Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32519044›Full record

ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2021

AMTRA: a multicentered experience of a web-based monitoring and tailored toxicity management system for cancer patients.

Marika Rasschaert, Christof Vulsteke, Sven De Keersmaeker, Kathleen Vandenborne, Stefanie Dias, Vincent Verschaeve, Peter Vuylsteke, Ilse Van Brussel, Jo Ravelingien, Peter Van Dam and 2 more

Abstract readMulticenter Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
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

12 authors.

Marika RasschaertDepartment of Oncology, Multidisciplinary Oncological Center Antwerp, MOCA, University Hospital Antwerp, Wilrijkstraat 10, 2650, Edegem, Belgium. marika.rasschaert@uza.be.
Christof VulstekeDepartment of Medical Oncology, AZ Maria Middelares, Ghent, Belgium.
Sven De KeersmaekerDepartment of Oncology, Multidisciplinary Oncological Center Antwerp, MOCA, University Hospital Antwerp, Wilrijkstraat 10, 2650, Edegem, Belgium.
Kathleen VandenborneDepartment of Oncology, Multidisciplinary Oncological Center Antwerp, MOCA, University Hospital Antwerp, Wilrijkstraat 10, 2650, Edegem, Belgium.
Stefanie DiasDepartment of Medical Oncology, AZ Maria Middelares, Ghent, Belgium.
Vincent VerschaeveDepartment of Oncology and Hematology, Grand Hôpital de Charleroi (GHDC)-site Notre Dame, Charleroi, Belgium.
Peter VuylstekeMedical Oncology, CHU UCL, UCLouvain Site St-Elisabeth's Hospital, Namur, Belgium.
Ilse Van BrusselRemedus Bvba, Aartselaar, Belgium.
Jo RavelingienRemedus Bvba, Aartselaar, Belgium.
Peter Van DamUnit of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, University Hospital Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium.
Eva SegelovDepartment of Oncology, Monash Health and Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Marc PeetersDepartment of Oncology, Multidisciplinary Oncological Center Antwerp, MOCA, University Hospital Antwerp, Wilrijkstraat 10, 2650, Edegem, Belgium.

Funding

Belgian Federal Goverment (BE) ehealt initiative
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTechnology-based interventions are increasingly being introduced in routine clinical cancer care. There is a need for reliable systems to monitor treatment-related toxicity in a standardized manner. Such electronic tools bridge the gap in providing quality home-based monitoring.

methodsFrom July 2017 to December 2017, we performed a multicentered, non-randomized prospective cohort analysis with patients who were receiving routine chemotherapy for various solid tumors, using a web-based patient-reported toxicity registration, management, and intervention system called AMTRA (ambulatory Monitoring of cancer Therapy using an interactive Application) linked to the homecare nursing organization Remedus®. Twelve common toxicities plus pain and two biometrics could be registered daily or more frequently as required. These were processed centrally to generate tailored advice for lesser symptoms or a phone call from a dedicated nurse in case of severe or prolonged toxicity. A compliance tool to monitor oral therapies was incorporated in the system.

resultsOne hundred sixty-eight patients (92%) were enrolled, with 31,514 registrations analyzed. One hundred eight patients reported severe toxicity (> 1461 registrations), resulting in 102 clinical interventions ranging from self-management advice, supplemental consultations to hospitalizations. Compliance to oral chemotherapy was high using AMTRA with a median of 98.7% (95 confidence interval (CI) [93.5-100.0%]). Seventy-nine percent of patients stated that the availability of AMTRA self-reports was useful in communication with the care provider, while 75% felt more in control while managing their treatment.

conclusionsThe application of an interactive PRO-system in routine symptom management of cancer patients allowed standardized documentation of toxicities and recorded a high compliance with oral treatment. It allows for rapid interaction for toxicities and cancer-related symptoms experienced at home.

Indexed as

InternetPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresAdultCohort StudiesDrug MonitoringHumansMaleMedication Therapy ManagementMiddle AgedMonitoring, AmbulatoryNeoplasmsProspective StudiesSelf-ManagementSelf ReportCancerPatient-reported outcome (PRO)Toxicity self-assessmentToxicity self-managementTransmural care

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.