search
Back to results

Influence of Electronic Patient Reported Outcomes (ePROMs) in Surgical Therapy for Prostate Cancer on Postoperative Outcome (PRO-P)

Primary Purpose

Prostate Cancer

Status
Not yet recruiting
Phase
Not Applicable
Locations
Study Type
Interventional
Intervention
complex intervention
current clinical practice
Sponsored by
Heinrich-Heine University, Duesseldorf
About
Eligibility
Locations
Arms
Outcomes
Full info

About this trial

This is an interventional other trial for Prostate Cancer

Eligibility Criteria

18 Years - undefined (Adult, Older Adult)MaleDoes not accept healthy volunteers

Inclusion Criteria: age ≥ 18 y legal capacity sufficient knowledge of the German language prostate carcinoma, TNM T1-4 NX N0-1 M0-1c primary radical prostatectomy planned mobile input device or PC available ability to either receive emails or install a special app on cell phone and receive push messages, with guidance or assistance if necessary ability to complete electronic questionnaires, with guidance or assistance if necessary Exclusion Criteria: palliative treatment situation (life expectancy < 1 year) preoperative urinary incontinence (at least one pad per 24 hours)

Sites / Locations

    Arms of the Study

    Arm 1

    Arm 2

    Arm 3

    Arm Type

    Experimental

    No Intervention

    Other

    Arm Label

    Intervention group

    Control group

    Comparison group

    Arm Description

    Patients who are not fully continent 6-weeks post-surgery (i.e., do not use pads in 24 hours) are randomized into the intervention or control group. In the intervention group, when the respective questionnaire thresholds are exceeded in the ePROM survey, an alarm is triggered at the treating prostate cancer center and contact is made by the center, as well as subsequent actions, if necessary.

    Patients who are not fully continent 6-weeks post-surgery (i.e., do not use pads in 24 hours) are randomized into the intervention or control group. In the control group, ePROMs will be collected 24 and 52 weeks after radical prostatectomy, but without triggering an alarm with subsequent measures - the control group will therefore receive treatment according to the current clinical routine.

    In patients who are fully continent 6-weeks post-surgery (i.e., do not use pads in 24 hours), ePROMs are collected at 24 and 52 weeks, but no alarms or further actions are derived from them. Thus, treatment is provided according to routine clinical practice. Patients are not randomized.

    Outcomes

    Primary Outcome Measures

    urinary incontinence
    The Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Short Form (EPIC-26) is a questionnaire that assesses symptoms and functions of people with prostate cancer in 5 domains. A total of 100 points can be achieved for each domain, with a higher score indicating better function. The urinary incontinence domain consists of four items. To calculate the primary endpoint, the difference between the scores on the urinary incontinence scale of the EPIC-26 is taken at 52 and 6 weeks. Changes regarding urinary incontinence (Minimally Important Difference (MID) >= 9) at 52 weeks postoperatively compared with 6 weeks postoperatively are considered.

    Secondary Outcome Measures

    EPIC-26: changes in sexual function
    Similar to the primary endpoint, changes at 52 weeks postoperatively compared with 6 weeks postoperatively are considered for the changes in in sexual function according to EPIC-26 (MID >= 10).
    EPIC-26: changes in irritative/obstructive symptoms
    Similar to the primary endpoint, changes at 52 weeks postoperatively compared with 6 weeks postoperatively are considered for the changes in irritative/obstructive an gastrointestinal symptoms according to EPIC-26 (MID >= 7).
    EPIC-26: changes in gastrointestinal symptoms
    Similar to the primary endpoint, changes at 52 weeks postoperatively compared with 6 weeks postoperatively are considered for the changes an gastrointestinal symptoms according to EPIC-26 (MID >= 5).
    EPIC-26: changes in vitality/hormonal function
    Similar to the primary endpoint, changes at 52 weeks postoperatively compared with 6 weeks postoperatively are considered for the changes in vitality/ hormonal function according to EPIC-26 (MID >= 4).
    EQ-5D-5L: changes in health-related quality of life (HRQoL)
    The European Quality of Life Five-Dimensions Questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L) measures health-related quality of life on five scales: 1. mobility, 2. ability to care for oneself, 3. activities of daily living, 4. pain/physical discomfort, and 5. anxiety/dejection, each of which is represented by a question that provides five response options for grading symptoms. In addition, a question on self-assessment of health status is asked on a visual analog scale from 0 to 100, where 100 is the best imaginable health.
    PHQ-4: changes in depressivity
    The Patient Health Questionnaire-4 (PHQ-4) measures depressiveness and generalized anxiety on two subscales with two items each. For each question, scores from 0 to 3 can be achieved, so that a cumulative score of 12 points can be reached, whereby a higher score indicates a more pronounced symptomatology. The cut-off value for depressivity is defined for the subscales of the PHQ-4 is definied by >= 3 points, the respective attainment of which (independent of the preoperative value) triggers an alarm at each survey time point.
    PHQ-4: changes in generalised anxiety
    The Patient Health Questionnaire-4 (PHQ-4) measures depressiveness and generalized anxiety on two subscales with two items each. For each question, scores from 0 to 3 can be achieved, so that a cumulative score of 12 points can be reached, whereby a higher score indicates a more pronounced symptomatology. The cut-off value for depressivity is defined for the subscales of the PHQ-4 is definied by >= 3 points, the respective attainment of which (independent of the preoperative value) triggers an alarm at each survey time point.
    PEI: changes in patient enablement
    The Patient Enablement Instrument (PEI) measures patient empowerment through six questions; a validated German translation with a modified question sequence and Likert scale is used. Overall, the sum score ranges from 6 to 30 points, with a higher score corresponding to greater patient empowerment.
    qualitative process evaluation - module 1: feasibility
    semi-structured interviews with patients, urologists, psychooncologists, study nurses (N=10-15); data from Module 1 will be evaluated qualitatively using content analysis; criteria are based on the feasibility criteria for evaluating the acceptance and feasibility of the intervention and the study procedures
    qualitative process evaluation - module 2: impact
    sequential semi-structured interviews with patients and relatives from the intervention and control groups in the main study (N=30-40); data from module 2 will be evaluated by contrastive thematic coding; in addition to possible differences between the intervention and control groups, intraindividual changes are also evaluated by contrastive coding of the data material at several time points
    qualitative process evaluation - module 3: implementation
    Semi-structured interviews with urologists, psychooncologists, study nurses in the main study (N=10-15); focus group discussion with study participants; analysis of implementation factors is guided by the Consolidated Framework for Advancing Implementation Science (CFIR); data from module 3 on implementation are evaluated qualitatively by content analysis

    Full Information

    First Posted
    November 18, 2022
    Last Updated
    March 1, 2023
    Sponsor
    Heinrich-Heine University, Duesseldorf
    Collaborators
    Marienhospital Herne, University Hospital, Essen, University Hospital, Bonn, Klinikum Dortmund gGbmH, University Hospital Muenster, University Hospital of Cologne, University of Cologne, Techniker Krankenkasse, Deutsche Krebsgesellschaft e.V.
    search

    1. Study Identification

    Unique Protocol Identification Number
    NCT05644821
    Brief Title
    Influence of Electronic Patient Reported Outcomes (ePROMs) in Surgical Therapy for Prostate Cancer on Postoperative Outcome
    Acronym
    PRO-P
    Official Title
    Influence of Electronic Patient Reported Outcomes (ePROMs) in Surgical Therapy for Prostate Cancer on Postoperative Outcome
    Study Type
    Interventional

    2. Study Status

    Record Verification Date
    March 2023
    Overall Recruitment Status
    Not yet recruiting
    Study Start Date
    April 2023 (Anticipated)
    Primary Completion Date
    March 2025 (Anticipated)
    Study Completion Date
    March 2025 (Anticipated)

    3. Sponsor/Collaborators

    Responsible Party, by Official Title
    Sponsor
    Name of the Sponsor
    Heinrich-Heine University, Duesseldorf
    Collaborators
    Marienhospital Herne, University Hospital, Essen, University Hospital, Bonn, Klinikum Dortmund gGbmH, University Hospital Muenster, University Hospital of Cologne, University of Cologne, Techniker Krankenkasse, Deutsche Krebsgesellschaft e.V.

    4. Oversight

    Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Drug Product
    No
    Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Device Product
    No
    Data Monitoring Committee
    Yes

    5. Study Description

    Brief Summary
    The study investigates the influence of structured follow-up using ePROMS in the 1st year after prostatectomy on the postoperative course. It will be examined whether this intervention leads to early detection of postoperative symptoms and whether the subsequent initiation of further measures lead to an improvement of incontinence, symptom burden, quality of life and patient competence.
    Detailed Description
    PRO-P is planned as a multicenter, prospective, and two-arm randomized control group study in which ePROMs will be performed in a standardized fashion once before and six times (intervention group) or three times (control group) after primary prostatectomy in patients with PCa. PROMs are collected either web-based or through a dedicated app and entered by the patient using either a mobile device or computer. Patients are invited to enter ePROMS into the app or web tool through email and app-driven push messages. Patients who are incontinent (at least one pad in 24 hours) at the 6-week postoperative survey are randomized into two groups: The intervention group and the control group. In the intervention group, when the respective questionnaire cut-off values are exceeded in the ePROM survey, an alarm is triggered at the treating prostate cancer center and contact is made by the center as well as subsequent measures, if necessary. This is done at 6 weeks postoperatively and at 12, 18, 24, 36 and 52 weeks postoperatively. In the control group, ePROMs are recorded 24 and 52 weeks after radical prostatectomy, but without triggering an alarm with subsequent measures - the control group thus receives treatment in accordance with the current clinical routine. The mechanisms of action of the intervention will be investigated within the framework of a qualitative process evaluation. Characteristics on the patient level (e.g., treatment-related attitudes, comorbidity, social support), on the practitioner level (e.g., communication skills), on the organizational level, and the interactions between the levels (e.g., patient-doctor relationship) will be explored. The goal is to develop an intervention model, or to describe the effective elements of the intervention.

    6. Conditions and Keywords

    Primary Disease or Condition Being Studied in the Trial, or the Focus of the Study
    Prostate Cancer

    7. Study Design

    Primary Purpose
    Other
    Study Phase
    Not Applicable
    Interventional Study Model
    Parallel Assignment
    Model Description
    Intention-to-treat principle, comparison (regarding superiority) of primary endpoint using mixed linear model for repeated measures: dependent variable: primary endpoint, influencing factors: Indicator for intervention/control group, time, group*time, center, tumor stage, and age group; downstream sequential-rejection testing of equality of expected values in the individual strata via appropriate contrasts; control of multiple error for at least one false rejection (final test principle); supplementary: mixed linear models with additional independent variables; sensitivity analyses on the influence of missing values (multiple imputation); subgroup analyses according to center, stage, and age group
    Masking
    None (Open Label)
    Allocation
    Randomized
    Enrollment
    336 (Anticipated)

    8. Arms, Groups, and Interventions

    Arm Title
    Intervention group
    Arm Type
    Experimental
    Arm Description
    Patients who are not fully continent 6-weeks post-surgery (i.e., do not use pads in 24 hours) are randomized into the intervention or control group. In the intervention group, when the respective questionnaire thresholds are exceeded in the ePROM survey, an alarm is triggered at the treating prostate cancer center and contact is made by the center, as well as subsequent actions, if necessary.
    Arm Title
    Control group
    Arm Type
    No Intervention
    Arm Description
    Patients who are not fully continent 6-weeks post-surgery (i.e., do not use pads in 24 hours) are randomized into the intervention or control group. In the control group, ePROMs will be collected 24 and 52 weeks after radical prostatectomy, but without triggering an alarm with subsequent measures - the control group will therefore receive treatment according to the current clinical routine.
    Arm Title
    Comparison group
    Arm Type
    Other
    Arm Description
    In patients who are fully continent 6-weeks post-surgery (i.e., do not use pads in 24 hours), ePROMs are collected at 24 and 52 weeks, but no alarms or further actions are derived from them. Thus, treatment is provided according to routine clinical practice. Patients are not randomized.
    Intervention Type
    Other
    Intervention Name(s)
    complex intervention
    Intervention Description
    The intervention has several elements: Regular symptom monitoring via ePROMs Alarm when defined thresholds of EPIC-26 or PHQ-4 are reached or exceeded, 3.) In case of alarm, standardized telephone contact by a study nurse at the treating center with the offer to coordinate a urological consultation at the center, 4.) if requested by the patient: a urological consultation at the treating prostate cancer center by urologists trained in the PRO-P study, 4) content of the consultation: if necessary, the guideline-compliant initiation of further diagnostics and therapy including in this context necessary follow-up contacts and 5) postal communication of the ePROM results in case of an alarm as well as postal dispatch of a report of the findings in case of a urological consultation at the treating prostate cancer center to the practicing, treating urologist.
    Intervention Type
    Other
    Intervention Name(s)
    current clinical practice
    Intervention Description
    current clinical practice
    Primary Outcome Measure Information:
    Title
    urinary incontinence
    Description
    The Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Short Form (EPIC-26) is a questionnaire that assesses symptoms and functions of people with prostate cancer in 5 domains. A total of 100 points can be achieved for each domain, with a higher score indicating better function. The urinary incontinence domain consists of four items. To calculate the primary endpoint, the difference between the scores on the urinary incontinence scale of the EPIC-26 is taken at 52 and 6 weeks. Changes regarding urinary incontinence (Minimally Important Difference (MID) >= 9) at 52 weeks postoperatively compared with 6 weeks postoperatively are considered.
    Time Frame
    52 weeks
    Secondary Outcome Measure Information:
    Title
    EPIC-26: changes in sexual function
    Description
    Similar to the primary endpoint, changes at 52 weeks postoperatively compared with 6 weeks postoperatively are considered for the changes in in sexual function according to EPIC-26 (MID >= 10).
    Time Frame
    52 weeks
    Title
    EPIC-26: changes in irritative/obstructive symptoms
    Description
    Similar to the primary endpoint, changes at 52 weeks postoperatively compared with 6 weeks postoperatively are considered for the changes in irritative/obstructive an gastrointestinal symptoms according to EPIC-26 (MID >= 7).
    Time Frame
    52 weeks
    Title
    EPIC-26: changes in gastrointestinal symptoms
    Description
    Similar to the primary endpoint, changes at 52 weeks postoperatively compared with 6 weeks postoperatively are considered for the changes an gastrointestinal symptoms according to EPIC-26 (MID >= 5).
    Time Frame
    36 months
    Title
    EPIC-26: changes in vitality/hormonal function
    Description
    Similar to the primary endpoint, changes at 52 weeks postoperatively compared with 6 weeks postoperatively are considered for the changes in vitality/ hormonal function according to EPIC-26 (MID >= 4).
    Time Frame
    52 weeks
    Title
    EQ-5D-5L: changes in health-related quality of life (HRQoL)
    Description
    The European Quality of Life Five-Dimensions Questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L) measures health-related quality of life on five scales: 1. mobility, 2. ability to care for oneself, 3. activities of daily living, 4. pain/physical discomfort, and 5. anxiety/dejection, each of which is represented by a question that provides five response options for grading symptoms. In addition, a question on self-assessment of health status is asked on a visual analog scale from 0 to 100, where 100 is the best imaginable health.
    Time Frame
    52 weeks
    Title
    PHQ-4: changes in depressivity
    Description
    The Patient Health Questionnaire-4 (PHQ-4) measures depressiveness and generalized anxiety on two subscales with two items each. For each question, scores from 0 to 3 can be achieved, so that a cumulative score of 12 points can be reached, whereby a higher score indicates a more pronounced symptomatology. The cut-off value for depressivity is defined for the subscales of the PHQ-4 is definied by >= 3 points, the respective attainment of which (independent of the preoperative value) triggers an alarm at each survey time point.
    Time Frame
    52 weeks
    Title
    PHQ-4: changes in generalised anxiety
    Description
    The Patient Health Questionnaire-4 (PHQ-4) measures depressiveness and generalized anxiety on two subscales with two items each. For each question, scores from 0 to 3 can be achieved, so that a cumulative score of 12 points can be reached, whereby a higher score indicates a more pronounced symptomatology. The cut-off value for depressivity is defined for the subscales of the PHQ-4 is definied by >= 3 points, the respective attainment of which (independent of the preoperative value) triggers an alarm at each survey time point.
    Time Frame
    52 weeks
    Title
    PEI: changes in patient enablement
    Description
    The Patient Enablement Instrument (PEI) measures patient empowerment through six questions; a validated German translation with a modified question sequence and Likert scale is used. Overall, the sum score ranges from 6 to 30 points, with a higher score corresponding to greater patient empowerment.
    Time Frame
    52 weeks
    Title
    qualitative process evaluation - module 1: feasibility
    Description
    semi-structured interviews with patients, urologists, psychooncologists, study nurses (N=10-15); data from Module 1 will be evaluated qualitatively using content analysis; criteria are based on the feasibility criteria for evaluating the acceptance and feasibility of the intervention and the study procedures
    Time Frame
    52 weeks
    Title
    qualitative process evaluation - module 2: impact
    Description
    sequential semi-structured interviews with patients and relatives from the intervention and control groups in the main study (N=30-40); data from module 2 will be evaluated by contrastive thematic coding; in addition to possible differences between the intervention and control groups, intraindividual changes are also evaluated by contrastive coding of the data material at several time points
    Time Frame
    52 weeks
    Title
    qualitative process evaluation - module 3: implementation
    Description
    Semi-structured interviews with urologists, psychooncologists, study nurses in the main study (N=10-15); focus group discussion with study participants; analysis of implementation factors is guided by the Consolidated Framework for Advancing Implementation Science (CFIR); data from module 3 on implementation are evaluated qualitatively by content analysis
    Time Frame
    52 weeks

    10. Eligibility

    Sex
    Male
    Minimum Age & Unit of Time
    18 Years
    Accepts Healthy Volunteers
    No
    Eligibility Criteria
    Inclusion Criteria: age ≥ 18 y legal capacity sufficient knowledge of the German language prostate carcinoma, TNM T1-4 NX N0-1 M0-1c primary radical prostatectomy planned mobile input device or PC available ability to either receive emails or install a special app on cell phone and receive push messages, with guidance or assistance if necessary ability to complete electronic questionnaires, with guidance or assistance if necessary Exclusion Criteria: palliative treatment situation (life expectancy < 1 year) preoperative urinary incontinence (at least one pad per 24 hours)
    Central Contact Person:
    First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name or Official Title & Degree
    Dominik Fugmann, MD
    Phone
    +49 (0)211-81 18 33 8
    Email
    dominik.fugmann@med.uni-duesseldorf.de
    First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name or Official Title & Degree
    Johanna Droop, PhD
    Phone
    +49 (0)211-81 18110
    Email
    johanna.droop@med.uni-duesseldorf.de
    Overall Study Officials:
    First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
    Peter Albers, MD
    Organizational Affiliation
    University Clinic Düsseldorf, Urology
    Official's Role
    Principal Investigator
    First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
    André Karger, MD
    Organizational Affiliation
    University Clinic Düsseldorf, psychosomatic medicine
    Official's Role
    Study Director

    12. IPD Sharing Statement

    Plan to Share IPD
    No

    Learn more about this trial

    Influence of Electronic Patient Reported Outcomes (ePROMs) in Surgical Therapy for Prostate Cancer on Postoperative Outcome

    We'll reach out to this number within 24 hrs