Ignite Creation Date:
2025-12-24 @ 5:50 PM
Ignite Modification Date:
2025-12-30 @ 3:02 AM
Study NCT ID:
NCT04066868
Status:
COMPLETED
Last Update Posted:
2025-04-20
First Post:
2019-08-19
Is NOT Gene Therapy:
True
Has Adverse Events:
False
Brief Title:
Evaluating the Use of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Improving the Inter-Rater Reliability of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Event Ratings
Sponsor:
Medical University Innsbruck
Organization:
Study Overview
Official Title:
Evaluating the Use of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Improving the Inter-Rater Reliability of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Event Ratings
Status:
COMPLETED
Status Verified Date:
2025-04
Last Known Status:
None
Delayed Posting:
No
If Stopped, Why?:
Not Stopped
Has Expanded Access:
False
If Expanded Access, NCT#:
N/A
Has Expanded Access, NCT# Status:
N/A
Acronym:
None
Brief Summary:
This open randomized trial investigates, if clinicians complete CTCAE ratings differently when receiving patients' patient-reported outcome (PRO) data prior to their CTCAE completion. The primary objective is to demonstrate superior inter-rater reliability of CTCAE ratings from physicians relying on EORTC PRO data as additional data source over traditional CTCAE ratings not including PRO information.
Detailed Description:
In oncology, detection and tracking of adverse events (AEs) are a top priority in both clinical trials and routine care. The classification of AEs mostly relies on the Common Toxicity Terminology for Adverse Events (CTCAE) developed by the US-American National Institutes of Health and the National Cancer Institute.
It is known, however, that the assessment of AEs can greatly vary depending on whether they are assessed by patients or by clinicians.
Procedure: The patients (any oncological diagnosis, day clinic or inpatient for treatment with chemotherapy or immunotherapy; open 1:1 randomized) fill out an EORTC quality of life questionnaire electronically (C30 + further questions). These PRO data are immediately available for the clinicians. Independently of each other, two different clinicians conduct a medical consultation with the patient and electronically a CTCAE rating. For the intervention Group, clinicians see the PRO values directly next to the input options for the CTCAE rating. For the control Group, clinicians see the input options for the CTCAE rating. The similarity of the assessments is checked using intra-class correlation.
The combined use of PROs and CTCAE data makes particular sense for AEs/aspects that are directly experienced by the patient (fatigue, pain, cognitive problems, emotional functioning, ...) and can only be adequately recorded by the clinician through communication with the patient.
It is known, however, that the assessment of AEs can greatly vary depending on whether they are assessed by patients or by clinicians.
Procedure: The patients (any oncological diagnosis, day clinic or inpatient for treatment with chemotherapy or immunotherapy; open 1:1 randomized) fill out an EORTC quality of life questionnaire electronically (C30 + further questions). These PRO data are immediately available for the clinicians. Independently of each other, two different clinicians conduct a medical consultation with the patient and electronically a CTCAE rating. For the intervention Group, clinicians see the PRO values directly next to the input options for the CTCAE rating. For the control Group, clinicians see the input options for the CTCAE rating. The similarity of the assessments is checked using intra-class correlation.
The combined use of PROs and CTCAE data makes particular sense for AEs/aspects that are directly experienced by the patient (fatigue, pain, cognitive problems, emotional functioning, ...) and can only be adequately recorded by the clinician through communication with the patient.
Study Oversight
Has Oversight DMC:
False
Is a FDA Regulated Drug?:
False
Is a FDA Regulated Device?:
False
Is an Unapproved Device?:
None
Is a PPSD?:
None
Is a US Export?:
None
Is an FDA AA801 Violation?: