Patient engagement in hematopoietic stem cell transplantation and cell therapy: a survey by the EBMT patient engagement task force & transplantation complications working party.
Journal
Bone marrow transplantation
ISSN: 1476-5365
Titre abrégé: Bone Marrow Transplant
Pays: England
ID NLM: 8702459
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
18 Jun 2024
18 Jun 2024
Historique:
received:
06
02
2024
accepted:
12
04
2024
revised:
05
04
2024
medline:
19
6
2024
pubmed:
19
6
2024
entrez:
18
6
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
The EBMT (European Blood and Marrow Transplantation Society) aims to connect patients, the scientific community, and other stakeholders to improve hematopoietic stem cell transplantation and cellular therapy outcomes. We performed a cross-sectional online survey to understand the perceptions regarding Patient Reported Outcomes (PROs) and Patient Active Involvement in Research (PAIR) in over 800 stakeholders (n = 813). Patients (n = 278) and health care professionals (HCPs) (n = 351) were compared. We observed high openness for EBMT PRO collection (n = 680, 84.5% across stakeholders' groups; patients n = 256, 93.1% versus HCPs n = 273, 78.4% [p < 0.001]) and PAIR (n = 702, 87.3% across stakeholder groups; patients n = 256, 92.4% versus HCPs n = 296, 85.8% [p = 0.009]), with a significantly higher proportion of patients expressing interest compared to HCPs. Priority domains for PROs data-collection identified were the assessment of symptom experience, psychosocial and cognitive functioning. The most important issues for patients specifically were the data-collection of PROs reflecting cognitive function, the option of reporting data at home, the importance of identifying actionable targets to improve their recovery, and receiving feedback on their input when participating in research projects. Our multistakeholder approach suggests an added value to embracing patient engagement in the development of meaningful research and service design within the transplantation and cellular therapy community.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38890544
doi: 10.1038/s41409-024-02290-7
pii: 10.1038/s41409-024-02290-7
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited.
Références
Devisch I. Progress in medicine: Autonomy, oughtonomy and nudging, vol. 17. 2011.
Batten LM, Bhattacharya IS, Moretti L, Haviland JS, Emson MA, Miller SE, et al. Patient advocate involvement in the design and conduct of breast cancer clinical trials requiring the collection of multiple biopsies. Res Involv Engagem. 2018;4:22. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40900-018-0108-0 .
doi: 10.1186/s40900-018-0108-0
pubmed: 30026963
pmcid: 6047125
O’Donnell D, Ni She E, McCarthy M, Thornton S, Doran T, Smith F, et al. Enabling public, patient and practitioner involvement in co-designing frailty pathways in the acute care setting. BMC Health Serv Res. 2019;19:797. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-019-4626-8 .
doi: 10.1186/s12913-019-4626-8
pubmed: 31690304
pmcid: 6833297
Deverka PA, Bangs R, Kreizenbeck K, Delaney DM, Hershman DL, Blanke CD, et al. A New Framework for Patient Engagement in Cancer Clinical Trials Cooperative Group Studies. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2018;110:553–9. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djy064 .
doi: 10.1093/jnci/djy064
pubmed: 29684151
pmcid: 6005117
Sacristan JA, Aguaron A, Avendano-Sola C, Garrido P, Carrion J, Gutierrez A, et al. Patient involvement in clinical research: why, when, and how. Patient preference adherence. 2016;10:631–40. https://doi.org/10.2147/ppa.S104259 .
doi: 10.2147/ppa.S104259
pubmed: 27175063
pmcid: 4854260
Frank L, Morton SC, Guise JM, Jull J, Concannon TW, Tugwell P. Engaging Patients and Other Non-Researchers in Health Research: Defining Research Engagement. J Gen Intern Med. 2020;35:307–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-019-05436-2 .
doi: 10.1007/s11606-019-05436-2
pubmed: 31713031
Grady PA, Gough LL. Self-management: a comprehensive approach to management of chronic conditions. Am J Public Health. 2014;104:e25–31. https://doi.org/10.2105/ajph.2014.302041 .
doi: 10.2105/ajph.2014.302041
pubmed: 24922170
pmcid: 4103232
Bevans M, El-Jawahri A, Tierney DK, Wiener L, Wood WA, Hoodin F, et al. National Institutes of Health Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation Late Effects Initiative: The Patient-Centered Outcomes Working Group Report. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant: J Am Soc Blood Marrow Transplant. 2017;23:538–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbmt.2016.09.011 .
doi: 10.1016/j.bbmt.2016.09.011
Shaw BE, Brazauskas R, Millard HR, Fonstad R, Flynn KE, Abernethy A et al. Centralized patient-reported outcome data collection in transplantation is feasible and clinically meaningful. Cancer 2017. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.30936 .
Shaw BE, Syrjala KL, Onstad LE, Chow EJ, Flowers ME, Jim H, et al. PROMIS measures can be used to assess symptoms and function in long-term hematopoietic cell transplantation survivors. Cancer. 2018;124:841–9. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.31089 .
doi: 10.1002/cncr.31089
pubmed: 29072787
Wood WA, Le-Rademacher J, Syrjala KL, Jim H, Jacobsen PB, Knight JM, et al. Patient-reported physical functioning predicts the success of hematopoietic cell transplantation (BMT CTN 0902). Cancer. 2016;122:91–8. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.29717 .
doi: 10.1002/cncr.29717
pubmed: 26439325
El-Jawahri A, Chen YB, Brazauskas R, He N, Lee SJ, Knight JM, et al. Impact of pre-transplant depression on outcomes of allogeneic and autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Cancer. 2017;123:1828–38. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.30546 .
doi: 10.1002/cncr.30546
pubmed: 28102896
Muffly LS, Kocherginsky M, Stock W, Chu Q, Bishop MR, Godley LA, et al. Geriatric assessment to predict survival in older allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation recipients. Haematologica. 2014;99:1373–9. https://doi.org/10.3324/haematol.2014.103655 .
doi: 10.3324/haematol.2014.103655
pubmed: 24816237
pmcid: 4116837
Hamilton BK, Law AD, Rybicki L, Abounader D, Dabney J, Dean R, et al. Prognostic significance of pre-transplant quality of life in allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation recipients. Bone Marrow Transpl. 2015;50:1235–40. https://doi.org/10.1038/bmt.2015.122 .
doi: 10.1038/bmt.2015.122
Chakraborty R, Sidana S, Shah GL, Scordo M, Hamilton BK, Majhail NS. Patient-Reported Outcomes with Chimeric Antigen Receptor T Cell Therapy: Challenges and Opportunities. Biol Blood Marrow Transpl: J Am Soc Blood Marrow Transplant. 2019;25:e155–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbmt.2018.11.025 .
doi: 10.1016/j.bbmt.2018.11.025
Burns LJ, Abbetti B, Arnold SD, Bender J, Doughtie S, El-Jawahiri A, et al. Engaging Patients in Setting a Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Agenda in Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation. Biol Blood Marrow Transpl: J Am Soc Blood Marrow Transplant. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbmt.2018.01.029 .
doi: 10.1016/j.bbmt.2018.01.029
Schoemans HM, Finn L, Foster J, Roche-Green A, Bevans M, Kullberg S, et al. A Conceptual Framework and Key Research Questions in Educational Needs of Blood and Marrow Transplantation Patients, Caregivers, and Families. Biol Blood Marrow Transpl: J Am Soc Blood Marrow Transplant. 2019;25:1416–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbmt.2019.02.017 .
doi: 10.1016/j.bbmt.2019.02.017
Pfadenhauer LM, Gerhardus A, Mozygemba K, Lysdahl KB, Booth A, Hofmann B, et al. Making sense of complexity in context and implementation: the Context and Implementation of Complex Interventions (CICI) framework. Implement Sci. 2017;12:21. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-017-0552-5 .
doi: 10.1186/s13012-017-0552-5
pubmed: 28202031
pmcid: 5312531
Mielke J, Leppla L, Valenta S, Zullig LL, Zúñiga F, Staudacher S, et al. Unraveling implementation context: the Basel Approach for coNtextual ANAlysis (BANANA) in implementation science and its application in the SMILe project. Implement Sci Commun. 2022;3:102. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43058-022-00354-7 .
doi: 10.1186/s43058-022-00354-7
pubmed: 36183141
pmcid: 9526967
Briefing notes for researchers - public involvement in NHS, health and social care research, April 2021. In: National Institute for Health and Care Research. 2021.
Goodman MS, Sanders Thompson VL. The science of stakeholder engagement in research: classification, implementation, and evaluation. Transl Behav Med. 2017;7:486–91. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13142-017-0495-z .
doi: 10.1007/s13142-017-0495-z
pubmed: 28397159
pmcid: 5645283
Gale NK, Heath G, Cameron E, Rashid S, Redwood S. Using the framework method for the analysis of qualitative data in multi-disciplinary health research. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2013;13:117. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-13-117 .
doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-13-117
pubmed: 24047204
pmcid: 3848812
Lee SJ, Cutler C, Blazar BR, Tu A, Yang Z, Pavletic SZ. Correlation of Patient-Reported Outcomes with Clinical Organ Responses: Data from the Belumosudil Chronic Graft-versus-Host Disease Studies. Transplant Cell Ther. 2022;28:700.e701–700.e706. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtct.2022.06.020 .
doi: 10.1016/j.jtct.2022.06.020
King-Kallimanis BL, Wroblewski T, Kwitkowski V, De Claro RA, Gwise T, Bhatnagar V, et al. FDA review summary of patient-reported outcome results for ibrutinib in the treatment of chronic graft versus host disease. Qual Life Res: Int J Qual Life Asp Treat, care Rehab. 2020;29:1903–11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-020-02448-y .
doi: 10.1007/s11136-020-02448-y
Zeiser R, Polverelli N, Ram R, Hashmi SK, Chakraverty R, Middeke JM, et al. Ruxolitinib for Glucocorticoid-Refractory Chronic Graft-versus-Host Disease. N Engl J Med. 2021;385:228–38. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2033122 .
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2033122
pubmed: 34260836
Im A, Pusic I, Onstad L, Kitko CL, Hamilton BK, Alousi AM, et al. Patient-reported treatment response in chronic graft-versus-host disease. Haematologica. 2024;109:143–50. https://doi.org/10.3324/haematol.2023.282734 .
doi: 10.3324/haematol.2023.282734
pubmed: 37226713
Calvert M, Blazeby J, Altman DG, Revicki DA, Moher D, Brundage MD. Reporting of patient-reported outcomes in randomized trials: the CONSORT PRO extension. Jama. 2013;309:814–22. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2013.879 .
doi: 10.1001/jama.2013.879
pubmed: 23443445
Calvert M, Kyte D, Mercieca-Bebber R, Slade A, Chan AW, King MT, et al. Guidelines for Inclusion of Patient-Reported Outcomes in Clinical Trial Protocols: The SPIRIT-PRO Extension. Jama. 2018;319:483–94. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2017.21903 .
doi: 10.1001/jama.2017.21903
pubmed: 29411037
Long CR, Stewart MK, McElfish PA. Health research participants are not receiving research results: a collaborative solution is needed. Trials. 2017;18:449. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-017-2200-4 .
doi: 10.1186/s13063-017-2200-4
pubmed: 28969665
pmcid: 5625845
Hemphill R, Forsythe LP, Heckert AL, Amolegbe A, Maurer M, Carman KL, et al. What motivates patients and caregivers to engage in health research and how engagement affects their lives: Qualitative survey findings. Health Expectations: Int J Public Participation health care health policy. 2020;23:328–36. https://doi.org/10.1111/hex.12979 .
doi: 10.1111/hex.12979
Bombard Y, Baker GR, Orlando E, Fancott C, Bhatia P, Casalino S, et al. Engaging patients to improve quality of care: a systematic review. Implement Sci: IS. 2018;13:98. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-018-0784-z .
doi: 10.1186/s13012-018-0784-z
pubmed: 30045735
pmcid: 6060529