Shared decision-making support program for older patients with advanced cancer using a question prompt list and geriatric assessment: A pilot randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Older patients with cancer are less likely to express their treatment preferences than younger patients. Question prompt lists (QPLs) facilitate communication between patients and physicians. Geriatric assessment (GA) is recommended when older patients with cancer make treatment decisions. This study estimated the effect size of a shared decision-making (SDM) support program combining QPLs with GA in terms of patients' subjective evaluation of the SDM process for a future definitive randomized controlled trial. We also evaluated the number and quality of aging-related communication during consultations, and feasibility and acceptability of the study for exploratory purposes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a pilot study with randomized allocation and blind evaluation. Patients aged 65 years or older at the National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan, scheduled to discuss the changes of their treatment, were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to the SDM support program or usual care. This program consisted of 30-60 min of face-to-face coaching, with QPLs and GA provided before the coaching. As the primary endpoint, the decisional conflict scores given by the patients immediately after the consultation were compared between the two groups. For the secondary endpoints, the number and quality of aging-related communications during the consultations were assessed by evaluators (blinded) using audio-recordings. Adherence, burden, and usefulness were assessed for evaluating feasibility and acceptability of the SDM support program. RESULTS: Forty patients were enrolled. All patients completed the GA questionnaire, for which 70% did not require any individual assistance. Answering the questionnaires took approximately 11 min. The decisional conflict scores were mean [standard deviation (SD)]: 19.3 [10.8] vs. 18.0 [11.1] (effect size: Cohen's d = 0.12) for the SDM support program and usual care groups, respectively. The number of aging-related communications during the consultation for the new treatment was higher in the SDM support program group than the usual care (mean [SD]: 3.3 [1.2] vs. 2.2 [1.5], effect size: cohen's d = 1.32). Patients felt that the SDM support program was useful but not burdensome or difficult. DISCUSSION: The SDM support program was considered useful and feasible for older patients and able to facilitate communication regarding aging-related concerns. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: The study protocol was registered on September 23, 2020, in the UMIN Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN000041867).

Optimizing smartphone psychotherapy for depressive symptoms in patients with cancer: Multiphase optimization strategy using a decentralized multicenter randomized clinical trial (J-SUPPORT 2001 Study).

AIM: Patients with cancer experience various forms of psychological distress, including depressive symptoms, which can impact quality of life, elevate morbidity risk, and increase medical costs. Psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy are effective for reducing depressive symptoms among patients with cancer, but most patients prefer psychotherapy. This study aimed to develop an efficient and effective smartphone psychotherapy component to address depressive symptom. METHODS: This was a decentralized, parallel-group, multicenter, open, individually randomized, fully factorial trial. Patients aged ≥20 years with cancer were randomized by the presence/absence of three cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) skills (behavioral activation [BA], assertiveness training [AT], and problem-solving [PS]) on a smartphone app. All participants received psychoeducation (PE). The primary outcome was change in the patient health questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) total score between baseline and week 8. Secondary outcomes included anxiety. RESULTS: In total, 359 participants were randomized. Primary outcome data at week 8 were obtained for 355 participants (99%). The week 8 PHQ-9 total score was significantly reduced from baseline for all participants by -1.41 points (95% confidence interval [CI] -1.89, -0.92), but between-group differences in change scores were not significant (BA: -0.04, 95% CI -0.75, 0.67; AT: -0.16, 95% CI -0.87, 0.55; PS: -0.19, 95% CI -0.90, 0.52). CONCLUSION: As the presence of any of the three intervention components did not contribute to a significant additive reduction of depressive symptoms, we cannot make evidence-based recommendations regarding the use of specific smartphone psychotherapy.

How to select and understand guidelines for patient-reported outcomes: a scoping review of existing guidance.

BACKGROUND: Over the past few decades, patient-reported outcomes (PROs) have been used to understand patient health conditions better. Therefore, numerous PRO measures (questionnaires) and guidelines or guidance have been developed. However, it is challenging to select target guidance from among the many available guidance and to understand the chosen guidance. This study comprehensively collected the existing PRO guidance for clinical trials or studies and practices to support novice PRO users in academia, industry, clinical practice, and regulatory and reimbursement decision-making. METHODS: For the scoping review, we searched the MEDLINE, Embase, Google Books, WorldCat, and the National Library of Medicine (NLM) Bookshelf databases from 2009 to 2023. The eligibility criteria were PRO guidance for clinical trials, clinical practice, or application such as health technology assessment. Those guidance cover aspects such as quality of life (QOL), PRO, health-related QOL, health state utilities, psychometric requirements, implementation methods, analysis and interpretation, or clinical practice applications. After the systematic search, three researchers individually reviewed the collected data, and the reviewed articles and books were scrutinized using the same criteria. RESULTS: We collected the PRO guidance published in articles and books between 2009 and 2023. From the database searches, 1,455 articles and 387 books were identified, of which one book and 33 articles were finally selected. The collected PRO guidance was categorized into the adoption of PRO measures, design and reporting of trials or studies using PROs, implementation of PRO evaluation in clinical trials or studies or clinical practice, analysis and interpretation of PROs, and application of PRO evaluation. Based on this categorization, we suggest the following for novices: When selecting guidance, novices should clarify the "place" and "purpose" where the guidance will be used. Additionally, they should know that the terminology related to PRO and the scope and expectations of PROs vary by "places" and "purposes". CONCLUSIONS: From this scoping review of existing PRO guidance, we provided summaries and caveats to assist novices in selecting guidance that fits their purpose and understanding it.

The development and analysis of a Japanese modern comprehensive clinical data management training program.

Background: Clinical data management (CDM) collects, integrates, and makes data available. It plays a vital role in clinical research. However, there are few opportunities for Japanese clinical data managers to learn about its systematic framework, particularly in academic research organizations. While Japanese-language CDM training exists, its effectiveness in a Japanese context requires clarification. Objectives: We aimed to develop an advanced program of instruction for professionals to understand CDM and to determine the effectiveness of the training program. Methods and results: We developed an advanced program including risk-based monitoring and the Clinical Data Interchange Standards Consortium on a trial basis for clinical data managers to provide them with a comprehensive understanding of CDM. Fifty-two people attended the program and reported that they were highly satisfied with it. Conclusions: To provide comprehensive CDM training in Japan, it is imperative to continue improving the content and develop an advanced program. Due to the recent tightening of clinical research regulations and the development and dissemination of various systems for conducting clinical research, the competency-based educational program requires further development.

Dexamethasone-sparing on days 2-4 with combined palonosetron, neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist, and olanzapine in cisplatin: a randomized phase III trial (SPARED Trial).

BACKGROUND: This study evaluated the non-inferiority of dexamethasone (DEX) on day 1, with sparing on days 2-4 in cisplatin-based chemotherapy. METHODS: Patients with malignant solid tumors who were treated with cisplatin (≥50 mg/m²) were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either DEX on days 1-4 (Arm D4) or DEX on day 1 (Arm D1) plus palonosetron, NK-1 RA, and olanzapine (5 mg). The primary endpoint was complete response (CR) during the delayed (24-120 h) phase. The non-inferiority margin was set at -15%. RESULTS: A total of 281 patients were enrolled, 278 of whom were randomly assigned to Arm D4 (n = 139) or Arm D1 (n = 139). In 274 patients were included in the efficacy analysis, the rates of delayed CR in Arms D4 and D1 were 79.7% and 75.0%, respectively (risk difference -4.1%; 95% CI -14.1%-6.0%, P = 0.023). However, patients in Arm D1 had significantly lower total control rates during the delayed and overall phases, and more frequent nausea and appetite loss. There were no significant between-arm differences in the quality of life. CONCLUSION: DEX-sparing is an alternative option for patients receiving cisplatin; however, this revised administration schedule should be applied on an individual basis after a comprehensive evaluation. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRY NUMBER: UMIN000032269.

Registry study of immune-related adverse events using electronic patient-reported outcome in patients with cancer receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors: protocol for a multicentre cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: The use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) is rapidly expanding in cancer treatment. ICIs have a unique safety profile, characterised by immune-related adverse events (irAEs). The safety profile of ICIs lacks patient experience and perspectives. This study primarily aims to obtain a database for descriptive research on the status of irAEs using the Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria (PRO-CTCAE) in patients with gastrointestinal cancer, lung cancer and malignant pleural mesothelioma treated with regimens containing ICIs. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is an ongoing, multicentre, observational study in Japan. Eligible patients must be at least 20 years old and have been diagnosed with lung cancer, malignant pleural mesothelioma or gastrointestinal cancer and plan to use ICIs. Participants will install the electronic PRO (ePRO) application and report adverse events via ePRO using PRO-CTCAE once weekly for up to 48 weeks. A registry will be established using background information obtained from medical records. The sample size is determined by 1 year projection without using statistical methods. Statistical analyses will include point estimates and 95% CIs for the incidence of each adverse event by cancer type and regimen at each time point. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This research will be conducted per the Declaration of Helsinki, the Ethical Guidelines for Life Science and Medical Research Involving Human Subjects issued by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology and the Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare, and the revised Personal Information Protection Law. The study protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee (approval ID T2021-0180) of Tokyo Medical University Hospital on 15 October 2021. REGISTRATION DETAILS: The study began enrolling patients in December 2021. The target enrolment is 260; as of October 2022, 141 have been enrolled, and the enrolment is scheduled to end on 30 June 2023. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: UMIN000046418.

Prevalence of psychological distress and associated factors among patients undergoing comprehensive genomic profiling testing: protocol for a multicentre, prospective, observational study.

INTRODUCTION: Since May 2019, comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) has been covered by Japan's health insurance system for patients with solid tumours that have progressed on standard chemotherapy, rare tumours or tumours of unknown primary origin. Although CGP has the potential to identify actionable mutations that can guide the selection of genomically matched therapies for patients with advanced cancer and limited treatment options, less than 10% of patients benefit from CGP testing, which may have a negative impact on patients' mental status. The aim of this study is to investigate the prevalence of psychological distress and associated factors among patients with advanced cancer who are undergoing CGP testing across Japan. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This multicentre, prospective cohort study will enrol a total of 700 patients with advanced cancer undergoing CGP testing. Participants will be asked to complete questionnaires at three timepoints: at the time of consenting to CGP testing (T1), at the time of receiving the CGP results (T2; 2-3 months after T1) and 4-5 months after T2 (T3). Primary outcome is the prevalence of depression as measured by the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 at the three timepoints. Secondary outcomes are the prevalence of anxiety and Quality of Life Score. Associated factors with psychological distress will also be examined, including knowledge about CGP, attitudes, values and preferences towards CGP, satisfaction with oncologists' communication and patient characteristics as well as medical information including CGP test results and genomically matched therapies if provided. The prevalence of depression and anxiety will be estimated using the unadjusted raw rates observed in the total sample. Longitudinal changes in measures will be explored by calculating differences between the timepoints. Multivariate associations between variables will be examined using multiple or logistic regression analysis depending on the outcomes to adjust for confounders and to identify outcome predictors. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the National Cancer Center Japan on 5 January 2023 (ID: 2022-228). Study findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals and conference presentations. TRIAL STATUS: The study is currently recruiting participants and the enrolment period will end on 31 March 2025, with an expected follow-up date of 31 March 2026. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: UMIN000049964.

Protocol for the ASTRO study (SSOP-01): a multicentre prospective cohort study investigating adverse events based on electronic patient-reported outcomes in patients with breast cancer after adjuvant chemotherapy.

INTRODUCTION: Symptom-related adverse events associated with perioperative chemotherapy in patients with breast cancer include short-term adverse events such as nausea and vomiting. However, changes in the severity and duration of prolonged symptom-related adverse events have not been fully investigated. We present a protocol of a study that aims to clarify the prevalence of symptom-related adverse events in patients with breast cancer 1 year after neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy using an electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePRO) system. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This multicentre prospective observational cohort study will include patients with breast cancer who have received preoperative or postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy. The final injection date of the cytotoxic agent will be the study initiation date. Patients will report every 2 weeks from the initiation date to 12 weeks and every 4 weeks from 12 weeks to 1 year, and they can enter this information into the ePRO system from anywhere. The primary outcome will be the prevalence of symptom-related adverse events according to the ePRO system 1 year after the date of the last injection of the cytotoxic drug used in neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer. To increase multi-institutional enrolment, two cohorts will be included. Cohort 1 will comprise patients with acquisition of baseline patient information regarding preoperative chemotherapy and presurgery characteristics. Cohort 2 will comprise patients without acquisition of baseline patient information. The target sample size is ≥250 per year. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study protocol has been approved by the ethics committee at each participating institution. The results will be presented at major national and international conferences and submitted to peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL STATUS: Registration was started in October 2021. By August 2022, a total of 132 participants were enrolled. Follow-up will be continued through December 2024. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: UMIN000045422.

Optimization of smartphone psychotherapy for depression and anxiety among patients with cancer using the multiphase optimization strategy (MOST) framework and decentralized clinical trial system (SMartphone Intervention to LEssen depression/Anxiety and GAIN resilience: SMILE AGAIN project): a protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Cancer patients experience various forms of psychological distress. Their distress, mainly in the form of depression and anxiety, leads to poor quality of life, increased medical spending due to frequent visits, and decrease in treatment adherence. It is estimated that 30-50% among them would require support from mental health professionals: in reality, much less actually receive such support partly due to a shortage of qualified professionals and also due to psychological barriers in seeking such help. The purpose of the present study is to develop the easily accessible and the most efficient and effective smartphone psychotherapy package to alleviate depression and anxiety in cancer patients. METHODS: Based on the multiphase optimization strategy (MOST) framework, the SMartphone Intervention to LEssen depression/Anxiety and GAIN resilience project (SMILE-AGAIN project) is a parallel-group, multicenter, open, stratified block randomized, fully factorial trial with four experimental components: psychosocial education (PE), behavioral activation (BA), assertion training (AT), and problem-solving therapy (PS). The allocation sequences are maintained centrally. All participants receive PE and then are randomized to the presence/absence of the remaining three components. The primary outcome of this study is the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) total score, which will be administered as an electronic patient-reported outcome on the patients' smartphones after 8 weeks. The protocol was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Nagoya City University on July 15, 2020 (ID: 46-20-0005). The randomized trial, which commenced in March 2021, is currently enrolling participants. The estimated end date for this study is March 2023. DISCUSSION: The highly efficient experimental design will allow for the identification of the most effective components and the most efficient combinations among the four components of the smartphone psychotherapy package for cancer patients. Given that many cancer patients face significant psychological hurdles in seeing mental health professionals, easily accessible therapeutic interventions without hospital visits may offer benefits. If an effective combination of psychotherapy is determined in this study, it can be provided using smartphones to patients who cannot easily access hospitals or clinics. TRIAL REGISTRATION: UMIN000041536, CTR. Registered on 1 November 2020  https://center6.umin.ac.jp/cgi-open-bin/ctr/ctr_view.cgi?recptno=R000047301 .

Preoperative steroid for enhancing patients' recovery after head and neck cancer surgery with free tissue transfer reconstruction: protocol for a phase III, placebo-controlled, randomised, double-blind study (J-SUPPORT 2022, PreSte-HN Study).

INTRODUCTION: There is no established methodology for the perioperative management of head and neck cancer surgery and free tissue transfer reconstruction (HNS-FTR). A single dose of corticosteroid administered immediately before surgery has been shown to reduce postoperative pain and nausea/vomiting after some types of surgery. However, the efficacy of this strategy has not been demonstrated in HNS-FTR, and the increased risk of infectious complications associated with its use cannot be ruled out. This phase III, placebo-controlled, randomised, double-blind, comparative, multicentre study seeks to determine if preoperative administration of corticosteroid hormone has an adjunctive effect in terms of reducing pain and nausea/vomiting after surgery and improving the quality of postoperative recovery. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Using the minimisation method, patients undergoing HNS-FTR are currently being recruited and randomly assigned to a study arm at a 1:1 allocation rate. The study treatment arm consists of 8.0 mg of dexamethasone phosphate dissolved in 100 mL of saline administered as a single dose by intravenous infusion. These treatments will be administered in a double-blind fashion. All patients will receive perioperative care according to the common multicentre enhanced recovery after surgery programme. The primary endpoint is the quality of postoperative recovery, as determined by the area under the curve (AUC) for total score on the Japanese version of the Quality of Recovery Score (QOR-40J) on postoperative days 2 and 4. The point estimate and CI for the difference in the AUC between the groups on postoperative days 2 and 4 will be calculated. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study will be performed in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and Japan's Clinical Trials Act. The study protocol was approved by the Certified Review Board of National Cancer Center Hospital East (Reference K2021004). TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: The study was registered in the Japan Registry of Clinical Trials (jRCTs031210593; V.3.0, November 2021, available at https://jrct.niph.go.jp/en-latest-detail/jRCTs031210593).

Adherence to anti-retroviral therapy, decisional conflicts, and health-related quality of life among treatment-naïve individuals living with HIV: a DEARS-J observational study.

BACKGROUND: Supporting people living with HIV using anti-retroviral therapy (ART) is important due to the requirement for strict medication adherence. To date, no data from longitudinal studies evaluating adherence by treatment-naïve people living with HIV are currently available. We investigated the adherence of treatment-naïve people living with HIV over time and examined the relationships among decisional conflicts, adherence, and health-related quality of life (HRQL). METHODS: The survey items included adherence (visual analogue scale [VAS]), decisional conflict (decisional conflict scale [DCS]), and HRQL (Medical Outcomes Study HIV Health Survey [MOS-HIV]). The DCS and MOS-HIV scores and the VAS and MOS scores were collected electronically at the ART initiation time point and at 4-, 24-, and 48-week post-treatment time points. RESULTS: A total of 215 participants were enrolled. The mean DCS score was 27.3 (SD, 0.9); 23.3% of participants were in the high-score and 36.7% in the low-score groups. The mean adherence rates at 4, 24, and 48 weeks were 99.2% (standard error [SE], 0.2), 98.4% (SE, 0.4), and 96.0% (SE, 1.2), respectively. The least-square means of the MOS-HIV for the DCS (high vs. low scores) were 64.4 vs. 69.2 for general health perceptions and 57.7 vs. 64.0 for HRQL, respectively. CONCLUSION: Adherence among treatment-naïve people living with HIV was maintained at a higher level, and HRQL tended to improve with ART. People with high levels of decisional conflict tended to have lower HRQL scores. Support for people living with HIV during ART initiation may be related to HRQL.

Effectiveness of a facilitation programme using a mobile application for initiating advance care planning discussions between patients with advanced cancer and healthcare providers: protocol for a randomised controlled trial (J-SUPPORT 2104).

INTRODUCTION: Timely implementation of the discussion process of advance care planning (ACP) is recommended. The communication attitude of healthcare providers is critical in ACP facilitation; thus, improving their communication attitudes may reduce patient distress and unnecessary aggressive treatment while enhancing care satisfaction. Digital mobile devices are being developed for behavioural interventions owing to their low space and time restrictions and ease of information sharing. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of an intervention programme using an application intended to facilitate patient questioning behaviour on improving communication related to ACP between patients with advanced cancer and healthcare providers. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study uses a parallel-group, evaluator-blind, randomised controlled trial design. We plan to recruit 264 adult patients with incurable advanced cancer at the National Cancer Centre in Tokyo, Japan. Intervention group participants use a mobile application ACP programme and undergo a 30 min interview with a trained intervention provider for discussions with the oncologist at the next patient visit, while control group participants continue their usual treatment. The primary outcome is the oncologist's communication behaviour score assessed using audiorecordings of the consultation. Secondary outcomes include communication between patients and oncologists and the patients' distress, quality of life, care goals and preferences, and medical care utilisation. We will use a full analysis set including the registered participant population who receive at least a part of the intervention. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study protocol was reviewed and approved by the Scientific Advisory Board of the Japan Supportive, Palliative and Psychosocial Oncology Group (Registration No. 2104) and the Institutional Review Board of the National Cancer Centre Hospital (registration No. 2020-500). Written informed consent is obtained from the patients. The results of the trial will be published in peer-reviewed scientific journals and presented at scientific meetings. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: UMIN000045305, NCT05045040.

Protocol for the RETHINK study: a randomised, double-blind, parallel-group, non-inferiority clinical trial comparing acetaminophen and NSAIDs for treatment of chronic pain in elderly patients with osteoarthritis of the hip and knee.

INTRODUCTION: In patients with chronic pain, oral analgesics are essential treatment options to manage pain appropriately, improve activities of daily living abilities and achieve a higher quality of life (QOL). It is desirable to select analgesics for elderly patients based on comparative data on analgesic effect and risk of adverse events; however, there are few comparative studies so far. The purpose of this study is to determine whether the efficacy and safety of acetaminophen are non-inferior to non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in the treatment of chronic pain associated with osteoarthritis of the hip and knee in elderly patients. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study is a multicentre, randomised controlled, double-blind, parallel-group study to compare the analgesic effect and adverse events between acetaminophen or NSAIDs (loxoprofen or celecoxib). A total of 400 elderly patients with osteoarthritis of the hip and knee will be recruited from five institutions in Japan. Patients of 65 years or older with osteoarthritis-related pain will be registered and randomly assigned to acetaminophen, loxoprofen or celecoxib with 2:1:1 allocation. The primary endpoint is change in the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) item 3 (worst pain) score from baseline to week 8. The secondary endpoints are BPI item 3 score change from baseline to week 4, health-related QOL measured by Short Form-8 Health Survey, and occurrence of adverse events including gastrointestinal disorders and abnormal liver function. Data will be analysed in accordance with a predefined statistical analysis plan. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study protocol was approved by the Kyushu University Hospital Certified Institutional Review Board for Clinical Trials on 28 January 2021 (KD2020004) and the chief executive of each participating hospital. The results of the study will be submitted to international peer-reviewed journals, and the main findings will be presented at international scientific conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: jRCTs071200112.

Protocol for a confirmatory trial of the effectiveness and safety of palliative arterial embolization for painful bone metastases.

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter arterial embolization (TAE) has long been used for hemostasis of traumatic or postoperative hemorrhage and embolization of tumors. Previous retrospective studies of TAE for painful bone metastases showed 60%-80% pain reduction with a median time to response of 1-2 days. Compared with radiotherapy and bisphosphonates, time to response appeared earlier than that of radiotherapy or bone-modifying agents. However, few prospective studies have examined TAE for this indication. Here, we describe the protocol for a confirmatory study designed to clarify the efficacy and safety profile of TAE. METHODS: This study will be a multicenter, single-arm confirmatory study (phase 2-3 design). Patients with painful bone metastases from any primary tumor are eligible for enrollment. TAE will be the main intervention. Following puncture of the femoral artery under local anesthesia and insertion of an angiographic sheath, angiography will confirm that the injected region includes tumor vasculature. Catheter position will be adjusted so that the embolization range does not include non-target tissues. Spherical embolic material will then be slowly injected into the artery to embolize it. The primary endpoint (efficacy) is the proportion of subjects with pain relief at 72 h after TAE and the secondary endpoint (safety) is the incidence of all NCI Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5.0 Grade 4 adverse events and Grade ≥ 3 necrosis of the central nervous system. DISCUSSION: If the primary and secondary endpoints are met, TAE can be a treatment choice for painful bone metastases. Trial registry number is UMIN-CTR ID: UMIN000040794. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study is ongoing, and patients are currently being enrolled. Enrollment started in March 2021. A total of 36 patients have participated as of Aug 2022. PROTOCOL VERSION: Ver1.4, 13/07/2022.

Patient-reported outcome and quality of life research policy: Japan Clinical Oncology Group (JCOG) policy.

Assessments of patient-reported outcomes and health-related quality of life in cancer clinical trials have been increasingly emphasized recently because patient and public involvement in cancer treatment development has been promoted by regulatory authorities and academic societies. To assess patient experiences during and after cancer treatment, there is interest in implementing patient-reported outcome and health-related quality of life assessments into cancer clinical trials. The Japan Clinical Oncology Group quality of life ad hoc committee previously created a version of the Quality of Life Assessment Policy in 2006. Recently, there has been increasing demand from Japan Clinical Oncology Group researchers to assess patient-reported outcome/health-related quality of life in clinical trials. Although guidelines are available regarding planning and reporting clinical trials that include patient-reported outcome/health-related quality of life as an endpoint, there are still issues regarding the lack of consensus on standardized methods for analysing and interpreting the results. Hence, it was considered necessary to reorganize the Japan Clinical Oncology Group patient-reported outcome/quality of life research committee and to revise the former patient-reported outcome/quality of life research policy to promote patient-reported outcome/health-related quality of life research in future Japan Clinical Oncology Group trials. The purpose of this Japan Clinical Oncology Group patient-reported outcome/quality of life research policy is to define patient-reported outcome/health-related quality of life research and provide guidelines for including patient-reported outcome/health-related quality of life as an endpoint in Japan Clinical Oncology Group trials.

Smartphone Psychotherapy Reduces Fear of Cancer Recurrence Among Breast Cancer Survivors: A Fully Decentralized Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial (J-SUPPORT 1703 Study).

PURPOSE: Fear of cancer recurrence (FCR) is a common distressing condition. We investigated the efficacy of smartphone problem-solving therapy and behavioral activation applications in breast cancer survivors. METHODS: This was a decentralized randomized trial. Participants were disease-free breast cancer survivors age 20-49 years who were randomly assigned to the smartphone-based intervention or waitlist control. Both groups received treatment as usual. The control group could access the smartphone apps during weeks 8-24. The intervention comprised smartphone problem-solving therapy and behavioral activation apps. The primary end point was the Concerns About Recurrence Scale at week 8. Secondary outcomes included the Fear of Cancer Recurrence Inventory-Short Form (FCRI-SF), the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), the Short-form Supportive Care Needs Survey (SCNS-SF34), and the Posttraumatic Growth Inventory at weeks 8 and 24 (trial registration: UMIN-CTR: UMIN000031140). RESULTS: The intervention group included 223 participants, and the control group included 224 participants. Primary outcome data were obtained for 444 participants, and 213 participants in the intervention arm completed the week 24 assessment. The intervention group had statistically greater improvements than controls at week 8 on the Concerns About Recurrence Scale (difference -1.39; 95% CI, -1.93 to -0.85; P < .001), FCRI-SF (difference -1.65; 95% CI, -2.41 to -0.89; P < .001), HADS depression (difference -0.49; 95% CI, -0.98 to 0; P < .05), and SCNS-SF34 psychological domain (difference -1.49; 95% CI, -2.67 to -0.32; P < .05). These scores at week 24 were not statistically significant compared with week 8 although the HADS depression score at week 24 was significantly reduced (P = .03). CONCLUSION: Novel smartphone psychotherapy offers a promising way to reduce FCR given the large number of survivors and a limited number of therapists to competently conduct psychotherapy.

Geriatric assessment and management with question prompt list using a web-based application for elderly patients with cancer (MAPLE) to communicate ageing-related concerns: J-SUPPORT 2101 study protocol for a multicentre, parallel group, randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Elderly cancer patients often have ageing-related physical and psychosocial problems that should be fully shared with their oncologists. Geriatric assessment (GA) can assess these ageing-related problems and guide management. Communication support might also facilitate implementation of GA-guided management. We will conduct a multicentre, randomised controlled trial to examine the efficacy of a programme that combines a GA summary, management recommendations and communication support to facilitate ageing-related communications between elderly Japanese patients with cancer and their oncologists, and thus to implement programme-guided management. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We plan to recruit a total of 210 patients aged ≥70 years, diagnosed with incurable cancers of gastrointestinal origin, and referred for first-line or second-line chemotherapy. In the intervention arm, a summary of management recommendations based on a GA and question prompt list (QPL) will be provided to patients and shared with their oncologists at the first outpatient visit after randomisation by trained intervention providers. For 5 months after the initial intervention, implementation of GA-guided management recommendations will be reviewed monthly with the patients and their oncologists to implement management as needed. The GA and QPL will be re-evaluated at 3 months, with a summary provided to patients and their oncologists. Those participants allocated to the usual care arm will receive usual oncology care. The primary endpoint is the number of conversations about ageing-related concerns at the first outpatient visit after randomisation. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study was approved by the institutional review board of the National Cancer Center Japan on 15 April 2021 (ID: 2020-592). Study findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals and conference presentations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: UMIN000045428.

Patients' acceptability and implementation outcomes of a case management approach to encourage participation in colorectal cancer screening for people with schizophrenia: a qualitative secondary analysis of a mixed-method randomised clinical trial.

OBJECTIVES: We examined the efficacy of case management (CM) interventions to encourage participation in colorectal cancer screening for patients with schizophrenia. This study aimed to clarify patients' acceptability of the intervention and the helpful components of the intervention. Simultaneously, the study aimed to determine the acceptability, appropriateness and feasibility of the intervention from the perspective of psychiatric care providers. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: This study was a secondary qualitative analysis of a mixed-method randomised controlled trial that evaluated the efficacy of the CM approach to encourage participation in cancer screening for people with schizophrenia. The intervention comprised education and patient navigation for colorectal cancer screening. Interviews were conducted with patients who received the intervention and staff from two psychiatric hospitals in Japan who delivered the intervention. PARTICIPANTS: Of the 172 patients with schizophrenia who participated in the trial, 153 were included. In addition, three out of six providers were included. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Using a structured interview, the case manager asked participants about patient acceptability and the helpful components of the intervention. Content analysis was conducted for the responses obtained, and the number of responses was tabulated by two researchers. For the interviews with the providers, opinions obtained from verbatim transcripts were extracted and summarised. RESULTS: Forty-three of the 56 patients perceived that the intervention was acceptable. For the intervention component, inperson counselling with an explanation of the screening process by psychiatric care providers was most frequently reported by the patients as helpful (48 of the 68 respondents). Psychiatric care providers evaluated the intervention as acceptable, appropriate and easy to understand and administer. However, providing the intervention to all patients simultaneously was considered difficult with the current human resources. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that the CM intervention was perceived as acceptable by patients and acceptable and appropriate by psychiatric care providers. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: UMIN000036017.

Ethical Considerations for the Inclusion of Patient-Reported Outcomes in Clinical Research: The PRO Ethics Guidelines.

Importance: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) can inform health care decisions, regulatory decisions, and health care policy. They also can be used for audit/benchmarking and monitoring symptoms to provide timely care tailored to individual needs. However, several ethical issues have been raised in relation to PRO use. Objective: To develop international, consensus-based, PRO-specific ethical guidelines for clinical research. Evidence Review: The PRO ethics guidelines were developed following the Enhancing the Quality and Transparency of Health Research (EQUATOR) Network's guideline development framework. This included a systematic review of the ethical implications of PROs in clinical research. The databases MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase, AMED, and CINAHL were searched from inception until March 2020. The keywords patient reported outcome* and ethic* were used to search the databases. Two reviewers independently conducted title and abstract screening before full-text screening to determine eligibility. The review was supplemented by the SPIRIT-PRO Extension recommendations for trial protocol. Subsequently, a 2-round international Delphi process (n = 96 participants; May and August 2021) and a consensus meeting (n = 25 international participants; October 2021) were held. Prior to voting, consensus meeting participants were provided with a summary of the Delphi process results and information on whether the items aligned with existing ethical guidance. Findings: Twenty-three items were considered in the first round of the Delphi process: 6 relevant candidate items from the systematic review and 17 additional items drawn from the SPIRIT-PRO Extension. Ninety-six international participants voted on the relevant importance of each item for inclusion in ethical guidelines and 12 additional items were recommended for inclusion in round 2 of the Delphi (35 items in total). Fourteen items were recommended for inclusion at the consensus meeting (n = 25 participants). The final wording of the PRO ethical guidelines was agreed on by consensus meeting participants with input from 6 additional individuals. Included items focused on PRO-specific ethical issues relating to research rationale, objectives, eligibility requirements, PRO concepts and domains, PRO assessment schedules, sample size, PRO data monitoring, barriers to PRO completion, participant acceptability and burden, administration of PRO questionnaires for participants who are unable to self-report PRO data, input on PRO strategy by patient partners or members of the public, avoiding missing data, and dissemination plans. Conclusions and Relevance: The PRO ethics guidelines provide recommendations for ethical issues that should be addressed in PRO clinical research. Addressing ethical issues of PRO clinical research has the potential to ensure high-quality PRO data while minimizing participant risk, burden, and harm and protecting participant and researcher welfare.

Phase III, international, multicentre, double-blind, dose increment, parallel-arm, randomised controlled trial of duloxetine versus pregabalin for opioid-unresponsive neuropathic cancer pain: a JORTC-PAL16 trial protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Management of neuropathic cancer pain (NCP) refractory to regular opioids remains an important challenge. The efficacy of pregabalin for NCP except chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) has already been confirmed in two randomised controlled trials (RCTs) compared with placebo. Duloxetine offers the potential of analgesia in opioid refractory NCP. However, there are no RCT of duloxetine for the management of opioid-refractory NCP as a first line treatment. Both classes of drugs have the potential to reduce NCP, but there has been no head-to-head comparison for the efficacy and safety, especially given differing side effect profiles. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: An international, multicentre, double-blind, dose increment, parallel-arm, RCT is planned. Inclusion criteria include: adults with cancer experiencing NCP refractory to opioids; Brief Pain Inventory (BPI)-item 3 (worst pain) of ≥4; Neuropathic Pain on the Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Symptoms and Signs Pain Scale of ≥12 despite of an adequate trial of regular opioid medication (≥60 mg/day oral morphine equivalent dose). Patients with CIPN are excluded.The study will recruit from palliative care teams (both inpatients and outpatients) in Japan and Australia. Participants will be randomised (1:1 allocation ratio) to duloxetine or pregabalin arm. Dose escalation is until day 14 and from day 14 to 21 is a dose de-escalation period to avoid withdrawal effects. The primary endpoint is defined as the mean difference in BPI item 3 for worst pain intensity over the previous 24 hours at day 14 between groups. A sample size of 160 patients will be enrolled between February 2020 and March 2023. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval was obtained at Osaka City University Hospital Certified Review Board and South Western Sydney Local Health District Human Research Ethics Committee. The results of this study will be submitted for publication in international journals and the key findings presented at international conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: jRCTs051190097, ACTRN12620000656932.