Web-based Treatment Information Tool for People With Advanced Pancreatic Cancer
Shared Decision-making: Investigating the Potential of an Interactive, Web-Based, Information Tool for People With Advanced Pancreatic Cancer
1 other identifier
observational
34
1 country
4
Brief Summary
Pancreatic cancer (PC) is usually diagnosed at a late stage when it is incurable, thereby limiting treatment to palliative care. Chemotherapy is one of the standard palliative care options. Due to the availability of different regimens with varying degrees of benefits and risks, clinicians and patients with advanced pancreatic cancer usually discuss treatment options in order to arrive at the most appropriate chemotherapy regimen for the patient. The use of information tools has produced positive results in explaining the benefits and risks of different treatment options for diseases like stage IV lung cancer, ovarian cancer, and colorectal cancer. However, there is no such tool for people with advanced pancreatic cancer. With over 80% of people with pancreatic cancer being diagnosed in the advanced stage, it would be beneficial to enhance effective decision-making with respect to treatment at this challenging time of the disease progression. The aim of this research is to investigate the potential of a web-based information tool to support decision-making about treatment options for people who have been diagnosed with advanced pancreatic cancer. A multiphase mixed methods design has been adopted for this research study. The identified phases are: (1) systematic review and network meta-analysis of reported randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in advanced pancreatic cancer; (2) focus groups/personal interviews with clinicians, and semi-structured interviews with patients and their relatives; (3) web-based information tool development; and (4) pilot test of the developed information tool with clinicians, patients, and relatives of patients
Trial Health
Trial Health Score
Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach
participants targeted
Target at P25-P50 for all trials
Started Feb 2019
4 active sites
Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.
Trial Relationships
Click on a node to explore related trials.
Study Timeline
Key milestones and dates
First Submitted
Initial submission to the registry
July 25, 2018
CompletedFirst Posted
Study publicly available on registry
August 16, 2018
CompletedStudy Start
First participant enrolled
February 19, 2019
CompletedPrimary Completion
Last participant's last visit for primary outcome
December 31, 2020
CompletedStudy Completion
Last participant's last visit for all outcomes
January 31, 2021
CompletedOctober 15, 2021
October 1, 2021
1.9 years
July 25, 2018
October 7, 2021
Conditions
Keywords
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcomes (1)
Decisional Conflict Scale
this is a 16-item validated instrument that measures the effectiveness in, and perceptions around decision making, using the decisional conflict construct, which is a state of uncertainty about the course of action to take. Subscales in the instrument are Informed subscale (3 items), Values Clarity subscale (3 items), Support subscale (3 items), and uncertainty subscale (4 items). The individual score is converted to an equivalent 0-100 scale. A total high score (above 37.5) means a high decisional conflict indicating a poor decision-making outcome, while a score below 25 indicates low decisional conflict hence better decision-making outcome. Mean scores and standard deviations will be reported for this measure.
up to 2 weeks after using the web-based information tool
Secondary Outcomes (1)
Usability: System Usability Scale (SUS)
up to 2 weeks after using the web-based information tool
Study Arms (4)
Doctors
This is a group of oncologists who have experience in treatment deliberations with patients of advanced cancer.
Nurses
This is a group of clinical nurse specialists who have experience in treatment deliberations with patients of advanced cancer
Patients
this is a group of adult patients who have been diagnosed with advanced pancreatic cancer
Relatives
this is a group of adults who are involved in providing support for their loved ones who are diagnosed with advanced pancreatic cancer
Interventions
an online tool to assist users in decision-making in choice of treatment for advanced cancer
Eligibility Criteria
The participants will be recruited from two settings 1. NHS sites in England 2. Pancreatic Cancer UK (PCUK) (for patients and relatives)
You may qualify if:
- Doctors and nurses must have had experience of a minimum of one consultation with a patient with cancer leading to the administration of chemotherapy
- Patients Diagnosed with advanced pancreatic cancer, Able to speak and understand written English, 18 years or older
- Relatives must be involved in, or aware of, the decision of the patients in choice of treatment, should be responsible for the provision of support to the patient, 18 years or older, Able to speak and understand written English
You may not qualify if:
- Patients who are unable to provide informed consent
Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.
Sponsors & Collaborators
- Bournemouth Universitylead
- Poole Hospital NHS Foundation Trustcollaborator
Study Sites (4)
Royal Bournemouth and Christchurch Hospitals
Bournemouth, United Kingdom
Dorset County Hospital NHS Foundation Trust
Dorchester, United Kingdom
Poole Hospital NHS Foundation Trust
Poole, United Kingdom
University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust
Southampton, United Kingdom
Related Publications (28)
Vincent A, Herman J, Schulick R, Hruban RH, Goggins M. Pancreatic cancer. Lancet. 2011 Aug 13;378(9791):607-20. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(10)62307-0. Epub 2011 May 26.
PMID: 21620466BACKGROUNDBalaban EP, Mangu PB, Khorana AA, Shah MA, Mukherjee S, Crane CH, Javle MM, Eads JR, Allen P, Ko AH, Engebretson A, Herman JM, Strickler JH, Benson AB 3rd, Urba S, Yee NS. Locally Advanced, Unresectable Pancreatic Cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline. J Clin Oncol. 2016 Aug 1;34(22):2654-68. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2016.67.5561. Epub 2016 May 31.
PMID: 27247216BACKGROUNDMalvezzi M, Carioli G, Bertuccio P, Boffetta P, Levi F, La Vecchia C, Negri E. European cancer mortality predictions for the year 2017, with focus on lung cancer. Ann Oncol. 2017 May 1;28(5):1117-1123. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdx033.
PMID: 28327906BACKGROUNDKamisawa T, Wood LD, Itoi T, Takaori K. Pancreatic cancer. Lancet. 2016 Jul 2;388(10039):73-85. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)00141-0. Epub 2016 Jan 30.
PMID: 26830752BACKGROUNDDucreux M, Cuhna AS, Caramella C, Hollebecque A, Burtin P, Goere D, Seufferlein T, Haustermans K, Van Laethem JL, Conroy T, Arnold D; ESMO Guidelines Committee. Cancer of the pancreas: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2015 Sep;26 Suppl 5:v56-68. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdv295. No abstract available.
PMID: 26314780BACKGROUNDTaieb J, Pointet AL, Van Laethem JL, Laquente B, Pernot S, Lordick F, Reni M. What treatment in 2017 for inoperable pancreatic cancers? Ann Oncol. 2017 Jul 1;28(7):1473-1483. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdx174.
PMID: 28459988BACKGROUNDHui D, De La Cruz M, Mori M, Parsons HA, Kwon JH, Torres-Vigil I, Kim SH, Dev R, Hutchins R, Liem C, Kang DH, Bruera E. Concepts and definitions for "supportive care," "best supportive care," "palliative care," and "hospice care" in the published literature, dictionaries, and textbooks. Support Care Cancer. 2013 Mar;21(3):659-85. doi: 10.1007/s00520-012-1564-y. Epub 2012 Aug 31.
PMID: 22936493BACKGROUNDElwyn G, Laitner S, Coulter A, Walker E, Watson P, Thomson R. Implementing shared decision making in the NHS. BMJ. 2010 Oct 14;341:c5146. doi: 10.1136/bmj.c5146. No abstract available.
PMID: 20947577BACKGROUNDCoulter A, Edwards A, Entwistle V, Kramer G, Nye A, Thomson R, Walker E. Shared decision making in the UK: Moving towards wider uptake. Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes. 2017 Jun;123-124:99-103. doi: 10.1016/j.zefq.2017.05.010. Epub 2017 May 20.
PMID: 28532629BACKGROUNDEdwards A, Hood K, Matthews E, Russell D, Russell I, Barker J, Bloor M, Burnard P, Covey J, Pill R, Wilkinson C, Stott N. The effectiveness of one-to-one risk communication interventions in health care: a systematic review. Med Decis Making. 2000 Jul-Sep;20(3):290-7. doi: 10.1177/0272989X0002000305.
PMID: 10929851BACKGROUNDElwyn G, Edwards A, Kinnersley P, Grol R. Shared decision making and the concept of equipoise: the competences of involving patients in healthcare choices. Br J Gen Pract. 2000 Nov;50(460):892-9.
PMID: 11141876BACKGROUNDGravel K, Legare F, Graham ID. Barriers and facilitators to implementing shared decision-making in clinical practice: a systematic review of health professionals' perceptions. Implement Sci. 2006 Aug 9;1:16. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-1-16.
PMID: 16899124BACKGROUNDOshima Lee E, Emanuel EJ. Shared decision making to improve care and reduce costs. N Engl J Med. 2013 Jan 3;368(1):6-8. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp1209500. No abstract available.
PMID: 23281971BACKGROUNDVeroff D, Marr A, Wennberg DE. Enhanced support for shared decision making reduced costs of care for patients with preference-sensitive conditions. Health Aff (Millwood). 2013 Feb;32(2):285-93. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2011.0941.
PMID: 23381521BACKGROUNDElwyn G, Rasmussen J, Kinsey K, Firth J, Marrin K, Edwards A, Wood F. On a learning curve for shared decision making: Interviews with clinicians using the knee osteoarthritis Option Grid. J Eval Clin Pract. 2018 Feb;24(1):56-64. doi: 10.1111/jep.12665. Epub 2016 Nov 16.
PMID: 27860101BACKGROUNDAgoritsas T, Heen AF, Brandt L, Alonso-Coello P, Kristiansen A, Akl EA, Neumann I, Tikkinen KA, Weijden Tv, Elwyn G, Montori VM, Guyatt GH, Vandvik PO. Decision aids that really promote shared decision making: the pace quickens. BMJ. 2015 Feb 10;350:g7624. doi: 10.1136/bmj.g7624.
PMID: 25670178BACKGROUNDVogel RI, Petzel SV, Cragg J, McClellan M, Chan D, Dickson E, Jacko JA, Sainfort F, Geller MA. Development and pilot of an advance care planning website for women with ovarian cancer: a randomized controlled trial. Gynecol Oncol. 2013 Nov;131(2):430-6. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2013.08.017. Epub 2013 Aug 27.
PMID: 23988413BACKGROUNDLeighl NB, Shepherd FA, Zawisza D, Burkes RL, Feld R, Waldron J, Sun A, Payne D, Bezjak A, Tattersall MH. Enhancing treatment decision-making: pilot study of a treatment decision aid in stage IV non-small cell lung cancer. Br J Cancer. 2008 Jun 3;98(11):1769-73. doi: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6604395. Epub 2008 May 27.
PMID: 18506180BACKGROUNDLeighl NB, Shepherd HL, Butow PN, Clarke SJ, McJannett M, Beale PJ, Wilcken NR, Moore MJ, Chen EX, Goldstein D, Horvath L, Knox JJ, Krzyzanowska M, Oza AM, Feld R, Hedley D, Xu W, Tattersall MH. Supporting treatment decision making in advanced cancer: a randomized trial of a decision aid for patients with advanced colorectal cancer considering chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol. 2011 May 20;29(15):2077-84. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2010.32.0754. Epub 2011 Apr 11.
PMID: 21483008BACKGROUNDMeropol NJ, Egleston BL, Buzaglo JS, Balshem A, Benson AB 3rd, Cegala DJ, Cohen RB, Collins M, Diefenbach MA, Miller SM, Fleisher L, Millard JL, Ross EA, Schulman KA, Silver A, Slater E, Solarino N, Sulmasy DP, Trinastic J, Weinfurt KP. A Web-based communication aid for patients with cancer: the CONNECT Study. Cancer. 2013 Apr 1;119(7):1437-45. doi: 10.1002/cncr.27874. Epub 2013 Jan 18.
PMID: 23335150BACKGROUNDAustin CA, Mohottige D, Sudore RL, Smith AK, Hanson LC. Tools to Promote Shared Decision Making in Serious Illness: A Systematic Review. JAMA Intern Med. 2015 Jul;175(7):1213-21. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2015.1679.
PMID: 25985438BACKGROUNDAnsari D, Nilsson J, Andersson R, Regner S, Tingstedt B, Andersson B. Artificial neural networks predict survival from pancreatic cancer after radical surgery. Am J Surg. 2013 Jan;205(1):1-7. doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2012.05.032.
PMID: 23245432BACKGROUNDSmith BJ, Mezhir JJ. An interactive Bayesian model for prediction of lymph node ratio and survival in pancreatic cancer patients. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2014 Oct;21(e2):e203-11. doi: 10.1136/amiajnl-2013-002171. Epub 2014 Jan 20.
PMID: 24444460BACKGROUNDWalczak S, Velanovich V. An Evaluation of Artificial Neural Networks in Predicting Pancreatic Cancer Survival. J Gastrointest Surg. 2017 Oct;21(10):1606-1612. doi: 10.1007/s11605-017-3518-7. Epub 2017 Aug 3.
PMID: 28776157BACKGROUNDGresham, G. Informed Decision Making for Patients with Advanced Pancreatic Cancer Considering Chemotherapy: Development and Evaluation of a Clinical Decision Aid for Patients. Université d'Ottawa/University of Ottawa, 2013.
BACKGROUNDGeessink NH, Schoon Y, van Herk HC, van Goor H, Olde Rikkert MG. Key elements of optimal treatment decision-making for surgeons and older patients with colorectal or pancreatic cancer: A qualitative study. Patient Educ Couns. 2017 Mar;100(3):473-479. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2016.10.013. Epub 2016 Oct 17.
PMID: 28029569BACKGROUNDLevinson W, Kallewaard M, Bhatia RS, Wolfson D, Shortt S, Kerr EA; Choosing Wisely International Working Group. 'Choosing Wisely': a growing international campaign. BMJ Qual Saf. 2015 Feb;24(2):167-74. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2014-003821. Epub 2014 Dec 31.
PMID: 25552584BACKGROUNDO'Connor AM, Llewellyn-Thomas HA, Flood AB. Modifying unwarranted variations in health care: shared decision making using patient decision aids. Health Aff (Millwood). 2004;Suppl Variation:VAR63-72. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.var.63.
PMID: 15471770BACKGROUND
MeSH Terms
Conditions
Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)
Study Design
- Study Type
- observational
- Observational Model
- COHORT
- Time Perspective
- CROSS SECTIONAL
- Sponsor Type
- OTHER
- Responsible Party
- SPONSOR
Study Record Dates
First Submitted
July 25, 2018
First Posted
August 16, 2018
Study Start
February 19, 2019
Primary Completion
December 31, 2020
Study Completion
January 31, 2021
Last Updated
October 15, 2021
Record last verified: 2021-10
Data Sharing
- IPD Sharing
- Will not share