ArticleCancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.)2026
Case Series: Can Daily Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Be Implemented for Cancer-Related Fatigue?
Article in Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCancer-related fatigue (CrF), a prevalent and debilitating symptom among cancer patients, remains underrecognized and unstandardized in routine oncology care. To address this, we introduced a new digital tool for daily CrF measurement and integration in routine cancer treatment. CASE: This case series investigates the use of the ePROtect app for daily CrF assessment in two pediatric acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) patients. Data were collected up to 2 weeks after the end of intensive therapy (before the start of maintenance) and analyzed using two questions informed by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN), each offering five possible responses and categorizing fatigue into different subclasses. This analysis compares two 3-year-old girls with pre-B ALL, one with standard risk (SR) and favorable genetics, the other one with poor therapy response and stratified to high risk (HR) treatment. The SR patient responded well to treatment, experiencing severe CrF on only 6% of the treatment days. In contrast, the HR patient required intensified treatment with multiple re-induction phases, resulting in more frequent hospitalizations and severe CrF on 19.4% of the treatment days. CrF assessments were conducted daily for both patients, achieving 98.6% and 69.5% completion rates throughout intensive therapy, for the SR and HR patient, respectively.
conclusionThis case series illustrates the feasibility and potential suitability of our tool using PROMs for CrF assessment. Furthermore, it highlights the correlation between treatment intensity, complications, and CrF levels, underlying the importance of systematically measuring fatigue in cancer patients. Such measurement may inform future efforts to develop and refine individualized supportive care strategies.
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.