Trial reportSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2025
A mobile supportive care app for patients with metastatic lung cancer: the Lung Cancer App (LuCApp) randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03512015 (A Mobile Supportive Care App for Patients With Metastatic Lung Cancer), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
A Mobile Supportive Care App for Patients With Metastatic Lung Cancer: a Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial - The Lung Cancer App (LuCApp) Study
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The Current Landscape of Remote Digital Symptom Monitoring for Patients With Lung Cancer: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMobile apps to support the delivery of cancer care are proliferating, often without adequate evidence. Lung Cancer App (LuCApp) is a mobile app developed by researchers, clinicians, and patients to promote real-time monitoring and management of symptoms in patients with lung cancer. We aimed to investigate the effect of LuCApp on health-related quality of life (HRQoL), anxiety and depression, and overall survival up to 24 weeks after pharmacological treatment start, as well as its impact on resource use.
methodsWe recruited adult patients diagnosed with non-resectable lung cancer and eligible for pharmaceutical treatments for a multicenter, randomized, non-blinded, controlled parallel-group trial across four hospitals in Italy. Patients were randomly allocated 1:1 to receive either standard care or LuCApp in addition to standard care. In the LuCApp arm, patients could grade a list of symptoms, triggering alerts to the physicians in case predefined severity thresholds were met. Patients completed a baseline assessment and a set of validated patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) up to 24 weeks after the beginning of the intervention. The primary outcome was the change in the HRQoL score in the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (Lung) questionnaire in the intention-to-treat population from baseline to 12 weeks.
findingsBetween July 2018 and February 2022, 100 adult patients were enrolled (48 in the intervention arm, and 52 in the control group), before the trial was terminated due to pandemic-related challenges with recruitment. The average score (± SD) of the composite primary endpoint HRQoL changed from 56.3 ± 14.8 and 54.9 ± 12.0 at baseline in LuCApp and control arm respectively, to 55.0 ± 15.9 and 55.9 ± 12.1 at 12 weeks, with no significant between-group difference in the change (- 1.68, 95% CI: - 6.90 to 3.54). The average score of the two groups at 24 weeks was 57.3 ± 14.5 and 54.8 ± 11.9 (mean change difference: - 1.57, 95% CI: - 6.66 to 3.52). Mean difference analysis and multivariable mixed models of the HADS-anxiety score indicated improvement in favor of LuCApp, with higher scores by 1.35 (- 0.25 to 2.94) and 1.52 (- 0.14 to 3.19) at 12 and 24 weeks respectively. There was no significant difference in HADS-Depression and EQ-5D-5L scores between groups at both time points. By the end of the follow-up, 5 and 12 deaths were observed in the LuCApp and standard care group, respectively. The use of resources and related costs were lower among LuCApp patients (€2900 vs €3720), although the difference was not statistically significant (p value = 0.138).
interpretationIn the Italian context, LuCApp for remote symptom monitoring did not demonstrate improved HRQoL in advanced lung cancer patients compared to standard care.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT03512015, 15 May 2018.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40586961What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.