Adverse EffectsNCT03073031
The Use of PatientReportedOutcomes (PRO)- CTCAE by Melanoma Patients Receiving Immunotherapy
A study testing Tablet: Samsung Galaxy Tab A in people with Adverse Effects, run by Odense University Hospital at 1 site in Denmark.
Trial summary
This study evaluates if melanoma patients who report their side effects to immunotherapy weekly by the use of ePRO-CTCAE will experience an overall reduction of grade 3 and 4 events with 50% compared to routine monitoring carried out every 3 weeks. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Adverse Effects
- What is being tested?
- Tablet: Samsung Galaxy Tab A
- Type of treatment
- Pill or oral medicine, Medical device
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 146 participants
- Where
- 1 siteDenmark
- Study dates
- 10 Jan 2017to 1 Nov 2019
- 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 18 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Men and women ≥18 years of age
- who read and understand Danish,
- who have been diagnosed with malignant melanoma,
- who are about to be treated with immunotherapy for their disease (1st and 2nd line, mono-therapy and combination therapy).
- Moreover, patients must have signed and dated a written informed consent form in accordance with regulatory and institutional guidelines and 6) be willing and able to comply with the completion of PRO-CTCAE and other required questionnaires.
Who cannot join
- None
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: The Use of PRO-CTCAE by Patients Receiving Immunotherapy for the Treatment of Malignant Melanoma
This study evaluates if melanoma patients who report their side effects to immunotherapy weekly by the use of ePRO-CTCAE will experience an overall reduction of grade 3 and 4 events with 50% compared to routine monitoring carried out every 3 weeks.
Read the detailed description
Hypothesis:
- Melanoma patients who report their side effects to immunotherapy by the use of PRO-CTCAE (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events) will experience an overall reduction of grade 3 and 4 events with 50% compared to routine monitoring.
Aim:
- Primary endpoint: To examine if the electronic tool PRO-CTCAE used on a weekly basis by patients receiving immunotherapy to supplement standard AE monitoring, results in cutting the frequency of grade 3 or 4 adverse events during treatment by 50% compared to patients who get a standard AE monitoring schedule every 3 weeks.
- Secondary endpoints: 1)To examine if the time patients experience grade 2 or higher toxicity, differs in the two groups 2)To examine if more symptoms are reported in the intervention group 3) To examine if there is a difference between the 2 group when it comes to number of extra out-patient visits, days in hospital, telephone consultations and days in prednisone therapy 4) To examine if PRO-CTCAE is implementable in daily practice (will be explored in study 2 and 3).
- Exploratoty endpoint: To examine, using both qualitative and quantitative data, patients´ and clinicians´ experiences with the e-Health intervention to monitor side effects during treatment with immunotherapy in routine clinical practice.
Method:
All patients who are about to receive immunotherapy for the treatment of malignant melanoma at the Department of Oncology, Odense University Hospital (OUH), will be asked to participate. Patients who meet eligibility criteria will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to either the intervention arm (the use of PRO-CTCAE) or the control arm (standard AE monitoring schedule). Approximately 70 patients in each arm. Inclusion will take place between September 2016 and July 2018. Patients in the intervention arm will report their events weekly for the first 12 weeks of treatment. Clinical staff and patients in the intervention arm will receive instructions on how to use the Ambuflex system to complete the electronic PRO-CTCAE questionnaire (patients) and include the reports in daily practice (clinical staff). Assistance from clinical staff will be provided to patients when needed. Moreover, hospital staff will receive education and written instructions on how to handle the weekly feedback form the patients in the intervention arm.
Evaluation: Studies show that 16% of patients treated with Pembrolizumab/Nivolumab experience grade 3 or 4 side effects during treatment. When it comes to Ipilimumab, the number is 27% and when the drugs are combined the number is as high as 55 %. It is however not all adverse events which the patients can report themselves and when biochemical AEs are deducted, it is estimated that the numbers suitable for self-reporting are as follows: Pembrolizumab/Nivolumab 10%, Ipilimumab 20%, Combination therapy 40%.The primary endpoint of the randomized trial is to reduce the frequency of grade 3 or 4 side effects from 10% to 5% for pembrolizumab /Nivolumab, from 20% to 10 % for Ipilimumab and from 40% to 20% for the combination theory. Realistically, 140 patients can be included in the course of 2 year according to the Danish Melanoma Group. A level of significance of 0.2 is accepted reaching a power of 0.61 for Pembrolizumab/Nivolumab, 0.80 for Ipilimumab) and 0,96 for the combination therapy. These numbers are acceptable due to the fact that this is a pilot study; PRO-CTCAE has not been used in connection with immunotherapy prior to this study and only in a few projects with other patients in Denmark. Moreover, it is prioritized that the Department of Oncology, OUH is the only site, so that the applicant can make sure that all relevant patients are recruited and that clinicians are constantly reminded of the project. Also, the applicant will be able to teach both patients and clinicians on how to use the tool. All in all, the collection of data will be easier and of a higher quality when the study is only being conducted in one site.
- Conditions
- Adverse Effects
- Being tested
- Tablet: Samsung Galaxy Tab A
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Tablet: Samsung Galaxy Tab ADevice
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Active comparator | Patients report their adverse events on a tablet once a week (intervention) as a supplement to having them monitored every 3 weeks by a physician Receives: Device: Tablet: Samsung Galaxy Tab A |
| Control | No intervention | Patients have their side effects monitored by a physician every 3 weeks (control) |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
The number of patients who experience drug-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events assessed by CTCAE 4.0 will be reduced by 50% in the intervention arm compared to patients in the control arm
Measured: The first 6 months of treatment with immunotherapy
Secondary outcomes (9)
The time patients experience grade 2 or higher toxicity assessed by CTCAE, differs in the intervention arm and the control arm respectively
Measured: The first 6 months of treatment with immunotherapy
The number of drug-related adverse events assessed by CTCAE 4.0 reported in the intervention will be higher compared to the adverse events reported in the control arm
Measured: The first 6 months of treatment with immunotherapy
The number of contacts to the hospital will be higher in the intervention arm compared to patients in the control arm
Measured: The first 6 months of treatment with immunotherapy
The number of hospitalizations are fewer in the intervention arm compared to the control arm.
Measured: The first 6 months of treatment with immunotherapy
Patients in the intervention arm receive a lower accumulated prednisone dose compared to patients in the control arm
Measured: The first 6 months of treatment with immunotherapy
Patients in the intervention arm have a longer progression free survival compared to patients in the control arm
PFS is estimated using Kaplan Meier method and differences estimated using logrank test
Measured: Estimation of median PFS and progression free survival rate at 6, 12 and 24 months
Patients in the intervention arm have a longer overall survival compared to patients in the control arm
OS is estimated using Kaplan Meier method and differences estimated using logrank test
Measured: Estimation of median OS and overall survival rate at 6, 12 and 24 months
Patients in the intervention arm have a better QoL compared to patients in the control arm
EQ-5D-5L and FACT-M questionnaires are used to examine the outcome
Measured: baseline, week 24 and week 48
The QoL of patients who experience grade 3 or 4 irAEs vs. no grade 3 or 4 irAEs
EQ-5D-5L and FACT-M questionnaires are used to examine the outcome
Measured: baseline, week 24 and week 48
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted8 Mar 2017
- Study start10 Jan 2017
- Primary completion1 Nov 2019
- Study completion1 Nov 2019
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (3)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Adverse EffectsStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Odense University 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
- Prevention
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 146 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Odense University Hospital
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- REHPA, The Danish Knowledge Centre for Rehabilitation and Palliative Care, Copenhagen University Hospital, Rigshospitalet, Danish Cancer Society
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Laerke Kjaer Tolstrup, Odense University Hospital
- Investigators
- Laerke K. Tolstrup, MD, Principal investigator, Odense University Hospital
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03073031
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- SDUSF-2016-90/R1 - (548)
- Status last verified
- Jan 2023
- First submitted
- 31 Oct 2016
- Last updated
- 26 Jan 2023
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Tolstrup LK, Pappot H, Bastholt L, Moller S, Dieperink KB. Impact of patient-reported outcomes on symptom monitoring during treatment with checkpoint inhibitors: health-related quality of life among melanoma patients in a randomized controlled trial. J Patient Rep Outcomes. 2022 Jan 21;6(1):8. doi: 10.1186/s41687-022-00414-5.
PubMed 35061112Tolstrup LK, Bastholt L, Dieperink KB, Moller S, Zwisler AD, Pappot H. The use of patient-reported outcomes to detect adverse events in metastatic melanoma patients receiving immunotherapy: a randomized controlled pilot trial. J Patient Rep Outcomes. 2020 Oct 30;4(1):88. doi: 10.1186/s41687-020-00255-0.
PubMed 33125537Tolstrup LK, Pappot H, Bastholt L, Zwisler AD, Dieperink KB. Patient-Reported Outcomes During Immunotherapy for Metastatic Melanoma: Mixed Methods Study of Patients' and Clinicians' Experiences. J Med Internet Res. 2020 Apr 9;22(4):e14896. doi: 10.2196/14896.
PubMed 32271150
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 26 Jan 2023. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- The Use of PRO-CTCAE by Patients Receiving Immunotherapy for the Treatment of Malignant Melanoma
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03073031
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- SDUSF-2016-90/R1 - (548)
- Conditions
- Adverse Effects
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 146 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Odense University HospitalUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- REHPA, The Danish Knowledge Centre for Rehabilitation and Palliative Care, Copenhagen University Hospital, Rigshospitalet, Danish Cancer Society
- Study start
- 10 Jan 2017 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 1 Nov 2019 (actual)
- Study completion
- 1 Nov 2019 (actual)
- First posted
- 8 Mar 2017 (actual)
- 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.
This study evaluates if melanoma patients who report their side effects to immunotherapy weekly by the use of ePRO-CTCAE will experience an overall reduction of grade 3 and 4 events with 50% compared to routine monitoring carried out every 3 weeks.
Detailed description
Hypothesis:
- Melanoma patients who report their side effects to immunotherapy by the use of PRO-CTCAE (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events) will experience an overall reduction of grade 3 and 4 events with 50% compared to routine monitoring.
Aim:
- Primary endpoint: To examine if the electronic tool PRO-CTCAE used on a weekly basis by patients receiving immunotherapy to supplement standard AE monitoring, results in cutting the frequency of grade 3 or 4 adverse events during treatment by 50% compared to patients who get a standard AE monitoring schedule every 3 weeks.
- Secondary endpoints: 1)To examine if the time patients experience grade 2 or higher toxicity, differs in the two groups 2)To examine if more symptoms are reported in the intervention group 3) To examine if there is a difference between the 2 group when it comes to number of extra out-patient visits, days in hospital, telephone consultations and days in prednisone therapy 4) To examine if PRO-CTCAE is implementable in daily practice (will be explored in study 2 and 3).
- Exploratoty endpoint: To examine, using both qualitative and quantitative data, patients´ and clinicians´ experiences with the e-Health intervention to monitor side effects during treatment with immunotherapy in routine clinical practice.
Method:
All patients who are about to receive immunotherapy for the treatment of malignant melanoma at the Department of Oncology, Odense University Hospital (OUH), will be asked to participate. Patients who meet eligibility criteria will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to either the intervention arm (the use of PRO-CTCAE) or the control arm (standard AE monitoring schedule). Approximately 70 patients in each arm. Inclusion will take place between September 2016 and July 2018. Patients in the intervention arm will report their events weekly for the first 12 weeks of treatment. Clinical staff and patients in the intervention arm will receive instructions on how to use the Ambuflex system to complete the electronic PRO-CTCAE questionnaire (patients) and include the reports in daily practice (clinical staff). Assistance from clinical staff will be provided to patients when needed. Moreover, hospital staff will receive education and written instructions on how to handle the weekly feedback form the patients in the intervention arm.
Evaluation: Studies show that 16% of patients treated with Pembrolizumab/Nivolumab experience grade 3 or 4 side effects during treatment. When it comes to Ipilimumab, the number is 27% and when the drugs are combined the number is as high as 55 %. It is however not all adverse events which the patients can report themselves and when biochemical AEs are deducted, it is estimated that the numbers suitable for self-reporting are as follows: Pembrolizumab/Nivolumab 10%, Ipilimumab 20%, Combination therapy 40%.The primary endpoint of the randomized trial is to reduce the frequency of grade 3 or 4 side effects from 10% to 5% for pembrolizumab /Nivolumab, from 20% to 10 % for Ipilimumab and from 40% to 20% for the combination theory. Realistically, 140 patients can be included in the course of 2 year according to the Danish Melanoma Group. A level of significance of 0.2 is accepted reaching a power of 0.61 for Pembrolizumab/Nivolumab, 0.80 for Ipilimumab) and 0,96 for the combination therapy. These numbers are acceptable due to the fact that this is a pilot study; PRO-CTCAE has not been used in connection with immunotherapy prior to this study and only in a few projects with other patients in Denmark. Moreover, it is prioritized that the Department of Oncology, OUH is the only site, so that the applicant can make sure that all relevant patients are recruited and that clinicians are constantly reminded of the project. Also, the applicant will be able to teach both patients and clinicians on how to use the tool. All in all, the collection of data will be easier and of a higher quality when the study is only being conducted in one site.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Prevention
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Active comparator | Device: Tablet: Samsung Galaxy Tab APatients report their adverse events on a tablet once a week (intervention) as a supplement to having them monitored every 3 weeks by a physician |
| Control | No intervention | –Patients have their side effects monitored by a physician every 3 weeks (control) |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Men and women ≥18 years of age
- who read and understand Danish,
- who have been diagnosed with malignant melanoma,
- who are about to be treated with immunotherapy for their disease (1st and 2nd line, mono-therapy and combination therapy).
- Moreover, patients must have signed and dated a written informed consent form in accordance with regulatory and institutional guidelines and 6) be willing and able to comply with the completion of PRO-CTCAE and other required questionnaires.
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- None
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Tablet: Samsung Galaxy Tab A | Device | Intervention |
Primary outcome
The number of patients who experience drug-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events assessed by CTCAE 4.0 will be reduced by 50% in the intervention arm compared to patients in the control arm
Time frame: The first 6 months of treatment with immunotherapy
9 secondary outcomes
The time patients experience grade 2 or higher toxicity assessed by CTCAE, differs in the intervention arm and the control arm respectively
Time frame: The first 6 months of treatment with immunotherapy
The number of drug-related adverse events assessed by CTCAE 4.0 reported in the intervention will be higher compared to the adverse events reported in the control arm
Time frame: The first 6 months of treatment with immunotherapy
The number of contacts to the hospital will be higher in the intervention arm compared to patients in the control arm
Time frame: The first 6 months of treatment with immunotherapy
The number of hospitalizations are fewer in the intervention arm compared to the control arm.
Time frame: The first 6 months of treatment with immunotherapy
Patients in the intervention arm receive a lower accumulated prednisone dose compared to patients in the control arm
Time frame: The first 6 months of treatment with immunotherapy
Patients in the intervention arm have a longer progression free survival compared to patients in the control arm
Time frame: Estimation of median PFS and progression free survival rate at 6, 12 and 24 months
Patients in the intervention arm have a longer overall survival compared to patients in the control arm
Time frame: Estimation of median OS and overall survival rate at 6, 12 and 24 months
Patients in the intervention arm have a better QoL compared to patients in the control arm
Time frame: baseline, week 24 and week 48
The QoL of patients who experience grade 3 or 4 irAEs vs. no grade 3 or 4 irAEs
Time frame: baseline, week 24 and week 48
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 26 Jan 2023.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 35061112Tolstrup LK, Pappot H, Bastholt L, Moller S, Dieperink KB. Impact of patient-reported outcomes on symptom monitoring during treatment with checkpoint inhibitors: health-related quality of life among melanoma patients in a randomized controlled trial. J Patient Rep Outcomes. 2022 Jan 21;6(1):8. doi: 10.1186/s41687-022-00414-5.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 33125537Tolstrup LK, Bastholt L, Dieperink KB, Moller S, Zwisler AD, Pappot H. The use of patient-reported outcomes to detect adverse events in metastatic melanoma patients receiving immunotherapy: a randomized controlled pilot trial. J Patient Rep Outcomes. 2020 Oct 30;4(1):88. doi: 10.1186/s41687-020-00255-0.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 32271150Tolstrup LK, Pappot H, Bastholt L, Zwisler AD, Dieperink KB. Patient-Reported Outcomes During Immunotherapy for Metastatic Melanoma: Mixed Methods Study of Patients' and Clinicians' Experiences. J Med Internet Res. 2020 Apr 9;22(4):e14896. doi: 10.2196/14896.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Adverse Effects
Active, not recruitingPhase 2
A Study of Anakinra to Prevent or Treat Severe Side Effects for Patients Receiving CAR-T Cell Therapy
B Cell ALL, B-Cell Lymphoma
Not yet recruitingPhase 2
SAMe in Prevention of Oxaliplatin-associated Liver Injury
Colorectal Cancer, Liver Metastases
Not yet recruitingPhase 2
The CARDIOPROTECT Trial
Diffuse Large B-cell Lymphoma (DLBCL), Cardiotoxicity
RecruitingPhase 4
Hematological Safety of Dipyrone Versus Paracetamol After Dental Extractions
Hematologic Test, Agranulocytosis
Active, not recruitingPhase 3
A Study of Inclisiran to Prevent Cardiovascular Events in High-risk Primary Prevention Patients.
Primary Prevention of Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease
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.
Laerke K. Tolstrup, MD principal investigator
Odense University Hospital
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Tablet: Samsung Galaxy Tab A in people with Adverse Effects, run by Odense University Hospital at 1 site in Denmark.
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 5 inclusion and 1 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 26 Jan 2023. 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 Denmark. 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?
The number of patients who experience drug-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events assessed by CTCAE 4.0 will be reduced by 50% in the intervention arm compared to patients in the control arm (time frame: The first 6 months of treatment with immunotherapy). 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 NCT03073031, which also lists 3 linked publications.
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 26 Jan 2023.