Background: Despite the acceptability and efficacy of e–patient-reported outcome (ePRO) systems, implementation in routine clinical care remains challenging. Objective: This pragmatic trial implemented the PROMPT-Care (Patient Reported Outcome Measures for Personalized Treatment and Care) web-based system into existing clinical workflows and evaluated its effectiveness among a diverse population of patients with cancer. Methods: Adult patients with solid tumors receiving active treatment or follow-up care in four cancer centers were enrolled. The PROMPT-Care intervention supported patient management through (1) monthly off-site electronic PRO physical symptom and psychosocial well-being assessments, (2) automated electronic clinical alerts notifying the care team of unresolved clinical issues following two consecutive assessments, and (3) tailored online patient self-management resources. Propensity score matching was used to match controls with intervention patients in a 4:1 ratio for patient age, sex, and treatment status. The primary outcome was a reduction in emergency department presentations. Secondary outcomes were time spent on chemotherapy and the number of allied health service referrals. Results: From April 2016 to October 2018, 328 patients from four public hospitals received the intervention. Matched controls (n=1312) comprised the general population of patients with cancer, seen at the participating hospitals during the study period. Emergency department visits were significantly reduced by 33% (P=.02) among patients receiving the intervention compared with patients in the matched controls. No significant associations were found in allied health referrals or time to end of chemotherapy. At baseline, the most common patient reported outcomes (above-threshold) were fatigue (39%), tiredness (38.4%), worry (32.9%), general wellbeing (32.9%), and sleep (24.1%), aligning with the most frequently accessed self-management domain pages of physical well-being (36%) and emotional well-being (23%). The majority of clinical feedback reports were reviewed by nursing staff (729/893, 82%), largely in response to the automated clinical alerts (n=877). Conclusions: Algorithm-supported web-based systems utilizing patient reported outcomes in clinical practice reduced emergency department presentations among a diverse population of patients with cancer. This study also highlighted the importance of (1) automated triggers for reviewing above-threshold results in patient reports, rather than passive manual review of patient records; (2) the instrumental role nurses play in managing alerts; and (3) providing patients with resources to support guided self-management, where appropriate. Together, these factors will inform the integration of web-based PRO systems into future models of routine cancer care. Trial Registration: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12616000615482; https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=370633 International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID): RR2-10.1186/s12885-018-4729-3

Background: Women with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) with poor IBD-specific reproductive knowledge experience more childlessness and fear of IBD medications in pregnancy. The Pregnancy in IBD Decision Aid (PIDA), developed by an international multidisciplinary team, offers personalized online decision support regarding pregnancy in IBD. Aims: Assess the impact of PIDA on quality of reproductive decision-making and pregnancy-related knowledge among preconception (PC) and pregnant patients with IBD, and evaluate acceptability to patients and clinicians. Methods: PC and pregnant patients with IBD aged 18–45 completed questionnaires pre- and post-PIDA to assess quality of decision-making (Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS); Decision Self-Efficacy Scale (DSES) and IBD-in-pregnancy knowledge (Crohn's and Colitis Pregnancy Knowledge Score (CCPKnow)). Paired t test assessed for differences pre- and post-PIDA. Patients and clinicians completed acceptability surveys. Results: DCS and DSES were completed by 74 patients (42 Crohn’s disease, 32 ulcerative colitis); 41 PC and 33 pregnant. DCS improved significantly post-PIDA in PC patients regarding pregnancy planning (t(40) = 4.83, p < 0.0001, Cohen’s d_z = 0.75) and in pregnant patients regarding medication management (t(32) = 2.37, p = 0.0242, d_z = 0.41). DSES for PC patients improved significantly post-PIDA (t(40) = -3.56, p = 0.001, d_z = -0.56). CCPKnow improved significantly post-PIDA in PC (t(42) = 4.93, p < 0.0001, d_z = -0.75) and pregnant patients (t(32) = 5.1, p < 0.0001, d_z = -0.89). PIDA was deemed optimal for length, readability, and content amount and considered highly useful by patients (n = 73) and clinicians (n = 14). Conclusions: Patients using PIDA developed an improved quality of reproductive decision-making and IBD-in-pregnancy knowledge. PIDA is an accessible tool that can empower women with IBD to make values-congruent, evidence-based decisions regarding pregnancy and may reduce voluntary childlessness.

Objective.: To develop feasible indices as clues to comorbid fibromyalgia (FM) in routine care of patients with various rheumatic diseases based only on self-report multidimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire (MDHAQ) scores, which are informative in all rheumatic diagnoses studied.Methods.: All patients with all diagnoses complete an MDHAQ at each visit; the 2011 FM criteria questionnaire was added to the standard MDHAQ between February 2013 and August 2016. The proportion of patients who met 2011 FM criteria or had a clinical diagnosis of FM was calculated. Individual candidate MDHAQ measures were compared to 2011 FM criteria using receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curves; cutpoints to recognize FM were selected from the area under the curve (AUC) for optimal tradeoff between sensitivity and specificity. Cumulative indices of 3 or 4 MDHAQ measures were analyzed as fibromyalgia assessment screening tools (FAST).Results.: In 148 patients, the highest AUC in ROC analyses versus 2011 FM criteria were seen for MDHAQ symptom checklist, self-report painful joint count, pain visual analog scale (VAS), and fatigue VAS. The optimal cutpoints were ≥ 16/60 for symptom checklist, ≥ 16/48 for self-report painful joint count, and ≥ 6/10 for both pain and fatigue VAS. Cumulative FAST indices of 2/3 or 3/4 MDHAQ measures correctly classified 89.4–91.7% of patients who met 2011 FM criteria.Conclusion.: FAST3 and FAST4 cumulative indices from only MDHAQ scores correctly identify most patients who meet 2011 FM criteria. FAST indices can assist clinicians in routine care as clues to FM with a general rheumatology rather than FM-specific questionnaire.

Routine assessment and clinical utilisation of patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures can lead to improved patient outcomes. The PROMPT-Care eHealth system facilitates PRO data capture from cancer patients, data linkage and retrieval to support clinical decisions, patient self-management, and shared care. Pilot testing demonstrated acceptability and feasibility of PROMPT-Care Version 1.0. This study aims to implement PROMPT-Care Version 2.0 and determine its efficacy in reducing emergency department (ED) presentations, and improving chemotherapy delivery and health service referrals, compared to usual care. Groups eligible to participate in the intervention arm of this controlled trial are patients receiving cancer care (including follow-up). PROMPT-Care patients will complete monthly assessments (distress, symptoms, unmet needs) until voluntary withdrawal or death. In Version 1.0, the care team accessed patients’ clinical feedback reports in ‘real time’ to guide their care, and patients received links to support their self-management, tailored to their PRO responses. Version 2.0 was extended to include: i) an additional alert system notifying the care team of ongoing unresolved clinical issues, ii) patient self-management resources, and iii) an auto-populated Treatment Summary and Survivorship Care Plan (SCP). The control population will be patients extracted from hospital databases of the general cancer patient population who were seen at the participating cancer therapy centres during the study period, with a ratio of 1:4 of intervention to control patients. A minimum sample size of 1760 (352 intervention and 1408 control) patients will detect a 14% reduction in the number of ED presentations (primary outcome) in the PROMPT-Care group compared with the control group. Intervention patients will provide feedback on system usability and value of the self-management materials; oncology staff will provide feedback on usefulness of PROMPT-Care reports, response to clinical alerts, impact on routine care, and usefulness of the SCPs; and GPs will provide feedback on the usefulness of the SCPs and attitudes towards shared-care models of survivorship care planning. This study will inform the PROMPT-Care system’s impact on healthcare utilisation and utility as an alternative model for ongoing supportive care. Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ( ACTRN12616000615482 ) on 12th May 2016 ( www.anzctr.org.au ).

KRAS and BRAF mutation rates in colorectal cancer (CRC) reported from various mono-ethnic studies vary amongst different ethnic groups. However, these differences in mutation rates may not be statistically significant or may be due to differences in environmental and/or laboratory factors across countries rather than racial genetic differences. Here, we compare the KRAS/BRAF mutation rates and survival outcomes in CRC between ethnic groups at a single institution. We also investigate the contributions of genetic, environmental, and laboratory factors to the variations in KRAS/BRAF mutation rates reported from different countries. Clinicopathological data from 453 ethnically diverse patients with CRC were retrospectively analyzed at Liverpool Hospital, NSW Australia (2014–2016). KRAS/BRAF mutations were detected using real-time PCR (Therascreen kits from Qiagen). Mismatch repair (MMR) status was determined using immunohistochemical staining. Four ethnic groups were analyzed: Caucasian, Middle Eastern, Asian, and South American. Overall survival data were available for 406 patients. There was no significant difference in KRAS mutation rates between Caucasians (41.1%), Middle Easterners (47.9%), Asians (44.8%), and South Americans (25%) (p = 0.34). BRAF mutation rates differed significantly between races (p = 0.025), with Caucasians having the highest rates (13.5%) and Middle Easterners the lowest (0%). A secondary analysis in which Caucasians were divided into three subgroups showed that ethnic grouping correlated significantly with KRAS mutation rate (p = 0.009), with central and eastern Europeans having the highest rates (58.3%). There were no significant differences in overall survival (OS) or disease-free survival (DFS) between the four races. The similarity in KRAS mutation rates across races raises the possibility that the differences in KRAS mutation rates reported from various countries may either not be statistically significant or may be due to environmental and/or laboratory factors rather than underlying racial genetic differences. In contrast, we verified that BRAF mutation rates differ significantly between races, suggesting racial genetic differences may be responsible for the discrepant BRAF mutation rates reported from different countries.