Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37679735›Full record

ArticleBMC cancer2023

Towards patient-led follow-up after curative surgical resection of stage I, II and III colorectal cancer (DISTANCE-trial): a study protocol for a stepped-wedge cluster-randomised trial.

Hidde Swartjes, Seyed M Qaderi, Steven Teerenstra, Jose A E Custers, Marloes A G Elferink, Bob J van Wely, Jacobus W A Burger, Wilhelmina M U van Grevenstein, Peter van Duijvendijk, Emiel G G Verdaasdonk and 5 more

Open access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial Protocol
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC cancer, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

15 authors at 9 institutions in 1 country.

Hidde SwartjesDepartment of Surgery, Radboud university medical center, 6500, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Seyed M QaderiDepartment of Surgery, Radboud university medical center, 6500, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Steven TeerenstraDepartment for Health Evidence, Radboud university medical center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Jose A E CustersDepartment of Medical Psychology, Radboud university medical center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Marloes A G ElferinkDepartment of Research and Development, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organization, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Bob J van WelyDepartment of Surgery, Ziekenhuis Bernhoven, Uden, The Netherlands.
Jacobus W A BurgerDepartment of Surgery Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
Wilhelmina M U van GrevensteinDepartment of Surgical Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Peter van DuijvendijkDepartment of Surgery, Gelre Hospitals, Apeldoorn, The Netherlands.
Emiel G G VerdaasdonkDepartment of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, 's-Hertogenbosch, The Netherlands.
Marnix A J de RoosDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery and Surgical Oncology, Rijnstate Hospital, Arnhem, The Netherlands.
Veerle M H CoupéDepartment of Epidemiology and Data Science Amsterdam Public Health, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Geraldine R VinkDepartment of Medical Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Cornelis VerhoefDepartment of Surgical Oncology and Gastrointestinal Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Johannes H W de WiltDepartment of Surgery, Radboud university medical center, 6500, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. hans.dewilt@radboudumc.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6773-9668
Radboud University Nijmegen · NLUtrecht University · NLAmsterdam University Medical Centers · NLErasmus MC Cancer Institute · NLGelre Hospitals · NLJeroen Bosch Ziekenhuis · NLNetherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation · NLRijnstate Hospital · NLZiekenhuis Bernhoven · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundColorectal cancer (CRC) is among the most frequently diagnosed cancers. Approximately 20-30% of stage I-III CRC patients develop a recurrent tumour or metastases after curative surgical resection. Post-operative follow-up is indicated for the first five years after curative surgical resection. As intensified follow-up after curative surgical resection has shown no effect on survival, patient organisations and policy makers have advocated for a more patient-centred approach to follow-up. The objective of this study is to successfully implement patient-led, home-based follow-up (PHFU) in six hospitals in The Netherlands, with as ultimate aim to come to a recommendation for a patient-centred follow-up schedule for stage I-III CRC patients treated with surgical resection with curative intent.

methodsThis study is designed as a stepped-wedge cluster-randomised trial (SW-CRT) in six participating centres. During the trial, three centres will implement PHFU after six months; the other three centres will implement PHFU after 12 months of inclusion in the control group. Eligible patients are those with pT2-4N0M0 or pT1-4N1-2M0 CRC, who are 18 years or older and have been free of disease for 12 months after curative surgical resection. The studied intervention is PHFU, starting 12 months after curative resection. The in-hospital, standard-of-care follow-up currently implemented in the participating centres functions as the comparator. The proportion of patients who had contact with the hospital regarding CRC follow-up between 12-24 months after curative surgical resection is the primary endpoint of this study. Quality of life, fear of cancer recurrence, patient satisfaction, cost-effectiveness and survival are the secondary endpoints. DISCUSSION: The results of this study will provide evidence on whether nationwide implementation of PHFU for CRC in The Netherlands will be successful in reducing contact between patient and health care provider. Comparison of PROMs between in-hospital follow-up and PHFU will be provided. Moreover, the cost-effectiveness of PHFU will be assessed.

trial registrationDutch Trail Register (NTR): NL9266 (Registered on January 1st, 2021).

Indexed as

Colorectal NeoplasmsEthnicityFollow-Up StudiesHumansQuality of LifeRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAftercareColorectal neoplasmsFollow-up studiesSurveillanceTelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID37679735
PMCPMC10483744
OpenAlexW4386510520

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.