Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32042437›Full record

ArticlePilot and feasibility studies2020

Development and proof-of-concept of a multicenter, patient-centered cancer registry for breast cancer patients with metastatic disease-the "Breast cancer care for patients with metastatic disease" (BRE-4-MED) registry.

Stephanie Stangl, Kirsten Haas, Felizitas A Eichner, Anna Grau, Udo Selig, Timo Ludwig, Tanja Fehm, Tanja Stüber, Asarnusch Rashid, Alexander Kerscher and 11 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pilot and feasibility studies, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 40% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

21 authors at 9 institutions in 1 country.

Stephanie Stangl1Institute of Clinical Epidemiology and Biometry (ICE-B), University of Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany.
Kirsten Haas1Institute of Clinical Epidemiology and Biometry (ICE-B), University of Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany.
Felizitas A Eichner1Institute of Clinical Epidemiology and Biometry (ICE-B), University of Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany.
Anna Grau1Institute of Clinical Epidemiology and Biometry (ICE-B), University of Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany.
Udo Selig1Institute of Clinical Epidemiology and Biometry (ICE-B), University of Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany.
Timo Ludwig1Institute of Clinical Epidemiology and Biometry (ICE-B), University of Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany.
Tanja Fehm3Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Heinrich-Heine-University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Tanja Stüber2Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany.
Asarnusch RashidZentrum für Telemedizin Bad Kissingen (ZTM), Bad Kissingen, Germany.
Alexander Kerscher5Comprehensive Cancer Center Mainfranken, University Hospital Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany.
Ralf Bargou5Comprehensive Cancer Center Mainfranken, University Hospital Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany.
Silke Hermann7Epidemiological Cancer Registry Baden-Württemberg, German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany.
Volker Arndt7Epidemiological Cancer Registry Baden-Württemberg, German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany.
Martin Meyer8Centre of Early Cancer Detection and Cancer Registration, Bavarian Health and Food Safety Authority, Nürnberg, Germany.
Manfred Wildner9Bavarian Health and Food Safety Authority, Munich, Germany.
Hermann Faller5Comprehensive Cancer Center Mainfranken, University Hospital Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany.
Michael G SchrauderClinic of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Hospital Aschaffenburg-Alzenau, Aschaffenburg, Germany.
Michael WeigelClinic for Gynecology and Obstetrics, Hospital Leopoldina Schweinfurt, Schweinfurt, Germany.
Ulrich SchlembachClinic of Gynecology, Caritas Hospital Bad Mergentheim, Bad Mergentheim, Germany.
Peter U Heuschmann1Institute of Clinical Epidemiology and Biometry (ICE-B), University of Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany.
Achim Wöckel2Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany.
University of Würzburg · DEComprehensive Cancer Center Mainfranken · DEUniversitätsklinikum Würzburg · DEGerman Cancer Research Center · DECaritas-Krankenhaus Bad Mergentheim · DEHeinrich Heine University Düsseldorf · DEKlinikum Aschaffenburg · DELaboklin (Germany) · DELeopoldina Krankenhaus Schweinfurt · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) are treated with a palliative approach with focus on controlling for disease symptoms and maintaining high quality of life. Information on individual needs of patients and their relatives as well as on treatment patterns in clinical routine care for this specific patient group are lacking or are not routinely documented in established Cancer Registries. Thus, we developed a registry concept specifically adapted for these incurable patients comprising primary and secondary data as well as mobile-health (m-health) data.

methodsThe concept for patient-centered "Breast cancer care for patients with metastatic disease" (BRE-4-MED) registry was developed and piloted exemplarily in the region of Main-Franconia, a mainly rural region in Germany comprising about 1.3 M inhabitants. The registry concept includes data on diagnosis, therapy, progression, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), and needs of family members from several sources of information including routine data from established Cancer Registries in different federal states, treating physicians in hospital as well as in outpatient settings, patients with metastatic breast cancer and their family members. Linkage with routine cancer registry data was performed to collect secondary data on diagnosis, therapy, and progression. Paper and online-based questionnaires were used to assess PROMs. A dedicated mobile application software (APP) was developed to monitor needs, progression, and therapy change of individual patients. Patient's acceptance and feasibility of data collection in clinical routine was assessed within a proof-of-concept study.

resultsThe concept for the BRE-4-MED registry was developed and piloted between September 2017 and May 2018. In total

conclusionThe concept of the BRE-4-MED registry provides evidence that combinatorial evaluation of PROMs, needs of family members, and raising clinical parameters from primary and secondary data sources as well as m-health applications are feasible and accepted in an incurable cancer collective.

Indexed as

Health care service researchMetastatic breast cancerm-HealthPatient-centered registryPatient’s needs

Identifiers

PMID32042437
PMCPMC7001276
OpenAlexW3012949254

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.