Evaluating a Digital Tool for Supporting People Affected by Breast Cancer: a Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial-the ADAPT Study

Overview

Journal Support Care Cancer

Specialties Critical Care
Oncology

Date 2024 Oct 21

PMID 39432189

Authors

Noelle J M C Vrancken Peeters

Olga Husson

Rafal Kulakowski

Emma Hainsworth

Emma Lidington

Sophie E McGrath

Jillian Noble

Leyla Azarang

Susanne Cruickshank

Sofia Georgopoulou

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Purpose: This study reports the findings from the ADAPT randomized controlled trial (RCT), concerning the impact of a digital tool for supported self-management in people affected by breast cancer on patient activation as the primary outcome, with health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and health status as secondary outcomes.

Methods: Women with early-stage breast cancer were randomly assigned to standard care (control) or standard care in addition to the breast cancer digital tool (intervention). Data were collected using a demographic questionnaire, the Patient Activation Measure (PAM-13), the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Core Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30), and the EuroQol 5-Dimension 5-Level questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L) at baseline, 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year from diagnosis. Linear mixed effect model regression was used to assess the effect of the digital tool over the first year from diagnosis while correcting for intra-participant correlation.

Results: A total of 166 participants were included, with 85 being randomized into the intervention. No significant differences (p > 0.05) in the PAM-13 scores, EORTC QLQ-C30 scales (global QoL, physical functioning, emotional functioning, pain, fatigue), and EQ-5D-5L Index between the control and intervention groups were observed. It is important to note that there was significant non-adherence within the intervention group.

Conclusion: The breast cancer digital tool had no statistically significant impact on patient activation, HRQoL, and health status over time compared to standard care alone in women with early-stage breast cancer. Future research should focus on identifying and addressing barriers to digital tool engagement to improve efficacy. Clinical trial information The study was registered at https://clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03866655) on 7 March 2019 ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT03866655 ).

References

Cruickshank S, Barber M . Breast cancer follow-up after a primary diagnosis: A confused picture. Breast. 2019; 46:97-100. DOI: 10.1016/j.breast.2019.05.010. View

Lidington E, McGrath S, Noble J, Stanway S, Lucas A, Mohammed K . Evaluating a digital tool for supporting breast cancer patients: a randomized controlled trial protocol (ADAPT). Trials. 2020; 21(1):86. PMC: 6961395. DOI: 10.1186/s13063-019-3971-6. View

Devlin N, Shah K, Feng Y, Mulhern B, van Hout B . Valuing health-related quality of life: An EQ-5D-5L value set for England. Health Econ. 2017; 27(1):7-22. PMC: 6680214. DOI: 10.1002/hec.3564. View

Mustafa A, Ali N, Dhillon J, Alkawsi G, Baashar Y . User Engagement and Abandonment of mHealth: A Cross-Sectional Survey. Healthcare (Basel). 2022; 10(2). PMC: 8872344. DOI: 10.3390/healthcare10020221. View

Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel R, Laversanne M, Soerjomataram I, Jemal A . Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2021; 71(3):209-249. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21660. View

Aaronson N, Ahmedzai S, Bergman B, Bullinger M, Cull A, Duez N . The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30: a quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1993; 85(5):365-76. DOI: 10.1093/jnci/85.5.365. View

Browall M, Forsberg C, Wengstrom Y . Assessing patient outcomes and cost-effectiveness of nurse-led follow-up for women with breast cancer - have relevant and sensitive evaluation measures been used?. J Clin Nurs. 2016; 26(13-14):1770-1786. DOI: 10.1111/jocn.13496. View

Hibbard J, Mahoney E, Stockard J, Tusler M . Development and testing of a short form of the patient activation measure. Health Serv Res. 2005; 40(6 Pt 1):1918-30. PMC: 1361231. DOI: 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2005.00438.x. View

van de Poll-Franse L, Horevoorts N, van Eenbergen M, Denollet J, Roukema J, Aaronson N . The Patient Reported Outcomes Following Initial treatment and Long term Evaluation of Survivorship registry: scope, rationale and design of an infrastructure for the study of physical and psychosocial outcomes in cancer survivorship cohorts. Eur J Cancer. 2011; 47(14):2188-94. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2011.04.034. View

10.

Cruz F, Vilela R, Ferreira E, Melo N, Reis P . Evidence on the Use of Mobile Apps During the Treatment of Breast Cancer: Systematic Review. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2019; 7(8):e13245. PMC: 6734853. DOI: 10.2196/13245. View

11.

Mumtaz H, Riaz M, Wajid H, Saqib M, Zeeshan M, Khan S . Current challenges and potential solutions to the use of digital health technologies in evidence generation: a narrative review. Front Digit Health. 2023; 5:1203945. PMC: 10568450. DOI: 10.3389/fdgth.2023.1203945. View

12.

Armbruster C, Knaub M, Farin-Glattacker E, von der Warth R . Predictors of Adherence to Cancer-Related mHealth Apps in Cancer Patients Undergoing Oncological or Follow-Up Treatment-A Scoping Review. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022; 19(20). PMC: 9603736. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph192013689. View

13.

Eysenbach G . CONSORT-EHEALTH: improving and standardizing evaluation reports of Web-based and mobile health interventions. J Med Internet Res. 2012; 13(4):e126. PMC: 3278112. DOI: 10.2196/jmir.1923. View

14.

Senbekov M, Saliev T, Bukeyeva Z, Almabayeva A, Zhanaliyeva M, Aitenova N . The Recent Progress and Applications of Digital Technologies in Healthcare: A Review. Int J Telemed Appl. 2020; 2020:8830200. PMC: 7732404. DOI: 10.1155/2020/8830200. View

15.

Rincon E, Monteiro-Guerra F, Rivera-Romero O, Dorronzoro-Zubiete E, Sanchez-Bocanegra C, Gabarron E . Mobile Phone Apps for Quality of Life and Well-Being Assessment in Breast and Prostate Cancer Patients: Systematic Review. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2017; 5(12):e187. PMC: 5735250. DOI: 10.2196/mhealth.8741. View

16.

Ren L, Chen M, Jiang H, Wang Y, Xia L, Dong C . Perceptions of adult patients with cancer towards telemedicine: A qualitative meta-synthesis. Asia Pac J Oncol Nurs. 2024; 11(2):100360. PMC: 10825605. DOI: 10.1016/j.apjon.2023.100360. View

17.

Corbett T, Lee K, Cummings A, Calman L, Farrington N, Lewis L . Self-management by older people living with cancer and multi-morbidity: a qualitative study. Support Care Cancer. 2022; 30(6):4823-4833. PMC: 8831683. DOI: 10.1007/s00520-022-06892-z. View

18.

Cai T, Huang Y, Zhang Y, Lu Z, Huang Q, Yuan C . Mobile health applications for the care of patients with breast cancer: A scoping review. Int J Nurs Sci. 2021; 8(4):470-476. PMC: 8488816. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijnss.2021.07.003. View

19.

Foster C, Breckons M, Cotterell P, Barbosa D, Calman L, Corner J . Cancer survivors' self-efficacy to self-manage in the year following primary treatment. J Cancer Surviv. 2014; 9(1):11-9. PMC: 4341005. DOI: 10.1007/s11764-014-0384-0. View

20.

Uhm K, Yoo J, Chung S, Lee J, Lee I, Kim J . Effects of exercise intervention in breast cancer patients: is mobile health (mHealth) with pedometer more effective than conventional program using brochure?. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2016; 161(3):443-452. DOI: 10.1007/s10549-016-4065-8. View