ArticleInternational journal of clinical oncology2026
Effectiveness of electronic patient-reported outcomes in patients with cancer undergoing immunotherapy: a real-world retrospective study.
Article in International journal of clinical oncology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundImmune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are essential in advanced cancer treatments; however, they can cause severe immune-related adverse events (irAEs). Herein, we aimed to investigate the effectiveness of electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePROs) in monitoring the symptoms of patients with advanced cancer undergoing ICI therapy.
methodsWe retrospectively reviewed the medical records of patients with advanced cancer who received ICIs at the Komatsu Municipal Hospital between June 2019 and March 2024 following ePROs introduction.
resultsOverall, 168 patients were included, with 43 and 125 in the ePRO and conventional care groups, respectively. The incidence of grade ≥ 3 irAEs was significantly lower in the ePRO than the conventional care group (7% vs. 21%; P = 0.039). Multivariate analysis showed that ePROs use was significantly associated with fewer emergency visits (odds ratio [OR]: 0.22, P < 0.001) and hospitalizations (OR: 0.36, P = 0.027). Patients in the ePRO group demonstrated significantly longer progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) than did those in the conventional care group (median PFS: 10.8 vs. 4.8 months, hazard ratio [HR]: 0.50, P = 0.003; median OS: not reached vs. 17.0 months, HR: 0.40, P = 0.010). These survival benefits remained statistically significant after propensity score matching (n = 37 per group; PFS: HR 0.48, P = 0.009; OS: HR 0.37, P = 0.013).
conclusionImplementation of ePROs was associated with clinical benefits in patients with advanced cancer receiving ICI therapy. ePRO-based symptom monitoring may contribute to safer and more effective immunotherapy in real-world oncology practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.