Cancer
Conditions
Brief summary
Therapies used to treat cancer are administered orally (OT) in 75% of cases, lending themselves to outpatient care. This care pathway raises new issues: specific toxicities, drug interactions, and the relationship between the community (physicians and pharmacists) and the hospital. Drug interactions can increase toxicities or decrease the effectiveness of treatment and impact overall survival. Detection of drug interactions before treatment initiation is not always performed in routine practice. However, these oral treatments have a low therapeutic index and are associated with side effects that can alter quality of life (QoL). They are classically documented by the physician at the time of the consultation using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), which makes it possible to adapt management. Nevertheless, numerous studies have shown a discrepancy between side effects reported by the patient versus those recorded by the physician, who tends to underestimate the intensity of the effects experienced by the patient. Studies have shown an improvement in the overall survival and QoL of patients followed by electronic patient reported outcomes (ePRO) compared to patients followed conventionally. Therefore, for this study, the study investigators aim to measure the impact of a care pathway associating a scheduled consultation with the hospital clinical pharmacist integrating a proactive medication assessment and the search for drug interactions and a follow-up of toxicities by ePROs on the QoL of patients treated with oral therapies in oncology and to estimate the economic impact.
Interventions
OTHERTHESS monitoring
Consultation with the pharmacist to look for possible medication interactions between the oral therapy and the patient's usual treatments and to inform the patient about his treatment to improve QOL and compliance. Consultation and follow-up by a nurse. Weekly notification by THESS Application of the symptoms experienced by the patient over the last 7 days
Sponsors
Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nīmes
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
OTHER
Masking
NONE
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
* Patient starting oral therapy treatment in oncology for metastatic or locally advanced cancer * Patient able to use a connected electronic object * Patient with a smartphone/tablet or computer with internet access and an email address. * Patient with WHO status ≤2 * Patients receiving other cancer therapy concurrently with oral therapy may be included * The patient must have given their free and informed consent and signed the consent form * The patient must be a member or beneficiary of a health insurance plan
Exclusion criteria
* The subject is participating in a category 1 interventional study, or is in a period of exclusion determined by a previous study * The subject refuses to sign the consent * It is impossible to give the subject informed information * The patient is under safeguard of justice or state guardianship * Patient pregnant, parturient or breast feeding * Illiterate patient * Patients with poor prognosis due to a serious uncontrolled medical condition, mild systemic disease, uncontrolled infection (cardiac, pulmonary, renal, etc.) * Patient receiving hormone therapy alone for breast or prostate cancer
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Time until decrease in quality of life by 5-points between groups | End of follow-up maximum 18 months | Quality of life calculated every 3 months using EORTC QLQ-C30 for which a decrease of 5-points is considered to be the minimal clinically important difference |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Patient satisfaction with their treatment between groups | 3 months | The EORTC PATSAT-C33 questionnaire assesses the delivery of oncology care as a whole with a score from 1-5; the EORTC OUT-PATSAT7 is a complementary questionnaire to assess the delivery of ambulatory oncology care with a score from 1-5. |
| Quality of life adjusted years between groups | 18 months | EuroQol-5 Dimension (EQ5D-3L) questionnaire, presented as 5-digit number |
| Cost of care between groups | End of study (18 months) | The cost of the system will be estimated from the point of view of the health care institution by valuing the time of the medical and nursing staff and patient out-of-pocket expenses |
| Toxicity experienced during treatment between groups | 3 months | National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) |
| Time until progression of cancer between groups | End of follow-up maximum 18 months | Measured every 3 months by the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) criteria, classed as: Complete response (CR), Partial response (PR), Stable disease (SD), or Progressive disease (PD) |
| Budget Impact Analysis | After 2 years | Cost of care for the population reached (actual population treated) on a national scale in Euros |
| Rate of prescription changes since initiation of oral therapy (whether change in usual treatment and oral therapy). | 3 months | — |
| Medication observance | 3 months | Girerd questionnaire; score 0-6 |
| Usability of the Thess monitoring patient interface for the collection of Patient Reported Outcomes | Month 18 | System Usability Scale questionnaire; score 0-100 |
| Relative Dose Intensity between groups | 3 months | % doses received/dose planned |
Countries
France
Contacts
Primary ContactFrédéric Fiteni
Outcome results
None listed