ABSTRACT
Aim Monitoring electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePRO) can provide various benefits to cancer patients, such as enhanced quality of life, reduction of hospital admissions, and even prolonged survival. Furthermore, ePRO might offer significant benefits to patients under antineoplastic treatment in the context of the current COVID-19 pandemic. However, evidence on feasibility of ePRO in routine cancer care and barriers met in a real-life setting remains limited. Subject and methods We conducted a feasibility study among patients diagnosed with multiple myeloma currently under antineoplastic treatment. Patients filled out weekly ePRO questionnaires and were followed up for 6 months. In case of adverse events, an alert was sent to the clinic. We assessed uptake and adherence, as well as subjective perceptions of patients and clinic staff. A semi-structured literature review was conducted to contextualize results. Results Eleven patients were recruited and followed up for 6 months. Overall adherence was found at a high level and remained stable throughout the study period. Feedback from patients was positive;however, clinic staff expressed disappointment and frustration, criticising an increase of workload while not perceiving any benefit to the oncological treatment. Both findings were backed by evidence we found in literature. Conclusions Implementation of ePRO monitoring to routine cancer treatment seems to be feasible regarding patients’ acceptance and compliance. However, integration of the tool into clinical workflow without increasing workload and deterring clinicians proves to be a major challenge. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10389-022-01767-3.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Vaccinations have the potential to significantly lower the burden of disease for many major infections in the high-risk population of hematological and oncological patients. In this regard Shingrix®, an inactivated Varicella Zoster Virus vaccine, received market approval in the European Union in March 2018, after prior US approval in October 2017, and recommendations specifically state immunocompromised, including oncological, patients. As vaccination rates are considered to be poor in oncological patients, determining the current vaccination rates for Shingrix® two years after market approval is important in defining the need for intervention to bring this potentially high-impact vaccine to the patients. METHODS: We analyzed data of the EVO Study to provide data for Herpes zoster vaccination rates in oncological patients. The EVO Study was an interventional study evaluating the potential of increasing vaccination rates of specified must-have vaccinations by an instructional card in the oncological setting. Numbers presented in this publication merged baseline data and follow-up data of the control group; hence data not affected by the intervention. RESULTS: Data of 370 patients were analyzed; 21.1% with hematological malignancies and 78.9% with solid cancer. Only 3.0% were vaccinated with Shingrix®. Patients with hematological malignancy were more likely to be vaccinated than those with solid cancer (7.7 vs. 1.7%). CONCLUSION: Despite clear recommendations and a pressing need in the high-risk population of hematological and oncological patients, the vast majority of patients are still left without vaccine protection against Herpes zoster by Shingrix®.