Mobile app activity engagement by cancer patients and their caregivers informs remote monitoring.

Mobile phone applications ("apps") are potentially an effective, low-burden method to collect patient-reported outcomes outside the clinical setting. Using such apps consistently and in a timely way is critical for complete and accurate data capture, but no studies of concurrent reporting by cancer patient-caregiver dyads have been published in the peer-reviewed literature. This study assessed app engagement, defined as adherence, timing, and attrition with two smartphone applications, one for adult cancer patients and one for their informal caregivers. This was a single-arm, pilot study in which adult cancer patients undergoing IV chemotherapy or immunotherapy used the DigiBioMarC app, and their caregivers used the TOGETHERCare app, for approximately one month to report weekly on the patients' symptoms and wellbeing. Using app timestamp metadata, we assessed user adherence, overall and by participant characteristics. Fifty patient-caregiver dyads completed the study. Within the one-month study period, both adult cancer patients and their informal caregivers were highly adherent, with app activity completion at 86% for cancer patients and 84% for caregivers. Caregivers completed 86% of symptom reports, while cancer patients completed 89% of symptom reports. Cancer patients and their caregivers completed most activities within 48 h of availability on the app. These results suggest that the DigiBioMarC and TOGETHERCare apps can be used to collect patient- and caregiver-reported outcomes data during intensive treatment. From our research, we conclude that metadata from mobile apps can be used to inform clinical teams about study participants' engagement and wellbeing outside the clinical setting.

Correction: Correlation Between Remote Symptom Reporting by Caregivers and Adverse Clinical Outcomes: Mixed Methods Study.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.2196/49100.].

Correlation Between Remote Symptom Reporting by Caregivers and Adverse Clinical Outcomes: Mixed Methods Study.

BACKGROUND: Timely collection of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) decreases emergency department visits and hospitalizations and increases survival. However, little is known about the outcome predictivity of unpaid informal caregivers' reporting using similar clinical outcome assessments. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to assess whether caregivers and adults with cancer adhered to a planned schedule for electronically collecting patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and if PROs were associated with future clinical events. METHODS: We developed 2 iPhone apps to collect PROs, one for patients with cancer and another for caregivers. We enrolled 52 patient-caregiver dyads from Kaiser Permanente Northern California in a nonrandomized study. Participants used the apps independently for 4 weeks. Specific clinical events were obtained from the patients' electronic health records up to 6 months following the study. We used logistic and quasi-Poisson regression analyses to test associations between PROs and clinical events. RESULTS: Participants completed 97% (251/260) of the planned Patient-Reported Outcomes Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE) surveys and 98% (254/260) of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) surveys. PRO-CTCAE surveys completed by caregivers were associated with patients' hospitalizations or emergency department visits, grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events, dose reductions (P<.05), and hospice referrals (P=.03). PROMIS surveys completed by caregivers were associated with hospice referrals (P=.02). PRO-CTCAE surveys completed by patients were not associated with any clinical events, but their baseline PROMIS surveys were associated with mortality (P=.03), while their antecedent or final PROMIS surveys were associated with all clinical events examined except for total days of treatment breaks. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, caregivers and patients completed PROs using smartphone apps as requested. The association of caregiver PRO-CTCAE surveys with patient clinical events suggests that this is a feasible approach to reducing patient burden in clinical trial data collection and may help provide early information about increasing symptom severity.

Usability evaluation of mobile phone technologies for capturing cancer patient-reported outcomes and physical functions.

Background: By eliminating the requirement for participants to make frequent visits to research sites, mobile phone applications ("apps") may help to decentralize clinical trials. Apps may also be an effective mechanism for capturing patient-reported outcomes and other endpoints, helping to optimize patient care during and outside of clinical trials. Objectives: We report on the usability of Digital BioMarkers for Clinical Impact (DigiBioMarC™ (DBM)), a novel smartphone-based app used by cancer patients in conjunction with a wearable device (Apple Watch®). DBM is designed to collect patient-reported outcomes and record physical functions. Methods: In a fully decentralized "bring-your-own-device" smartphone study, we enrolled 54 cancer patient and caregiver dyads from Kaiser Permanente Northern California (KPNC) from October 2020 through March 2021. Patients used the app for at least 28 days, completed weekly questionnaires about their symptoms, physical functions, and mood, and performed timed physical tasks. Usability was determined through a subset of the Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS), the full System Usability Scale (SUS), the Net Promoter Score (NPS), and semi-structured interviews. Results: We obtained usability survey data from 50 of 54 patients. Median responses to the selected MARS questions and the mean SUS scores indicated above average usability. The NPS from the semi-structured interviews at the end of the study was 24, indicating a favorable score. Conclusions: Cancer patients reported above average usability for the DBM app. Qualitative analyses indicated that the app was easy to use and helpful. Future work will emphasize implementing further patient recommendations and evaluating the app's clinical efficacy in multiple settings.

A novel smartphone application for the informal caregivers of cancer patients: Usability study.

Informal caregivers are a critical source of support for cancer patients. However, their perspectives are not routinely collected, despite health impacts related to the burden of caregiving. We created the TOGETHERCare smartphone application (app) to collect observer-reported outcomes regarding the cancer patient's health and caregiver's perceptions of their own mental and physical health, and to provide tips and resources for self-care and patient care. We enrolled 54 caregivers between October 2020 and March 2021 from Kaiser Permanente Northern California (KPNC), an integrated healthcare system. Fifty caregivers used the app for approximately 28 days. Usability and acceptability were assessed using questions from the Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS), the System Usability Scale (SUS), the Net Promoter Score (NPS), and semi-structured interviews. The caregivers' mean age was 54.4 years, 38% were female and 36% were non-White. The SUS total mean score was 83.4 (SD = 14.2), for a percentile rank of 90-95 ("excellent"). Median MARS responses to the functionality questions were also high. The NPS score of 30 at the end of the study indicated that most caregivers would recommend the app. Themes from semi-structured interviews were consistent across the study period and indicated that the app was easy to use and helpful. Caregivers indicated a need for feedback from the app, suggested some changes to the wording of questions, the app's visuals, and timing of notifications. This study demonstrated that caregivers are willing to complete frequent surveys about themselves and their patients. The app is unique because it provides a remote method to collect caregivers' observations about the patient that may be useful for clinical care. To our knowledge, TOGETHERCare is the first mobile app developed specifically to capture adult cancer patient symptoms from the informal caregiver's perspective. Future research will examine whether use of this app can help improve patient outcomes.

Overcoming barriers to cancer clinical trial accrual: impact of a mass media campaign.

BACKGROUND: Annually, only 3% of adult patients participate in cancer clinical trials (CCT). Accrual barriers include lack of CCT awareness and uncertain third-party coverage. In 2002, a California law (SB37) required all insurers to reimburse costs related to CCT. The objective of the current study was to increase awareness of CCT and SB37 through a mass multimedia campaign (MMC) in the University of California (UC) Davis (UCD) Cancer Center catchment area. The authors assessed willingness to participate in and accrual to CCT. METHODS: Changes in CCT/SB37 awareness and willingness to participate were investigated before the MMC versus after the MMC and in UCD respondents versus UC San Diego (UCSD) catchment respondents-a control group that was not exposed to the MMC-by Pearson chi-square and logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: Of 1081 post-MMC respondents, 957 were from UCD, and 124 from UCSD. UCD respondents had a greater awareness of CCT (59% vs 65%; P < .01) and SB37 (17% vs 32%; P < .01) compared with UCSD respondents. Willingness to participate did not change in either cohort. Awareness level predicted willingness (odds ratio, 2.3; P < .01). Blacks, Asians, and lowest income (<$25 K per year) groups were the least willing to participate (P < .01, P < .04, and P < .02, respectively). The CCT accrual rate at UCD was unchanged. CONCLUSIONS: CCT and SB37 awareness increased significantly in the UCD cohort after the MMC. However, it was unclear whether this increase was attributable entirely to the MMC or to varying demographic variables. Enhancing patient willingness and accrual will require targeting other variables, such as physician or resource barriers, rather than just CCT and reimbursement awareness.

Information-seeking behavior of minority breast cancer patients: an exploratory study.

Few population-based studies have been conducted with minority breast cancer patients in the United States to understand their information-seeking behaviors. We examined the resources minority breast cancer patients used and the extent to which the Internet was being utilized by Hispanic and African American breast cancer patients. A random sample of 388 Hispanic and African American breast cancer female patients was obtained from the Sacramento Cancer Surveillance Program in California. Various survey and data collection tools were researched and adapted to create the 44-item questionnaire. Subjects were asked to participate in a telephone interview. Of the 388 cases, 74% (n = 287) consented to participate in our study. Sixty-three percent (n = 181) received cancer-related information at the time of their diagnosis; 58% reported that a health care professional provided them with this information. Only 17% of study respondents had ever used the Internet. The top 3 sources for cancer information were books, brochures, and pamphlets (98%); doctor or other health professionals (97%); and spouse or partner, family members, friends, or all of these (62%). None of the respondents indicated accessing the National Cancer Institute's cancer.gov website. Minority breast cancer patients were using the Internet for cancer-related information at a very low rate.

The efficacy of tailored print materials in promoting colorectal cancer screening: results from a randomized trial involving callers to the National Cancer Institute's Cancer Information Service.

In this large randomized trial among callers to the Cancer Information Service (CIS), tailored print materials were tested for efficacy in promoting colorectal cancer (CRC) screening (fecal occult blood test [FOBT], flexible sigmoidoscopy, or colonoscopy). All participants completed baseline interviews at the end of their usual service calls to the CIS, as well as short-term (6-month) and longer-term (14-month) telephone follow-up interviews. The study sample (n = 4,014) was restricted to English-speaking CIS callers 50 + years of age, who would be eligible for CRC screening at 14 months follow-up and did not call the CIS about CRC or CRC screening. Four experimental conditions were compared: a single untailored (SU) mailout of print material (the control condition); a single tailored (ST) mailout of print material; four (multiple) tailored (MT) mailouts of print materials spanning 12 months, all of which were tailored to information obtained at baseline; and four (multiple) retailored (MRT) mailouts also spanning 12 months, with retailoring of the print materials (mailouts 2, 3, and 4) based on updated information obtained from the 6-month follow-up interviews. Consistent with the main hypothesis of this trial, a significant linear trend across the SU, ST, MT, and MRT groups was found at 14 months (42%, 44%, 51%, and 48%, respectively, p = 0.05). Only for MT was there a significant difference compared with SU (p = 0.03) for the sample as a whole, while no differences were found for MT vs. MRT at 14 months. Significant moderator effects in the predicted direction were found among females, younger participants, and among those with a history of CRC screening, all of which involved the SU vs. MT MRT comparisons. Only among younger participants (ages 50-59) was there a difference between SU vs. ST at 14 months. Given these results, we conclude from this trial the following: (1) the MRT intervention failed to show added benefit beyond the MT intervention, (2) the significant intervention effects involving the MT and MRT conditions can be explained by tailoring and/or the longitudinal nature of both interventions, and (3) the most compelling evidence in support of tailoring was found for the ST condition among younger participants, where a significant need for interventions exists at the national level. Directions for future research are discussed in light of the results summarized above.

A case study in dissemination: lessons learned from a pilot study involving the National Cancer Institute's Cancer Information Service.

The Cancer Information Service Research Consortium (CISRC) was funded by the National Cancer Institute to disseminate as a pilot study a longitudinally tailored print intervention to promote the 5 A Day for Better Health program among callers to the National Cancer Institute's Cancer Information Service (CIS). Using a one-group (intervention-only) study design, 1,022 eligible CIS callers were enrolled to receive the intervention consisting of four mailings of tailored print materials over a 3-month period. Program evaluation focused on process and implementation evaluation, including adherence to the baseline interviews by CIS information specialists based on live-call monitoring (n = 55 eligible callers), and the timeliness of the intervention mailouts (4,088 scheduled mailouts). Adherence to the baseline interviews by CIS information specialists was extremely high, exceeding 90% for all indicators of quality control. Of the 4,088 intervention mailings, 75% occurred on or before the target date, while 95% occurred within 21 days of the target date. All delays in the scheduled mailouts occurred in the first mailing, due to changes made in the production process (batch printing of all tailored print materials at baseline). This change required additional system upgrades and more intensive and time-consuming quality control than originally anticipated, which was exacerbated by the faster-than-expected accrual of eligible participants. Based on this pilot study, the CIS is now positioned for widespread dissemination of the 5 A Day tailored print intervention. Several key lessons learned are also identified to facilitate the transition from research to dissemination.