Advanced CancerNCT01241929
Using Videos in Advance Care Planning for Patients With Advanced Cancer
A study testing video decision aid in people with Advanced Cancer, run by Massachusetts General Hospital at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
To compare the decision making of subjects with advanced cancer having a verbal advance care planning discussion compared to subjects using a video. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 21 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Advanced Cancer
- What is being tested?
- video decision aid
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 150 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- Apr 2009to Apr 2012
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 21 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- diagnosis of cancer that falls under one of the following: A. All patients with brain cancer, inoperable hepatocellular/bile duct/gallbladder cancer, incurable non-small cell lung carcinoma (wet IIIb or IV), extensive stage small cell lung cancer, inoperable mesothelioma, inoperable pancreatic cancer or; metastatic gastric or esophageal cancer, metastatic melanoma, OR B. Patients with the following cancers, if first-line therapy has failed and limited response is expected to second-line therapy: breast cancer, colorectal cancer, head and neck cancer, leukemia, ovarian cancer, prostate cancer, renal cancer, sarcoma, lung cancer, myeloma, or lymphoma, OR C. Less than one year prognosis.
- ability to provide informed consent,
- cognitive ability to participate in the study
- ability to communicate in English.
Who cannot join
- inability to make decisions,
- non-English speaking,
- new patient visit
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United States1 site
Massachusetts General Hospital
Boston, Massachusetts, 02114
About this study
Official title: A Pilot Study of Using Video Images in Advance Care Planning in Patients With Advanced Cancer
To compare the decision making of subjects with advanced cancer having a verbal advance care planning discussion compared to subjects using a video.
Read the detailed description
A.1. Aim 1: To recruit 150 subjects with advanced cancer and randomly assign these subjects to one of two advance care planning (ACP) modalities: 1. a video visually depicting CPR (intervention) or 2. a verbal narrative describing the CPR.
Hypothesis 1: It is feasible to recruit and randomize 150 subjects with advanced cancer.
A.2. Aim 2: To compare the care preferences for CPR among 150 subjects randomized to video vs. verbal narrative intervention.
Hypothesis 2: Subjects randomized to the video intervention will be significantly more likely to opt NOT to have CPR compared to those randomized to the verbal narrative.
A.3. Aim 3: To compare knowledge assessment of CPR for 150 subjects randomized to video vs. verbal narrative intervention.
Hypothesis 3: When compared to subjects randomized to the verbal narrative arm, subjects in the video group will have higher knowledge assessment scores when asked questions regarding their understanding of CPR.
- Conditions
- Advanced Cancer
- Being tested
- video decision aid
- Keywords
- advanced cancer
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
video decision aidBehavioural
video of CPR
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| video decision aid | Experimental | Video decision aid arm Receives: Behavioral: video decision aid |
| Usual Care -- Verbal Description Arm | No intervention | Verbal description of CPR (i.e., without the video). |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
preferences for CPR
CPR preference after visit to oncologist
Measured: within one hour after oncology visit
Secondary outcomes (3)
knowledge of CPR
assess knowledge of CPR
Measured: baseline and post-intervention
stability of preferences
assess CPR preferences again
Measured: after 6-8 weeks
predictors of preferences
predictors of preferences for CPR
Measured: post-intervention
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted16 Nov 2010 (estimated)
- Study startApr 2009
- Primary completionJan 2012
- Study completionApr 2012
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Advanced CancerStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Massachusetts General HospitalThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Health services research
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 150 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Massachusetts General Hospital
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Angelo E. Volandes, MD, Massachusetts General Hospital
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01241929
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 2008P000826
- Status last verified
- Jul 2012
- First submitted
- 15 Nov 2010
- Last updated
- 10 Jul 2012
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
Publications
Volandes AE, Paasche-Orlow MK, Mitchell SL, El-Jawahri A, Davis AD, Barry MJ, Hartshorn KL, Jackson VA, Gillick MR, Walker-Corkery ES, Chang Y, Lopez L, Kemeny M, Bulone L, Mann E, Misra S, Peachey M, Abbo ED, Eichler AF, Epstein AS, Noy A, Levin TT, Temel JS. Randomized controlled trial of a video decision support tool for cardiopulmonary resuscitation decision making in advanced cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2013 Jan 20;31(3):380-6. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2012.43.9570. Epub 2012 Dec 10.
PubMed 23233708
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 10 Jul 2012. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- A Pilot Study of Using Video Images in Advance Care Planning in Patients With Advanced Cancer
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01241929
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 2008P000826
- Conditions
- Advanced Cancer
- Keywords
- advanced cancer
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 150 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Massachusetts General HospitalUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- Apr 2009
- Primary completion
- Jan 2012 (actual)
- Study completion
- Apr 2012 (actual)
- First posted
- 16 Nov 2010 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
To compare the decision making of subjects with advanced cancer having a verbal advance care planning discussion compared to subjects using a video.
Detailed description
A.1. Aim 1: To recruit 150 subjects with advanced cancer and randomly assign these subjects to one of two advance care planning (ACP) modalities: 1. a video visually depicting CPR (intervention) or 2. a verbal narrative describing the CPR.
Hypothesis 1: It is feasible to recruit and randomize 150 subjects with advanced cancer.
A.2. Aim 2: To compare the care preferences for CPR among 150 subjects randomized to video vs. verbal narrative intervention.
Hypothesis 2: Subjects randomized to the video intervention will be significantly more likely to opt NOT to have CPR compared to those randomized to the verbal narrative.
A.3. Aim 3: To compare knowledge assessment of CPR for 150 subjects randomized to video vs. verbal narrative intervention.
Hypothesis 3: When compared to subjects randomized to the verbal narrative arm, subjects in the video group will have higher knowledge assessment scores when asked questions regarding their understanding of CPR.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Health services research
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| video decision aid | Experimental | Behavioral: video decision aidVideo decision aid arm |
| Usual Care -- Verbal Description Arm | No intervention | –Verbal description of CPR (i.e., without the video). |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 21 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (4 listed)
- diagnosis of cancer that falls under one of the following: A. All patients with brain cancer, inoperable hepatocellular/bile duct/gallbladder cancer, incurable non-small cell lung carcinoma (wet IIIb or IV), extensive stage small cell lung cancer, inoperable mesothelioma, inoperable pancreatic cancer or; metastatic gastric or esophageal cancer, metastatic melanoma, OR B. Patients with the following cancers, if first-line therapy has failed and limited response is expected to second-line therapy: breast cancer, colorectal cancer, head and neck cancer, leukemia, ovarian cancer, prostate cancer, renal cancer, sarcoma, lung cancer, myeloma, or lymphoma, OR C. Less than one year prognosis.
- ability to provide informed consent,
- cognitive ability to participate in the study
- ability to communicate in English.
Key exclusion criteria (3 listed)
- inability to make decisions,
- non-English speaking,
- new patient visit
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| video decision aidvideo of CPR | Behavioural | video decision aid |
Primary outcome
preferences for CPR
Time frame: within one hour after oncology visit
CPR preference after visit to oncologist
3 secondary outcomes
knowledge of CPR
Time frame: baseline and post-intervention
stability of preferences
Time frame: after 6-8 weeks
predictors of preferences
Time frame: post-intervention
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 10 Jul 2012.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 23233708Volandes AE, Paasche-Orlow MK, Mitchell SL, El-Jawahri A, Davis AD, Barry MJ, Hartshorn KL, Jackson VA, Gillick MR, Walker-Corkery ES, Chang Y, Lopez L, Kemeny M, Bulone L, Mann E, Misra S, Peachey M, Abbo ED, Eichler AF, Epstein AS, Noy A, Levin TT, Temel JS. Randomized controlled trial of a video decision support tool for cardiopulmonary resuscitation decision making in advanced cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2013 Jan 20;31(3):380-6. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2012.43.9570. Epub 2012 Dec 10.
Related trials for Advanced Cancer
Enrolling by invitationPhase 2
A Single-Arm Study of Nimotuzumab Combined With NALIRIFOX as First-Line Treatment for Pancreatic Cancer
Pancreatic Cancer Metastatic
RecruitingPhase 1/2
Study of INBRX-106 and INBRX-106 in Combination With Pembrolizumab (Keytruda®) in Subjects With Locally Advanced or Metastatic Solid Tumors (Hexavalent OX40 Agonist)
Solid Tumor, Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer
Active, not recruitingPhase 3
A Study of Belzutifan (MK-6482) in Combination With Lenvatinib Versus Cabozantinib for Treatment of Renal Cell Carcinoma (MK-6482-011)
Carcinoma, Renal Cell
RecruitingPhase 3
A Study Evaluating Sotorasib Platinum Doublet Combination Versus Pembrolizumab Platinum Doublet Combination as a Front-Line Therapy in Participants With Stage IV or Advanced Stage IIIB/C Nonsquamous Non-Small Cell Lung Cancers (CodeBreaK 202)
Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC)
Active, not recruitingPhase 1
A Study to Assess Safety, Tolerability, and Pharmacokinetics of ABSK043 in Patients With Advanced Solid Tumor
Neoplasms
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing video decision aid in people with Advanced Cancer, run by Massachusetts General Hospital at 1 site in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 4 inclusion and 3 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 10 Jul 2012. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
preferences for CPR (time frame: within one hour after oncology visit). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT01241929, which also lists 1 linked publication.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 10 Jul 2012.