care team of unresolved clinical issues following two consecutive assessments, and (3) tailored online patient self-management resources. Propensity score matching was used to match controls with intervention patients in a 4:1 ratio for patient age, sex, and treatment status. The primary outcome was a reduction in emergency department presentations. Secondary outcomes were time spent on chemotherapy and the number of allied health service referrals. Results: From April 2016 to October 2018, 328 patients from four public hospitals received the intervention. Matched controls (n=1312) comprised the general population of patients with cancer, seen at the participating hospitals during the study period. Emergency department visits were significantly reduced by 33% (P=.02) among patients receiving the intervention compared with patients in the matched controls. No significant associations were found in allied health referrals or time to end of chemotherapy. At baseline, the most common patient reported outcomes (above-threshold) were fatigue (39%), tiredness (38.4%), worry (32.9%), general wellbeing (32.9%), and sleep (24.1%), aligning with the most frequently accessed self-management domain pages of physical well-being (36%) and emotional well-being (23%). The majority of clinical feedback reports were reviewed by nursing staff (729/893, 82%), largely in response to the automated clinical alerts (n=877). Conclusions: Algorithm-supported web-based systems utilizing patient reported outcomes in clinical practice reduced emergency department presentations among a diverse population of patients with cancer. This study also highlighted the importance of (1) automated triggers for reviewing above-threshold results in patient reports, rather than passive manual review of patient records; (2) the instrumental role nurses play in managing alerts; and (3) providing patients with resources to support guided self-management, where appropriate. Together, these factors will inform the integration of web-based PRO systems into future models of routine cancer care

Comparison of magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography for breast target volume delineation in prone and supine positions

Purpose To\ua0determine whether T2-weighted MRI improves seroma cavity (SC) and whole breast (WB) interobserver conformity for radiation therapy purposes, compared with the gold standard of CT, both in the prone and supine positions. Methods and Materials Eleven observers (2 radiologists and 9 radiation oncologists) delineated SC and WB clinical target volumes (CTVs) on T2-weighted MRI and CT supine and prone scans (4 scans per patient) for 33 patient datasets. Individual observer's volumes were compared using the Dice similarity coefficient, volume overlap index, center of mass shift, and Hausdorff distances. An average cavity visualization score was also determined. Results Imaging modality did not affect interobserver variation for WB CTVs. Prone WB CTVs were larger in volume and more conformal than supine CTVs (on both MRI and CT). Seroma cavity volumes were larger on CT than on MRI. Seroma cavity volumes proved to be comparable in interobserver conformity in both modalities (volume overlap index of 0.57\ua0(95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.54-0.60) for CT supine and 0.52\ua0(95% CI 0.48-0.56) for MRI supine, 0.56\ua0(95% CI 0.53-0.59) for CT prone and 0.55\ua0(95% CI 0.51-0.59) for MRI prone); however, after registering modalities together the intermodality variation (Dice similarity coefficient of 0.41\ua0(95% CI 0.36-0.46) for supine and 0.38\ua0(0.34-0.42) for prone) was larger than the interobserver variability for SC, despite the location typically remaining constant. Conclusions Magnetic resonance imaging interobserver variation was comparable to CT for the WB CTV and SC delineation, in both prone and supine positions. Although the cavity visualization score and interobserver concordance was not significantly higher for MRI than for CT, the SCs were smaller on MRI, potentially owing to clearer SC definition, especially on T2-weighted MR images

International comparison of cosmetic outcomes of breast conserving surgery and radiation therapy for women with ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast

Purpose: To assess the cosmetic impact of breast conserving surgery (BCS), whole breast irradiation (WBI) fractionation and tumour bed boost (TBB) use in a phase III trial for women with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast. Materials and methods: Baseline and 3-year cosmesis were assessed using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Cosmetic Rating System and digital images in a randomised trial of non-low risk DCIS treated with postoperative WBI +/- TBB. Baseline cosmesis was assessed for four geographic clusters of treating centres. Cosmetic failure was a global score of fair or poor. Cosmetic deterioration was a score change from excellent or good at baseline to fair or poor at three years. Odds ratios for cosmetic deterioration by WBI dose-fractionation and TBB use were calculated for both scoring systems. Results: 1608 women were enrolled from 11 countries between 2007 and 2014. 85-90% had excellent or good baseline cosmesis independent of geography or assessment method. TBB (16 Gy in 8 fractions) was associated with a >2-fold risk of cosmetic deterioration (p

The organizational embeddedness of social capital: a comparative case study of two voluntary organisations

Social capital is a popular, but contested concept. It draws attention to the way in which social relations and constructed forms of social organization can produce outcomes on individual and collective levels. However, it is often founded on individualistic, rational-choice models of human behavior that neglect its embeddedness. I explore the embeddedness of social capital through a comparative case study of two voluntary sport organizations in the UK. Through close analysis of in-depth interviews and longitudinal observation, I look at the processes of social capital development and at how socio-organizational context and identity shape these processes

Comparison of setup accuracy of three different image assessment methods for tangential breast radiotherapy

Introduction To compare the differences in setup errors measured with electronic portal image (EPI) and cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) in patients undergoing tangential breast radiotherapy (RT). Relationship between setup errors, body mass index (BMI) and breast size was assessed. Methods Twenty-five patients undergoing postoperative RT to the breast were consented for this study. Weekly CBCT scans were acquired and retrospectively registered to the planning CT in three dimensions, first using bony anatomy for bony registration (CBCT-B) and again using breast tissue outline for soft tissue registration (CBCT-S). Digitally reconstructed radiographs (DRR) generated from CBCT to simulate EPI were compared to the planning DRR using bony anatomy in the V (parallel to the cranio-caudal axis) and U (perpendicular to V) planes. The systematic (Σ) and random (σ) errors were calculated and correlated with BMI and breast size. Results The systematic and random errors for EPI (ΣV = 3.7 mm, ΣU = 2.8 mm and σV = 2.9 mm, σU = 2.5) and CBCT-B (ΣV = 3.5 mm, ΣU = 3.4 mm and σV = 2.8 mm, σU = 2.8) were of similar magnitude in the V and U planes. Similarly, the differences in setup errors for CBCT-B and CBCT-S in three dimensions were less than 1 mm. Only CBCT-S setup error correlated with BMI and breast size. Conclusions CBCT and EPI show insignificant variation in their ability to detect setup error. These findings suggest no significant differences that would make one modality considered superior over the other and EPI should remain the standard of care for most patients. However, there is a correlation with breast size, BMI and setup error as detected by CBCT-S, justifying the use of CBCT-S for larger patients

A review of setup error in supine breast radiotherapy using cone-beam computed tomography

Setup error in breast radiotherapy (RT) measured with 3-dimensional cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) is becoming more common. The purpose of this study is to review the literature relating to the magnitude of setup error in breast RT measured with CBCT. The different methods of image registration between CBCT and planning computed tomography (CT) scan were also explored. A literature search, not limited by date, was conducted using Medline and Google Scholar with the following key words: breast cancer, RT, setup error, and CBCT. This review includes studies that reported on systematic and random errors, and the methods used when registering CBCT scans with planning CT scan. A total of 11 relevant studies were identified for inclusion in this review. The average magnitude of error is generally less than 5 mm across a number of studies reviewed. The common registration methods used when registering CBCT scans with planning CT scan are based on bony anatomy, soft tissue, and surgical clips. No clear relationships between the setup errors detected and methods of registration were observed from this review. Further studies are needed to assess the benefit of CBCT over electronic portal image, as CBCT remains unproven to be of wide benefit in breast RT

Assessment of dose variation for accelerated partial-breast irradiation using rigid and deformable image registrations

Purpose: The aim of this study was to estimate the delivered dose to the target and organs at risk (OAR) for external beam accelerated partial-breast irradiation (APBI) accounting for day-to-day setup uncertainties, using rigid and deformable image registration. Methods and materials: One planning computed tomography (CT) scan and 5 cone beam CT scans for each of 25 patients previously treated with tangential breast radiation therapy were used. All cone beam CT scans were registered to the planning CT scan using 3 techniques: (1) rigid registration based on bony anatomy only, (2) rigid registration based on soft-tissue only, and (3) deformable image registration. For each patient, 4 dose distributions were calculated for APBI. The first dose distribution was the original plan. The other 3 were dose-of-the-day for each of the registration approaches. The effects of image registrations on estimating delivered dose to targets and OAR were determined. Results: The average reductions in V95 (percentage of the PTV that received 95% of the prescribed dose) were 6%, 7%, and 5% for bone, soft-tissue, and deformable registrations, respectively. The average increase in mean dose to the heart were 9%, 9%, and 18% for bone, soft-tissue, and deformable registrations, respectively, whereas the average increase in maximum dose to the contralateral breast were 19%, 20%, and 28%, respectively. Conclusions: The results of this study have shown that there are differences between the planned and estimated delivered dose for APBI because of day-to-day setup uncertainties that may need to be accounted for. Estimated dosimetric impact of setup variation and breast deformation assessed using deformable registration was greater for OARs and smaller for target volumes compared to rigid registration

Clinical practice guideline adherence in oncology: A qualitative study of insights from clinicians in Australia.

BackgroundThe burden of cancer is large in Australia, and rates of cancer Clinical Practice Guideline (CPG) adherence is suboptimal across various cancers.MethodsThe objective of this study is to characterise clinician-perceived barriers and facilitators to cancer CPG adherence in Australia. Semi-structured interviews were conducted to collect data from 33 oncology-focused clinicians (surgeons, radiation oncologists, medical oncologists and haematologists). Clinicians were recruited in 2019 and 2020 through purposive and snowball sampling from 7 hospitals across Sydney, Australia, and interviewed either face-to-face in hospitals or by phone. Audio recordings were transcribed verbatim, and qualitative thematic analysis of the interview data was undertaken. Human research ethics committee approval and governance approval was granted (2019/ETH11722, #52019568810127).ResultsFive broad themes and subthemes of key barriers and facilitators to cancer treatment CPG adherence were identified: Theme 1: CPG content; Theme 2: Individual clinician and patient factors; Theme 3: Access to, awareness of and availability of CPGs; Theme 4: Organisational and cultural factors; and Theme 5: Development and implementation factors. The most frequently reported barriers to adherence were CPGs not catering for patient complexities, being slow to be updated, patient treatment preferences, geographical challenges for patients who travel large distances to access cancer services and limited funding of CPG recommended drugs. The most frequently reported facilitators to adherence were easy accessibility, peer review, multidisciplinary engagement or MDT attendance, and transparent CPG development by trusted, multidisciplinary experts. CPGs provide a reassuring framework for clinicians to check their treatment plans against. Clinicians want cancer CPGs to be frequently updated utilising a wiki-like process, and easily accessible online via a comprehensive database, coordinated by a well-trusted development body.ConclusionFuture implementation strategies of cancer CPGs in Australia should be tailored to consider these context-specific barriers and facilitators, taking into account both the content of CPGs and the communication of that content. The establishment of a centralised, comprehensive, online database, with living wiki-style cancer CPGs, coordinated by a well-funded development body, along with incorporation of recommendations into point-of-care decision support would potentially address many of the issues identified

Why Do Some Lung Cancer Patients Receive No Anticancer Treatment?

IntroductionA significant proportion of lung cancer patients receive no anticancer treatment. This varies from 19% in USA, 33% in Australia, 37% in Scotland, and 50% in Ireland. The aim of this study was to identify the reasons behind this.MethodsThe Lung Cancer Multidisciplinary Meeting (MDM) in South-West Sydney prospectively collects data on all patients presented. All new lung cancer patients presented between December 1, 2005, and December 31, 2007, were reviewed. Patients were assigned optimal treatment based on evidence-based guidelines. Those patients in whom guidelines recommended no treatment (GNT) were compared with those whom the MDM recommended no treatment (MNT) and with those who actually received no treatment (ANT).ResultsThere were 335 patients with a median age of 69 years. A total of 82% had non-small cell lung cancer, 14% had small cell lung cancer, and 4% had no pathologic diagnosis. Eighty-five percent had locally advanced or metastatic disease. GNT was recommended in 4% (n = 13), MNT in 10% (n = 32) but ANT comprised 20% (n = 66). The differences between GNT and MNT were mainly due to patient comorbidities and clinician decision, but the differences between MNT and ANT were due to patient preference and declining performance status. In multivariate analysis, older age, poorer Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group status, non-small cell lung cancer, and non-English language predicted for ANT.ConclusionsThe proportion of patients with lung cancer receiving no treatment is greater than that predicted by guidelines or recommended by the MDM but lower than that described in population-based studies suggesting that MDMs can improve treatment utilization in lung cancer