Literature DB >> 24073038

Stakeholder perspectives on implementing the National Cancer Institute's patient-reported outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE).

Deborah Watkins Bruner1, Laura J Hanisch, Bryce B Reeve, Andy M Trotti, Deborah Schrag, Laura Sit, Tito R Mendoza, Lori Minasian, Ann O'Mara, Andrea M Denicoff, Julia H Rowland, Michael Montello, Cindy Geoghegan, Amy P Abernethy, Steven B Clauser, Kathleen Castro, Sandra A Mitchell, Laurie Burke, Ann Marie Trentacosti, Ethan M Basch.   

Abstract

The National Cancer Institute (NCI) is developing a patient-reported version of its Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, called the "PRO-CTCAE." The PRO-CTCAE consists of a library of patient-reported items which can be administered in clinical trials to directly capture the patient experience of adverse events during cancer treatment, as well as a software platform for administering these items via computer or telephone. In order to better understand the impressions of stakeholders involved in cancer clinical research about the potential value of the PRO-CTCAE approach to capturing adverse event information in clinical research, as well as their perspectives about barriers and strategies for implementing the PRO-CTCAE in NCI-sponsored cancer trials, a survey was conducted. A survey including structured and open-ended questions was developed to elicit perceptions about the use of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) for adverse event reporting, and to explore logistical considerations for implementing the PRO-CTCAE in cancer trials. The survey was distributed electronically and by paper to a convenience sample of leadership and committee members in the NCI's cooperative group network, including principal investigators, clinical investigators, research nurses, data managers, patient advocates, and representatives of the NCI and Food and Drug Administration. Between October, 2008 through February, 2009, 727 surveys were collected. Most respondents (93%) agreed that patient reporting of adverse symptoms would be useful for improving understanding of the patient experience with treatment in cancer trials, and 88%, 80%, and 76%, respectively, endorsed that administration of PRO-CTCAE items in clinical trials would improve the completeness, accuracy, and efficiency of symptom data collection. More than three fourths believed that patient reports would be useful for informing treatment dose modifications and towards FDA regulatory evaluation of drugs. Eighty-eight percent felt that patients in clinical trials would be willing to self-report adverse symptoms at clinic visits via computer, and 68% felt patients would self-report weekly from home via the internet or an automated telephone system. Lack of computers and limited space and personnel were seen as potential barriers to in-clinic self-reporting, but these were judged to be surmountable with adequate funding. The PRO-CTCAE items and software are viewed by a majority of survey respondents as a means to improve adverse event data quality and comprehensiveness, enhance clinical decision-making, and foster patient-clinician communication. Research is ongoing to assess the measurement properties and feasibility of implementing this measure in cancer clinical trials.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cancer, Clinical trials; Comparative effectiveness research; Cooperative groups; National Cancer Institute; Oncology; Patient-reported outcomes; Symptoms, adverse events; Tolerability; Toxicity, safety

Year:  2011        PMID: 24073038      PMCID: PMC3717706          DOI: 10.1007/s13142-011-0025-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Transl Behav Med        ISSN: 1613-9860            Impact factor:   3.046


  21 in total

1.  The need for and characteristics of randomized, phase III trials to evaluate symptom management in patients with cancer.

Authors:  Claudette G Varricchio; Jeff A Sloan
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2002-08-21       Impact factor: 13.506

Review 2.  Measuring treatment impact: a review of patient-reported outcomes and other efficacy endpoints in approved product labels.

Authors:  Richard J Willke; Laurie B Burke; Pennifer Erickson
Journal:  Control Clin Trials       Date:  2004-12

3.  Clinical significance of patient-reported questionnaire data: another step toward consensus.

Authors:  Jeff A Sloan; David Cella; Ron D Hays
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2005-10-13       Impact factor: 6.437

4.  Electronic patient-reported data capture as a foundation of rapid learning cancer care.

Authors:  Amy P Abernethy; Asif Ahmad; S Yousuf Zafar; Jane L Wheeler; Jennifer Barsky Reese; H Kim Lyerly
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 2.983

5.  Patient versus clinician symptom reporting using the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events: results of a questionnaire-based study.

Authors:  Ethan Basch; Alexia Iasonos; Tiffani McDonough; Allison Barz; Ann Culkin; Mark G Kris; Howard I Scher; Deborah Schrag
Journal:  Lancet Oncol       Date:  2006-11       Impact factor: 41.316

Review 6.  Issues and challenges with integrating patient-reported outcomes in clinical trials supported by the National Cancer Institute-sponsored clinical trials networks.

Authors:  Deborah Watkins Bruner; Charlene J Bryan; Neil Aaronson; C Craig Blackmore; Michael Brundage; David Cella; Patricia A Ganz; Carolyn Gotay; Pamela S Hinds; Alice B Kornblith; Benjamin Movsas; Jeff Sloan; Lari Wenzel; Giles Whalen
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2007-11-10       Impact factor: 44.544

Review 7.  Patient-reported outcomes supporting anticancer product approvals.

Authors:  Edwin P Rock; Dianne L Kennedy; Melissa H Furness; William F Pierce; Richard Pazdur; Laurie B Burke
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2007-11-10       Impact factor: 44.544

8.  Is cancer treatment toxicity accurately reported?

Authors:  M B Parliament; C E Danjoux; T Clayton
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  1985-03       Impact factor: 7.038

9.  Agreement between patient-reported symptoms and their documentation in the medical record.

Authors:  Serguei V Pakhomov; Steven J Jacobsen; Christopher G Chute; Veronique L Roger
Journal:  Am J Manag Care       Date:  2008-08       Impact factor: 2.229

10.  Measuring quality of life in routine oncology practice improves communication and patient well-being: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Galina Velikova; Laura Booth; Adam B Smith; Paul M Brown; Pamela Lynch; Julia M Brown; Peter J Selby
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2004-02-15       Impact factor: 44.544

View more
  19 in total

Review 1.  The level of association between functional performance status measures and patient-reported outcomes in cancer patients: a systematic review.

Authors:  Thomas M Atkinson; Charissa F Andreotti; Kailey E Roberts; Rebecca M Saracino; Marisol Hernandez; Ethan Basch
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2015-08-28       Impact factor: 3.603

2.  Commentary: encouraging clinicians to incorporate longitudinal patient-reported symptoms in routine clinical practice.

Authors:  Ethan Basch; Amy P Abernethy
Journal:  J Oncol Pract       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 3.840

3.  Development of the National Cancer Institute's patient-reported outcomes version of the common terminology criteria for adverse events (PRO-CTCAE).

Authors:  Ethan Basch; Bryce B Reeve; Sandra A Mitchell; Steven B Clauser; Lori M Minasian; Amylou C Dueck; Tito R Mendoza; Jennifer Hay; Thomas M Atkinson; Amy P Abernethy; Deborah W Bruner; Charles S Cleeland; Jeff A Sloan; Ram Chilukuri; Paul Baumgartner; Andrea Denicoff; Diane St Germain; Ann M O'Mara; Alice Chen; Joseph Kelaghan; Antonia V Bennett; Laura Sit; Lauren Rogak; Allison Barz; Diane B Paul; Deborah Schrag
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2014-09-29       Impact factor: 13.506

Review 4.  Patient-reported outcomes in the evaluation of toxicity of anticancer treatments.

Authors:  Massimo Di Maio; Ethan Basch; Jane Bryce; Francesco Perrone
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2016-01-20       Impact factor: 66.675

5.  Development and preliminary evaluation of a training workshop for the collection of patient-reported outcome (PRO) interview data by research support staff.

Authors:  Thomas M Atkinson; Karen Hurley; Carma L Bylund; Alexandra Berk; Kimberly Diminni; Jamie S Ostroff
Journal:  J Cancer Educ       Date:  2013-03       Impact factor: 2.037

Review 6.  Beyond maximum grade: modernising the assessment and reporting of adverse events in haematological malignancies.

Authors:  Gita Thanarajasingam; Lori M Minasian; Frederic Baron; Franco Cavalli; R Angelo De Claro; Amylou C Dueck; Tarec C El-Galaly; Neil Everest; Jan Geissler; Christian Gisselbrecht; John Gribben; Mary Horowitz; S Percy Ivy; Caron A Jacobson; Armand Keating; Paul G Kluetz; Aviva Krauss; Yok Lam Kwong; Richard F Little; Francois-Xavier Mahon; Matthew J Matasar; María-Victoria Mateos; Kristen McCullough; Robert S Miller; Mohamad Mohty; Philippe Moreau; Lindsay M Morton; Sumimasa Nagai; Simon Rule; Jeff Sloan; Pieter Sonneveld; Carrie A Thompson; Kyriaki Tzogani; Flora E van Leeuwen; Galina Velikova; Diego Villa; John R Wingard; Sophie Wintrich; John F Seymour; Thomas M Habermann
Journal:  Lancet Haematol       Date:  2018-06-18       Impact factor: 18.959

7.  International Collaborative Research Partnerships: Blending Science with Management and Diplomacy.

Authors:  Chuen-Yen Lau; Crystal Wang; Susan Orsega; Edmund C Tramont; Ousmane Koita; Michael A Polis; Sophia Siddiqui
Journal:  J AIDS Clin Res       Date:  2014-12

Review 8.  Recommended patient-reported core set of symptoms to measure in adult cancer treatment trials.

Authors:  Bryce B Reeve; Sandra A Mitchell; Amylou C Dueck; Ethan Basch; David Cella; Carolyn Miller Reilly; Lori M Minasian; Andrea M Denicoff; Ann M O'Mara; Michael J Fisch; Cynthia Chauhan; Neil K Aaronson; Corneel Coens; Deborah Watkins Bruner
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2014-07-08       Impact factor: 13.506

9.  Comparison of Patient- and Practitioner-Reported Toxic Effects Associated With Chemoradiotherapy for Head and Neck Cancer.

Authors:  Aaron D Falchook; Rebecca Green; Mary E Knowles; Robert J Amdur; William Mendenhall; David N Hayes; Juneko E Grilley-Olson; Jared Weiss; Bryce B Reeve; Sandra A Mitchell; Ethan M Basch; Bhishamjit S Chera
Journal:  JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2016-06-01       Impact factor: 6.223

Review 10.  Considerations for observational research using large data sets in radiation oncology.

Authors:  Reshma Jagsi; Justin E Bekelman; Aileen Chen; Ronald C Chen; Karen Hoffman; Ya-Chen Tina Shih; Benjamin D Smith; James B Yu
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2014-09-01       Impact factor: 7.038

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.