Individualised Versus Conventional Medical Follow-up for Women After Primary Treatment for Ovarian Cancer.
NCT ID: NCT02298855
Last Updated: 2014-11-24
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
NA
113 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2006-01-31
2010-05-31
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Aim:
The investigators shall conduct the trial using experienced clinical nurse specialists (CNSs) to deliver self-management focused individual follow-up and evaluate whether this brings about greater improvement in quality of life, is acceptable and cost saving when compared to the standard (conventional) model.
Design:
Two arm randomised controlled trial.
Setting:
Specialist gynaecological cancer outpatient services at three cancer centres, one inner city and two urban.
Sample size:
A sample size of 100 patients, randomised equally to the 2 treatment groups, has been determined for this study. See statistical analysis section.
Recruitment:
Based on previous experience of recruiting in this population approximately 50% of women approached will agree to take part. The investigators need 1 year to recruit the sample.
Randomisation:
Participants will be subdivided into two groups those recruited at the inner city centre and those recruited at the suburban. Randomisation will be performed independently for both groups with participants randomly allocated to either the conventional or individualised follow-up in a 1:1 ratio. Allocation of the first participant from a pair to one of the 2 follow-up strategies will be made using randomness derived from atmospheric noise (http://www.random.org); the second participant from each pair will then be allocated to the other group.
The intervention:
Trial follow-up is 2 years from baseline. Conventional follow-up/treatment as usual This will remain unchanged and involve: one post treatment appointment then appointments every 3 months with a doctor. Routinely a medical history is taken and investigations to monitor disease progression including serum cancer antigen 125 (CA125) tumour marker. A physical examination may be performed. The appointment will sometimes involve CNS input and patients may contact the non-study CNS on an ad hoc basis.
Individualised follow-up Patients will meet the study CNS in clinic when they attend for their 4-6 week post treatment appointment. The nurse will negotiate with the patient to agree follow-up arrangements best suited to their needs. E.g. patient-initiated telephone or face-to-face appointments. The nurse will assess the patient at appointments using an assessment proforma.
Data collection:
Quantitative data Baseline qol questionnaires will be provided by the Research Assistant at the time of written consent and completed and returned prior to disclosure of randomisation. Subsequent questionnaires will be posted to participants with a reply paid envelope.
Data will be entered on a 'Patient events' data base and then extracted for all patients for different types of service use during the two-year follow-up period. The investigators will also record primary care contacts and the reasons for these with a questionnaire to General Practitioners.
Qualitative interview data Selected patients will take part in a 45-60 minute one-to-one interview at a location convenient to them. The interview will be audio-recorded following consent and anonymised to maintain confidentiality. A semi-structured interview guide will be used to ensure all important topic areas are covered.
CNSs will be interviewed in a quiet room away from their clinical area as above.
Data Analysis:
Quantitative data Differences in mean patient qol and satisfaction and between the two groups will be assessed by 2 sample t-tests. Assuming a two-sided significance level of 5% with 40 in each sample, to achieve 80% power any differences will have to be quite large to be detectable. For the satisfaction scale (0-100), where the estimated common standard deviation = 14.7 (de Bock et al (2004)), a difference between the two groups of 9.3 would be detectable with 80% power. For the anxiety (0-13) and depression (0-14) measures common standard deviation = 2.75 in both cases (de Bock et al 2004), such a difference would need to be 1.74 in both cases. The investigators may be able to detect smaller differences with the planned sample size when taking into account adjustment for baseline values in the sample size calculation comparing the randomised groups (analysis of covariance).
For the qol scales there are various sub-scales (0-100) and the evidence from literature sources suggest that for most scales the standard deviation is approximately 20-25 (Greimel et al 2003). Using such a value then, a difference in means, detectable with 80% power, would be between 12.7 and 15.9. Even if the ensuing results are not able to detect clinically important differences between the two groups, the scale scores will provide useful information and may justify further inquiry.
The total cost of follow-up for each patient will be calculated by multiplying service use by unit costs obtained from relevant National Health Service (NHS) Reference Costs and summing across all types of use. Unadjusted service use and total costs will be compared between each group using Mann-Whitney two-sample statistics.
Qualitative data Interviews will be fully transcribed and analysed according to principles of grounded theory (Strauss and Corbin, 1991).
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
SUPPORTIVE_CARE
NONE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Conventional follow-up
Treatment as usual will involve: one post treatment appointment then 3 monthly appointments with a Dr. At appointments: medical history; investigations to monitor disease progression including CA125 tumour marker blood test if this were raised at diagnosis. A physical examination may be performed.
No interventions assigned to this group
Individualised follow-up
Follow-up is delivered by a nurse and frequency and type (telephone or face-to-face) is negotiated to suit their individual situation. Assessment by holistic guide. The intervention is informed by a model of health promoting interactions oriented towards improving self-efficacy. The nurses will provide information and support to help patients manage symptoms and psychological discomfort.
Individualised follow-up
Patients allocated to gynaecological cancer nurse specialist at the end of primary treatment. Follow-up is negotiated to suit their individual situation. Type of contact is flexible, primarily by telephone although some women may opt for face-to-face appointments. Patients will be assessed using a holistic guide to identify signs of disease progression, symptoms warranting intervention, and psychological issues. The nurses delivering the intervention are expert in the management of ovarian cancer and will work to a model of health promoting interactions oriented towards improving self-efficacy. The nurses will provide information and support to assist patients to manage troublesome symptoms and live with psychological discomfort.
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Individualised follow-up
Patients allocated to gynaecological cancer nurse specialist at the end of primary treatment. Follow-up is negotiated to suit their individual situation. Type of contact is flexible, primarily by telephone although some women may opt for face-to-face appointments. Patients will be assessed using a holistic guide to identify signs of disease progression, symptoms warranting intervention, and psychological issues. The nurses delivering the intervention are expert in the management of ovarian cancer and will work to a model of health promoting interactions oriented towards improving self-efficacy. The nurses will provide information and support to assist patients to manage troublesome symptoms and live with psychological discomfort.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
2. Within one month of completion of primary treatment including surgery \& chemotherapy/radiotherapy or surgery alone, irrespective of outcome with regard to remission
3. Expected survival ≥3 months
4. Agreement to be randomised
5. Agreement to give written consent to participate in the study
6. Sufficient grasp of English to engage in the self-management focused approach.
Exclusion Criteria
2. Clinician estimated survival of ≤ 3 months
3. Women receiving treatment for a mental health condition
4. Women who have a learning disability.
18 Years
FEMALE
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
University College London Hospitals
OTHER
Mid and South Essex NHS Foundation Trust
OTHER
University College, London
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Anne Lanceley, PhD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
University College, London
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Southend University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust
Westcliff-on-Sea, Essex., United Kingdom
Basildon & Thurrock University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
Basildon, Essex, United Kingdom
University College London Hospital NHS Foundation Trust
London, London, United Kingdom
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Greimel E, Bottomley A, Cull A, Waldenstrom AC, Arraras J, Chauvenet L, Holzner B, Kuljanic K, Lebrec J, D'haese S; EORTC Quality of Life Group and the Quality of Life Unit. An international field study of the reliability and validity of a disease-specific questionnaire module (the QLQ-OV28) in assessing the quality of life of patients with ovarian cancer. Eur J Cancer. 2003 Jul;39(10):1402-8. doi: 10.1016/s0959-8049(03)00307-1.
Kew F, Galaal K, Bryant A, Naik R. Evaluation of follow-up strategies for patients with epithelial ovarian cancer following completion of primary treatment. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011 Jun 15;(6):CD006119. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006119.pub2.
de Bock GH, Bonnema J, van der Hage J, Kievit J, van de Velde CJ. Effectiveness of routine visits and routine tests in detecting isolated locoregional recurrences after treatment for early-stage invasive breast cancer: a meta-analysis and systematic review. J Clin Oncol. 2004 Oct 1;22(19):4010-8. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2004.06.080.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
OC_F-UP_V3 28/07/2006
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id