Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40607376›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in immunology2025

Using technology for patient-centered care at home after CAR T-cell therapy or stem cell transplant: a prospective feasibility study.

Susan L Moore, Glen J Peterson, Sarah R Montoya, Bellinda K Conte, Rachel K Brahler, Carolyn Hutchison, Katherine L Hoople, Clayton A Smith

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in immunology, 2025. 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
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

8 authors.

Susan L Moore *Division of General Internal Medicine, University of Colorado School of Medicine, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO, United States.
Glen J Peterson *Division of Hematology, University of Colorado School of Medicine, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO, United States.
Sarah R MontoyaOffice for the Vice Chancellor of Research, Clinical Research Support Team, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO, United States.
Bellinda K ConteReimagine Care, Inc., Nashville, TN, United States.
Rachel K BrahlerReimagine Care, Inc., Nashville, TN, United States.
Carolyn HutchisonCU Innovations, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO, United States.
Katherine L HooplemHealth Impact Lab, Department of Community and Behavioral Health, Colorado School of Public Health, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO, United States.
Clayton A SmithDivision of Hematology, University of Colorado School of Medicine, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Febrile neutropenia, neurotoxicity, and cytokine release syndrome are dangerous and damaging side effects seen in more than half of patients with cancer who receive critical chemotherapies or immunotherapies respectively. Early intervention and care can reduce complications, but timely treatment in the outpatient setting is often delayed due to dependency on interval-based, patient-driven self-assessments. Using digital health technologies (DHT) to monitor patients remotely can improve time-to-intervention and health outcomes. Providing follow-up treatment and essential support to patients at home can further reduce patients' and caregivers' burden and improve patient satisfaction. Methods: This pilot feasibility study examined the results of a patient-centered program for technology-assisted remote patient monitoring and symptom reporting for patients undergoing autologous or allogeneic stem cell transplant (SCT) or CAR T-cell therapy. Technical and operational feasibility and user experience were assessed for patients, caregivers, and providers. Ten patients between 30 and 80 years old participated in the study for up to 30 days after CAR T-cell therapy or autologous SCT or up to 90 days after allogeneic SCT. Patients wore biometric sensors around the clock to monitor vital signs and engaged with a chatbot through bidirectional SMS text messages for symptom reporting and regular health check-ins. Virtual care center personnel monitored patient status and followed up with patients or their care providers as needed. Patients, caregivers, and providers completed surveys about their program experience; patients also completed brief interviews. Results: Nine of 10 patients engaged with DHT based monitoring as intended. A total of 219 alerts were generated, 171 from wearables and 48 from the chatbot and check-ins. Fifty-seven alerts required follow-up with patients, 26 required care team follow-up, and 10 required patients to be seen in a clinical setting. Users found the program acceptable overall, with patients and caregivers reporting perceptions of being more cared for and providers feeling that it improved quality of care. Suggestions received included a desire for more information and improved communication and alerting processes. Discussion: Overall, DHT-based remote patient monitoring was feasible for use with patients receiving SCT and CAR T-cell therapy. Effective practice integration requires adaptation to clinical workflows. Further evaluation of patient acceptance over time and effectiveness at improving health outcomes is recommended.

Indexed as

Immunotherapy, AdoptivePatient-Centered CareStem Cell TransplantationAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFeasibility StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPilot ProjectsProspective Studiesbone marrow transplantCAR T-cell therapydigital healthpatient-centered careremote patient monitoringstem cell transplant

Identifiers

PMID40607376
PMCPMC12213405

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.