AzTrials
AzTrials

Acute Myeloid LeukemiaNCT03154190

Health Care Coach Support in Reducing Acute Care Use and Cost in Patients With Cancer

A study testing Best Practice, Laboratory Biomarker Analysis and Supportive Care in people with Acute Myeloid Leukemia and Brain Glioblastoma, run by Stanford University at 1 site in United States.

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

This randomized pilot clinical trial studies health care coach support in reducing acute care use and cost in patients with cancer. Health care coach support may help cancer patients to make decisions about their care that matches what is important to them with symptom management. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 18 years and older
What is being tested?
Best Practice, Laboratory Biomarker Analysis and Supportive Care
Type of treatment
Surgery or procedure
Could I receive a placebo?
No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people
128 participants
Where
1 siteUnited States
Study dates
8 Aug 2017to 30 Aug 2022
Phase
Interventional
Are there results?
Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view

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

  • Newly diagnosed patients for the following conditions
  • Colon cancer stage III and IV
  • Rectal cancer stage II, III, IV
  • Glioblastoma multiforme (brain) -- no stage
  • Non-small cell lung cancer stage IIIA, IIIB, IV
  • Small cell lung cancer, limited stage and extensive stage
Show all 22Show fewer
  • Castration-resistant prostate cancer
  • Head and neck cancer stage III and IV
  • Gastric cancer stage III and IV
  • Esophageal cancer stage III and IV
  • Pancreatic cancer stage II, III, IV
  • Renal cell carcinoma, stage IV
  • Breast cancer, stage IV, if triple negative ER/PR/H2N negative or on systemic chemotherapy
  • Sarcoma, stage IV
  • Bladder carcinoma, stage IV
  • Acute myeloid leukemia
  • Melanoma, stage III and IV
  • Ovarian cancer, stage III and IV
  • High grade myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS)
  • Any patient with recurrent or progressive cancer
  • Patients must have the ability to understand and willingness to sign a written informed consent document
  • Patient must have ongoing oncologic needs and plan to receive all care at the study institution and not already be in hospice or home-care

Who cannot join

  • Patients must have capacity to consent
  • Pregnant patients are excluded

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country.

United States1 site
  • Virginia K Crosson Cancer Center

    Fullerton, California, 29835

Other trials in United States

About this study

Official title: St. Judes-Stanford Comprehensive Support Initiative

This randomized pilot clinical trial studies health care coach support in reducing acute care use and cost in patients with cancer. Health care coach support may help cancer patients to make decisions about their care that matches what is important to them with symptom management.

Read the detailed description

PRIMARY OBJECTIVES:

  1. To reduce acute care utilization by 2-5% for advanced cancer patients by training and deploying health care coaches who help patients and families discuss care goals, virtual modalities, engage in shared-decision-making, and participate in educational activities.

SECONDARY OBJECTIVES:

  1. To improve patients' experience of their care. II. Improve patient understanding of advanced care planning. III. To improve the receipt of goal concordant care. IV. To reduce total healthcare costs.

OUTLINE: Patients are randomized to 1 of 2 arms.

ARM A: Patients receive usual care.

ARM B: Patients undergo health care coach support with a baseline introduction (either telephonic or in-person) of the program followed by a visit (telephonic or in-person) with the health care coach after the first oncology appointment to discuss goals of care. The health care coach will contact patient based on patients' ongoing needs (weekly to monthly) and will conduct symptom assessments based on patients' treatment plans and symptoms.

After completion of study, patients are followed up for 6 months.

Being tested
Best Practice, Laboratory Biomarker Analysis, Supportive Care, Survey Administration
Medical subject headings
Leukemia, Myeloid, Acute, Myelodysplastic Syndromes, Disease Progression, Recurrence, Pancreatic Neoplasms, Rectal Neoplasms, Colonic Neoplasms, Esophageal Neoplasms

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • Best PracticeOther

    Also called standard of care, standard therapy

    Receive usual care

  • Laboratory Biomarker AnalysisOther

    Correlative studies

  • Supportive CareProcedure or surgery

    Also called Supportive Therapy, Symptom Management, Therapy, Supportive

    Undergo health care coach support

  • Survey AdministrationOther

    Ancillary studies

Study groups in NCT03154190
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
Arm A (usual care)Active comparatorPatients receive usual care.
Receives: Other: Best Practice; Other: Laboratory Biomarker Analysis; Other: Survey Administration
Arm B (health care coach support)ExperimentalPatients undergo health care coach support with a baseline introduction (either telephonic or in-person) of the program followed by a visit (telephonic or in-person) with the health care coach after the first oncology appointment to discuss goals of care. The health care coach will contact patient based on patients' ongoing needs (weekly to monthly) and will conduct symptom assessments based on patients' treatment plans and symptoms.
Receives: Other: Laboratory Biomarker Analysis; Procedure: Supportive Care; Other: Survey Administration

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Number of Emergency Department Visits (Chart Review)

    Mean emergency department visits for each patient will be abstracted by electronic medical record chart review for each patient at 6 months after enrollment. We will evaluate comparisons of mean numbers of emergency department visits between study arms.

    Measured: 6 months after patient enrollment

  2. Number of Hospitalization Visits (Chart Review)

    Mean Hospitalization use for each patient will be abstracted by electronic medical record chart review for each patient at 6 months after enrollment. We will evaluate comparisons of mean numbers of hospitalizations between the two study arms.

    Measured: 6 months after patient enrollment

Secondary outcomes (12)
  1. Change in Patient Satisfaction With Care and Decision Making Among Patients Undergoing Health Care Coach Support as Assessed by Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems-G and Patient Satisfaction With Decision Scale

    Each patient will receive a satisfaction with decision-making survey (The Satisfaction with Decision Survey) at baseline, 6 months, and 12 months.

    Satisfaction with Decision was assessed using the Satisfaction with Decision scale, which measured rating of decision-making. Questions were assessed with responses on a scale of "strongly disagree," "disagree," "neither agree nor disagree," "agree," or "strongly agree." Results are expressed as proportion of participants who responded "strongly agree."

    Measured: Change in patient satisfaction with care and decision making from baseline to 6 and 12 months

  2. Change in Patient Satisfaction With Care Among Patients Undergoing Health Care Coach Support as Assessed by Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems-G.

    Each patient will receive a satisfaction with care survey (The Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems-G) at baseline, 6 months, and 12 months.

    Overall Health and Overall Mental or Emotional health was assessed using the Consumer Assessment of Health Care Providers and Systems-Clinician and Group Survey version 2.0 (cite) questions #26, which measured rating of overall health with responses, "excellent," "very good," "fair," or "poor." Questions were assessed with responses "never", "sometimes," "usually," or "always," or care rated as "worst," "fair," good", or "best." Results are expressed as proportion of participants who responded "always", or "best care."

    Measured: Change in patient satisfaction with care from baseline to 6 and 12 months

  3. Mean Emergency Department Visits (Chart Review)

    Emergency Department use for each patient will be abstracted by electronic medical record chart review for each patient at 12 months after enrollment. We will evaluate comparisons of emergency department visits between study arms.

    Measured: 12 months after patient enrollment

  4. Number of People With Emergency Department Visit (Chart Review)

    Number of people with Emergency Department use in the 30 days before death will be abstracted by electronic medical record chart review for each patient who has died. We will evaluate comparisons of the number of people with emergency department visits between study arms.

    Measured: 30 days prior to death

  5. Hospitalization Visits (Chart Review)

    Hospital use for each patient will be abstracted by electronic medical record chart review for each patient at 12 months after enrollment. We will evaluate comparisons of hospitalization use between study arms.

    Measured: 12 months after patient enrollment

  6. Number of Patients With Hospital Use (Chart Review)

    Number of patients with hospital use in the 30 days before death will be abstracted by electronic medical record chart review for each patient who has died. We will evaluate comparisons of proportion of people with hospitalization use between study arms in the 30 days before death.

    Measured: 30 days prior to death

  7. Hospice Consult (Chart Review)

    Hospice use for each patient will be abstracted by electronic medical record chart review for each patient at 12 months after enrollment. We will evaluate comparisons of hospice use between study arms.

    Measured: 6 months after patient enrollment

  8. Hospice Consult (Chart Review)

    Hospice use for each patient will be abstracted by electronic medical record chart review for each patient at 12 months after enrollment. We will evaluate comparisons of hospice use between study arms.

    Measured: 12 months after patient enrollment

  9. Hospice Consult (Chart Review)

    Hospice use for each patient will be abstracted by electronic medical record chart review for each patient who has died. We will evaluate comparisons of hospice use between study arms.

    Measured: 30 days prior to death

  10. Palliative Care Consult (Chart Review)

    Palliative Care consult for each patient will be abstracted by electronic medical record chart review for each patient at 12 months after enrollment. We will evaluate comparisons of palliative care use between study arms.

    Measured: 6 months after patient enrollment

  11. Palliative Care Consult (Chart Review)

    Palliative Care consult for each patient will be abstracted by electronic medical record chart review for each patient at 12 months after enrollment. We will evaluate comparisons of palliative care use between study arms.

    Measured: 12 months after patient enrollment

  12. Palliative Care Consult (Chart Review)

    Palliative Care consult for each patient will be abstracted by electronic medical record chart review for each patient who has died. We will evaluate comparisons of palliative care use between study arms.

    Measured: 30 days prior to death

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted16 May 2017
  2. Study start8 Aug 2017
  3. Primary completion30 Nov 2021
  4. Study completion30 Aug 2022

Resources

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
Parallel groups
Masking
None (open label)
Enrolment
128 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT03154190
Sponsor's protocol ID
VAR0134
Status last verified
Dec 2024
First submitted
14 Nov 2016
Last updated
24 Jan 2025
Data monitoring committee
Yes
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No

Publications

  • Patel MI, Kapphahn K, Dewland M, Aguilar V, Sanchez B, Sisay E, Murillo A, Smith K, Park DJ. Effect of a Community Health Worker Intervention on Acute Care Use, Advance Care Planning, and Patient-Reported Outcomes Among Adults With Advanced Stages of Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Oncol. 2022 Aug 1;8(8):1139-1148. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2022.1997.

    PubMed 35771552
  • Patel MI, Aguilar V, Sanchez B, Sisay E, Park DJ. Health care coach support to assist with advance care planning and symptom management -A randomized controlled trial. Contemp Clin Trials. 2021 Dec;111:106617. doi: 10.1016/j.cct.2021.106617. Epub 2021 Nov 5.

    PubMed 34749008

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A study testing Best Practice, Laboratory Biomarker Analysis and Supportive Care in people with Acute Myeloid Leukemia and Brain Glioblastoma, run by Stanford University 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 22 inclusion and 2 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 24 Jan 2025. 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?

Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 24 Jan 2025). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.

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?

Number of Emergency Department Visits (Chart Review) (time frame: 6 months after patient enrollment). The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. 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 NCT03154190, which also lists 2 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 24 Jan 2025.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in