Active Breast Cancer TreatmentNCT03283553
Involving Family to Improve Communication in Breast Cancer Care
A study testing Checklist, MyChart, OpenNotes in people with Active Breast Cancer Treatment, run by Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins at 2 sites in United States.
Trial summary
This study evaluates a multi-component communication intervention in the outpatient setting to strengthen communication among patients being actively treated for breast cancer and their support network of family members and friends. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Active Breast Cancer Treatment
- What is being tested?
- Checklist, MyChart, OpenNotes
- Could I receive a placebo?
- Yes, some participants may receive a placebo
- How many people
- 132 participants
- Where
- 2 sitesUnited States
- Study dates
- 20 Jul 2017to 7 Nov 2019
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Medical oncology patient: Established patient of participating medical oncologist greater than 18 years of age, have a diagnosis of early stage or advanced breast cancer, are receiving active systemic therapy (in the form of IV adjuvant systemic therapy if early stage), are English speaking, able to provide informed consent themselves, and identify a family member who they would like to include in their care.
- Care partner: Family member (e.g. spouse, adult child, parent, adult sibling or other relative) or unpaid friend who regularly accompanies patient to medical oncology visits.
- Medical oncology provider: Practicing medical oncology provider at a participating clinic who provides care to patients with breast cancer.
Who cannot join
- Medical oncology patients: Younger than 18 years, pregnant, not being treated for breast cancer, do not attend medical oncology visits with family member or unpaid friend or unwilling for their family member or unpaid friend to be contacted.
- Care partner: Paid non-family member who accompanies patient to visits.
Trial locations and contacts
2 sites in 1 country.
United States2 sites
Johns Hopkins Kimmel Cancer Center - Medical Oncology
Baltimore, Maryland, 21231
Johns Hopkins Kimmel Cancer Center at Green Spring Station - Medical Oncology
Lutherville, Maryland, 21093
About this study
This study evaluates a multi-component communication intervention in the outpatient setting to strengthen communication among patients being actively treated for breast cancer and their support network of family members and friends. The intervention comprises: 1.) a patient-family agenda-setting checklist completed immediately before a regularly scheduled oncology visit, 2.) facilitated registration for the patient portal (for patient and family member, as desired by the patient), and 3.) education (as relevant) on access to clinician electronic visit notes. The study team will conduct a two-group randomized trial to examine feasibility of the protocol and to compare quality of communication with oncology providers, understanding of patient's cancer, confidence in managing patient's care and satisfaction with cancer care between patient-companion dyads who are in the intervention group (n=60) and patient-companion dyads who receive usual medical oncology care (n=60).
Read the detailed description
Breast cancer is the most common cancer among survivors in the US. Most patients with breast cancer receive help from family in making complex decisions about treatment, handling logistically demanding care coordination, and managing symptoms and side effects. Although family members (as defined by each patient) play a vital role in cancer care, they are not formally recognized or assessed in care delivery, and their need for information and support is typically unmet. Lack of attention to family in care delivery is an important gap that too often leaves families without adequate information about patient health and treatments. This may prevent families and patients from engaging in open conversations, cause them unnecessary anxiety, and negatively affect the quality of cancer care and delivery.
Communication is particularly important in cancer care, as the optimal course of action is determined through longitudinal discussion of prognosis, treatments, and patient goals, preferences, and concerns. Strategies to improve communication for serious illnesses such as cancer have been developed, but typically target a specific decision, conversation, or setting, most often the inpatient hospital. There is growing agreement that communication among patients, families, and providers should be initiated early and continue throughout the disease trajectory. However, little is known about how to provide both patients and families with access to timely information about patient health and mechanisms to communicate directly with health care providers, as proposed in this study.
The goal of this study is to test a multicomponent intervention to strengthen communication and longitudinal partnerships among women with breast cancer and their family members. Recent work by the study team has demonstrated the feasibility, acceptability, and benefit of intervention components which will be combined into a single model of care. The study team's preliminary studies indicate that clarifying patient and family expectations regarding the role of family and providing family with timely and comprehensive information about patient health (as desired by the patient) leads to more effective family involvement, more frequent patient-family-provider interactions, more patient-centered communication, and greater preparedness to manage care.
This study will evaluate the feasibility of delivering a multicomponent communication intervention in the outpatient setting comprising: 1.) a patient-family agenda-setting checklist completed immediately before a regularly scheduled medical oncology visit with a participating medical oncologist, 2.) facilitated registration for the patient portal (for patient and family member, as desired by the patient), and 3.) education (as relevant) on access to doctor's electronic visit notes. The study will focus on patients who typically attend medical oncology visits with a family member or trusted friend who are already present and involved in communication. This study will enroll up to 132 patients who are on active treatment for breast cancer, up to 132 family member/friend "companions" and up to 14 medical oncology providers. The study team will compare patients and companions who are in the intervention group (n=60 dyads) with patients and companions who are in the control group and receive usual medical oncology care (n=60 dyads). This study will compare quality of communication with medical oncology providers, understanding of patient's cancer, confidence in managing patient's care, satisfaction with cancer care, and symptoms of anxiety after 3 months, 9 months, and 12 months of follow-up.
- Conditions
- Active Breast Cancer Treatment
- Being tested
- Checklist, MyChart, OpenNotes, Usual Care
- Keywords
- breast cancer
- Medical subject headings
- Breast Neoplasms
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Checklist, MyChart, OpenNotesOther
- Patient-family agenda-setting checklist, 2) Facilitated proxy registration for MyChart, and 3) Education on access to doctor's electronic visit notes.
Usual CareOther
Routine medical oncology care
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Multicomponent Intervention | Experimental | 1.) A one-page paper-pencil agenda setting checklist completed immediately before a regularly scheduled medical oncology visit to elicit and align patient and companion perspectives regarding issues to discuss with the provider, and to stimulate discussion about the role of the companion in the visit, 2.) facilitated registration for the patient portal (for patient and family member, as desired by the patient), and 3.) education (as relevant) on access to doctor's electronic visit notes. Receives: Other: Checklist, MyChart, OpenNotes |
| Usual Care | Placebo comparator | Care as usual with the medical oncologist. Receives: Other: Usual Care |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Between-group Differences in Patient Complete Illness Understanding at 9-months
Illness understanding was measured by 4 questions regarding knowledge that is considered to be essential to making informed treatment decisions in serious illness, including: 1.) understanding of illness, 2.) knowledge of disease status, 3.) awareness of disease state, and 4.) expectation of duration of life. We summed responses to each item (coded 1 or 0 to reflect the presence or absence of understanding), yielding a score ranging from 0 to 4. Participants with perfect scores reflecting complete illness understanding (4 of 4 correct responses) were compared to all others.
Measured: 9 months
Between-group Differences in Mean Patient Satisfaction With Cancer Care at 9-months
Outcome was measured with the short-form 10-item version of the Family Satisfaction with Cancer Care (FAMCARE) questionnaire, a validated multi-item instrument that was developed to assess family perspective on cancer care. Respondents are asked to rate 10 items that relate to emotional support, personalization of care, support of decision-making, accessibility, and coordination. Response categories include "very satisfied" (2 points), "satisfied" (1 point), or "not satisfied" (0 points), and the 10-items may be summed to yield a total score (range: 0 to 20) with higher scores reflecting greater satisfaction.
Measured: 9 months
Between-group Differences in Patient Anxiety at 9-months
Outcome was measured using the Generalized Anxiety Disorder 2-item questionnaire (GAD-2), a well-established 2-item instrument that asks about symptoms of anxiety in a two-week recall period from 0 ("not at all") to 3 ("nearly every day"). Full range is 0-6 with higher scores indicating more anxiety. Symptoms of anxiety refer to a cutpoint of 3+ on the GAD-2.
Measured: 9 months
Between-group Differences in Care Partner Complete Illness Understanding at 9-months
Illness understanding was measured by 4 questions regarding knowledge that is considered to be essential to making informed treatment decisions in serious illness, including: 1.) understanding of illness, 2.) knowledge of disease status, 3.) awareness of disease state, and 4.) expectation of duration of life. We summed responses to each item (coded 1 or 0 to reflect the presence or absence of understanding), yielding a score ranging from 0 to 4. Participants with perfect scores reflecting complete illness understanding (4 of 4 correct responses) were compared to all others.
Measured: 9 months
Between-group Differences in Care Partner Satisfaction With Cancer Care at 9-months
Outcome was measured with the short-form 10-item version of the FAMCARE (Family Satisfaction with Cancer Care) questionnaire, a validated multi-item instrument that was developed to assess family perspective on cancer care. Respondents are asked to rate 10 items that relate to emotional support, personalization of care, support of decision-making, accessibility, and coordination. Response categories include "very satisfied" (2 points), "satisfied" (1 point), or "not satisfied" (0 points), and the 10-items may be summed to yield a total score (range: 0 to 20) with higher scores reflecting greater satisfaction.
Measured: 9 months
Between-group Differences in Care Partner Anxiety at 9-months
Outcome was measured using the Generalized Anxiety Disorder 2-item questionnaire (GAD-2), a well-established 2-item instrument that asks about symptoms of anxiety in a two-week recall period from 0 ("not at all") to 3 ("nearly every day"). Full range is 0-6 with higher scores indicating more anxiety. Symptoms of anxiety refer to a cutpoint of 3+ on the GAD-2.
Measured: 9 months
Secondary outcomes (2)
Between-group Differences in Patient Quality of Communication at 9-months
Outcome was measured using the Quality of Communication (QC) Scale, a validated 10-item instrument to assess quality of communication between the participant and the medical oncology team. The scale for each item is from 0 ('Worst you can imagine') to 10 ('Best you can imagine'). Full range is 0-100 with higher scores indicating higher perceived quality of communication.
Measured: 9 months
Between-group Differences in Care Partner Quality of Communication at 9-months
Outcome was measured using the Quality of Communication (QC) Scale, a validated 10-item instrument to assess quality of communication between the participant and the medical oncology team. The scale for each item is from 0 ('Worst you can imagine') to 10 ('Best you can imagine'). Full range is 0-100 with higher scores indicating higher perceived quality of communication.
Measured: 9 months
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted14 Sep 2017
- Study start20 Jul 2017
- Primary completion15 Jul 2019
- Study completion7 Nov 2019
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, outcome measures and adverse events reported by the sponsor.
- Publications (5)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Active Breast Cancer TreatmentStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns HopkinsThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Health services research
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind
- Who is masked
- Care provider, Investigator
- Enrolment
- 132 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Antonio Wolff, MD, Principal investigator, Johns Hopkins University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03283553
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- J1735
- Other IDs
- IRB00129995, SAC170001
- Status last verified
- Feb 2021
- First submitted
- 28 Aug 2017
- Last updated
- 19 Mar 2021
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No: This research involves the collection of data and identifying information from approximately 278 diverse study participants including up to 14 medical oncology clinicians, 132 breast cancer patients, and 132 family member or friend companions. The final dataset will include self-reported demographic and health status measures, information from electronic health records, and information about participant experiences. Even though the final dataset will be stripped of identifying information prior to analysis, the study team believes that there remains a possibility of deductive disclosure of subjects. Upon written request from members of the research community, the following resources will be shared: documentation of the process for accessing the study data and constructing the analytic dataset; the codebook for the master analytic dataset; the analytic plan for each study aim; the algorithms used for measurement of outcome variables; surveys and questionnaires.
Publications
Wolff JL, Roter DL, Barron J, Boyd CM, Leff B, Finucane TE, Gallo JJ, Rabins PV, Roth DL, Gitlin LN. A tool to strengthen the older patient-companion partnership in primary care: results from a pilot study. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2014 Feb;62(2):312-9. doi: 10.1111/jgs.12639. Epub 2014 Jan 13.
PubMed 24417565Wolff JL, Berger A, Clarke D, Green JA, Stametz R, Yule C, Darer JD. Patients, care partners, and shared access to the patient portal: online practices at an integrated health system. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2016 Nov;23(6):1150-1158. doi: 10.1093/jamia/ocw025. Epub 2016 Mar 28.
PubMed 27026614Delbanco T, Walker J, Bell SK, Darer JD, Elmore JG, Farag N, Feldman HJ, Mejilla R, Ngo L, Ralston JD, Ross SE, Trivedi N, Vodicka E, Leveille SG. Inviting patients to read their doctors' notes: a quasi-experimental study and a look ahead. Ann Intern Med. 2012 Oct 2;157(7):461-70. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-157-7-201210020-00002.
PubMed 23027317Wolff JL, Aufill J, Echavarria D, Heughan JA, Lee KT, Connolly RM, Fetting JH, Jelovac D, Papathakis K, Riley C, Stearns V, Thorner E, Zafman N, Levy HP, Dy SM, Wolff AC. Sharing in care: engaging care partners in the care and communication of breast cancer patients. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2019 Aug;177(1):127-136. doi: 10.1007/s10549-019-05306-9. Epub 2019 Jun 4.
PubMed 31165374Wolff JL, Aufill J, Echavarria D, Blackford AL, Connolly RM, Fetting JH, Jelovac D, Papathakis K, Riley C, Stearns V, Zafman N, Thorner E, Levy HP, Guo A, Dy SM, Wolff AC. A randomized intervention involving family to improve communication in breast cancer care. NPJ Breast Cancer. 2021 Feb 12;7(1):14. doi: 10.1038/s41523-021-00217-9.
PubMed 33579966
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 19 Mar 2021. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Involving Family to Improve Communication in Breast Cancer Care
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03283553
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- J1735
- Conditions
- Active Breast Cancer Treatment
- Keywords
- breast cancer
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 132 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns HopkinsUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation
- Study start
- 20 Jul 2017 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 15 Jul 2019 (actual)
- Study completion
- 7 Nov 2019 (actual)
- First posted
- 14 Sep 2017 (actual)
- Results
- Posted 19 Mar 2021
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
This study evaluates a multi-component communication intervention in the outpatient setting to strengthen communication among patients being actively treated for breast cancer and their support network of family members and friends. The intervention comprises: 1.) a patient-family agenda-setting checklist completed immediately before a regularly scheduled oncology visit, 2.) facilitated registration for the patient portal (for patient and family member, as desired by the patient), and 3.) education (as relevant) on access to clinician electronic visit notes. The study team will conduct a two-group randomized trial to examine feasibility of the protocol and to compare quality of communication with oncology providers, understanding of patient's cancer, confidence in managing patient's care and satisfaction with cancer care between patient-companion dyads who are in the intervention group (n=60) and patient-companion dyads who receive usual medical oncology care (n=60).
Detailed description
Breast cancer is the most common cancer among survivors in the US. Most patients with breast cancer receive help from family in making complex decisions about treatment, handling logistically demanding care coordination, and managing symptoms and side effects. Although family members (as defined by each patient) play a vital role in cancer care, they are not formally recognized or assessed in care delivery, and their need for information and support is typically unmet. Lack of attention to family in care delivery is an important gap that too often leaves families without adequate information about patient health and treatments. This may prevent families and patients from engaging in open conversations, cause them unnecessary anxiety, and negatively affect the quality of cancer care and delivery.
Communication is particularly important in cancer care, as the optimal course of action is determined through longitudinal discussion of prognosis, treatments, and patient goals, preferences, and concerns. Strategies to improve communication for serious illnesses such as cancer have been developed, but typically target a specific decision, conversation, or setting, most often the inpatient hospital. There is growing agreement that communication among patients, families, and providers should be initiated early and continue throughout the disease trajectory. However, little is known about how to provide both patients and families with access to timely information about patient health and mechanisms to communicate directly with health care providers, as proposed in this study.
The goal of this study is to test a multicomponent intervention to strengthen communication and longitudinal partnerships among women with breast cancer and their family members. Recent work by the study team has demonstrated the feasibility, acceptability, and benefit of intervention components which will be combined into a single model of care. The study team's preliminary studies indicate that clarifying patient and family expectations regarding the role of family and providing family with timely and comprehensive information about patient health (as desired by the patient) leads to more effective family involvement, more frequent patient-family-provider interactions, more patient-centered communication, and greater preparedness to manage care.
This study will evaluate the feasibility of delivering a multicomponent communication intervention in the outpatient setting comprising: 1.) a patient-family agenda-setting checklist completed immediately before a regularly scheduled medical oncology visit with a participating medical oncologist, 2.) facilitated registration for the patient portal (for patient and family member, as desired by the patient), and 3.) education (as relevant) on access to doctor's electronic visit notes. The study will focus on patients who typically attend medical oncology visits with a family member or trusted friend who are already present and involved in communication. This study will enroll up to 132 patients who are on active treatment for breast cancer, up to 132 family member/friend "companions" and up to 14 medical oncology providers. The study team will compare patients and companions who are in the intervention group (n=60 dyads) with patients and companions who are in the control group and receive usual medical oncology care (n=60 dyads). This study will compare quality of communication with medical oncology providers, understanding of patient's cancer, confidence in managing patient's care, satisfaction with cancer care, and symptoms of anxiety after 3 months, 9 months, and 12 months of follow-up.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Health services research
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind (care provider, investigator)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Multicomponent Intervention | Experimental | Other: Checklist, MyChart, OpenNotes1.) A one-page paper-pencil agenda setting checklist completed immediately before a regularly scheduled medical oncology visit to elicit and align patient and companion perspectives regarding issues to discuss with the provider, and to stimulate discussion about the role of the companion in the visit, 2.) facilitated registration for the patient portal (for patient and family member, as desired by the patient), and 3.) education (as relevant) on access to doctor's electronic visit notes. |
| Usual Care | Placebo comparator | Other: Usual CareCare as usual with the medical oncologist. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Medical oncology patient: Established patient of participating medical oncologist greater than 18 years of age, have a diagnosis of early stage or advanced breast cancer, are receiving active systemic therapy (in the form of IV adjuvant systemic therapy if early stage), are English speaking, able to provide informed consent themselves, and identify a family member who they would like to include in their care.
- Care partner: Family member (e.g. spouse, adult child, parent, adult sibling or other relative) or unpaid friend who regularly accompanies patient to medical oncology visits.
- Medical oncology provider: Practicing medical oncology provider at a participating clinic who provides care to patients with breast cancer.
Key exclusion criteria (2 listed)
- Medical oncology patients: Younger than 18 years, pregnant, not being treated for breast cancer, do not attend medical oncology visits with family member or unpaid friend or unwilling for their family member or unpaid friend to be contacted.
- Care partner: Paid non-family member who accompanies patient to visits.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Checklist, MyChart, OpenNotes1) Patient-family agenda-setting checklist, 2) Facilitated proxy registration for MyChart, and 3) Education on access to doctor's electronic visit notes. | Other | Multicomponent Intervention |
| Usual CareRoutine medical oncology care | Other | Usual Care |
Primary outcome
Between-group Differences in Patient Complete Illness Understanding at 9-months
Time frame: 9 months
Illness understanding was measured by 4 questions regarding knowledge that is considered to be essential to making informed treatment decisions in serious illness, including: 1.) understanding of illness, 2.) knowledge of disease status, 3.) awareness of disease state, and 4.) expectation of duration of life. We summed responses to each item (coded 1 or 0 to reflect the presence or absence of understanding), yielding a score ranging from 0 to 4. Participants with perfect scores reflecting complete illness understanding (4 of 4 correct responses) were compared to all others.
Between-group Differences in Mean Patient Satisfaction With Cancer Care at 9-months
Time frame: 9 months
Outcome was measured with the short-form 10-item version of the Family Satisfaction with Cancer Care (FAMCARE) questionnaire, a validated multi-item instrument that was developed to assess family perspective on cancer care. Respondents are asked to rate 10 items that relate to emotional support, personalization of care, support of decision-making, accessibility, and coordination. Response categories include "very satisfied" (2 points), "satisfied" (1 point), or "not satisfied" (0 points), and the 10-items may be summed to yield a total score (range: 0 to 20) with higher scores reflecting greater satisfaction.
Between-group Differences in Patient Anxiety at 9-months
Time frame: 9 months
Outcome was measured using the Generalized Anxiety Disorder 2-item questionnaire (GAD-2), a well-established 2-item instrument that asks about symptoms of anxiety in a two-week recall period from 0 ("not at all") to 3 ("nearly every day"). Full range is 0-6 with higher scores indicating more anxiety. Symptoms of anxiety refer to a cutpoint of 3+ on the GAD-2.
Between-group Differences in Care Partner Complete Illness Understanding at 9-months
Time frame: 9 months
Illness understanding was measured by 4 questions regarding knowledge that is considered to be essential to making informed treatment decisions in serious illness, including: 1.) understanding of illness, 2.) knowledge of disease status, 3.) awareness of disease state, and 4.) expectation of duration of life. We summed responses to each item (coded 1 or 0 to reflect the presence or absence of understanding), yielding a score ranging from 0 to 4. Participants with perfect scores reflecting complete illness understanding (4 of 4 correct responses) were compared to all others.
Between-group Differences in Care Partner Satisfaction With Cancer Care at 9-months
Time frame: 9 months
Outcome was measured with the short-form 10-item version of the FAMCARE (Family Satisfaction with Cancer Care) questionnaire, a validated multi-item instrument that was developed to assess family perspective on cancer care. Respondents are asked to rate 10 items that relate to emotional support, personalization of care, support of decision-making, accessibility, and coordination. Response categories include "very satisfied" (2 points), "satisfied" (1 point), or "not satisfied" (0 points), and the 10-items may be summed to yield a total score (range: 0 to 20) with higher scores reflecting greater satisfaction.
Between-group Differences in Care Partner Anxiety at 9-months
Time frame: 9 months
Outcome was measured using the Generalized Anxiety Disorder 2-item questionnaire (GAD-2), a well-established 2-item instrument that asks about symptoms of anxiety in a two-week recall period from 0 ("not at all") to 3 ("nearly every day"). Full range is 0-6 with higher scores indicating more anxiety. Symptoms of anxiety refer to a cutpoint of 3+ on the GAD-2.
2 secondary outcomes
Between-group Differences in Patient Quality of Communication at 9-months
Time frame: 9 months
Between-group Differences in Care Partner Quality of Communication at 9-months
Time frame: 9 months
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 19 Mar 2021.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
- Background: PubMed 24417565Wolff JL, Roter DL, Barron J, Boyd CM, Leff B, Finucane TE, Gallo JJ, Rabins PV, Roth DL, Gitlin LN. A tool to strengthen the older patient-companion partnership in primary care: results from a pilot study. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2014 Feb;62(2):312-9. doi: 10.1111/jgs.12639. Epub 2014 Jan 13.
- Background: PubMed 27026614Wolff JL, Berger A, Clarke D, Green JA, Stametz R, Yule C, Darer JD. Patients, care partners, and shared access to the patient portal: online practices at an integrated health system. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2016 Nov;23(6):1150-1158. doi: 10.1093/jamia/ocw025. Epub 2016 Mar 28.
- Background: PubMed 23027317Delbanco T, Walker J, Bell SK, Darer JD, Elmore JG, Farag N, Feldman HJ, Mejilla R, Ngo L, Ralston JD, Ross SE, Trivedi N, Vodicka E, Leveille SG. Inviting patients to read their doctors' notes: a quasi-experimental study and a look ahead. Ann Intern Med. 2012 Oct 2;157(7):461-70. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-157-7-201210020-00002.
- Results publication: PubMed 31165374Wolff JL, Aufill J, Echavarria D, Heughan JA, Lee KT, Connolly RM, Fetting JH, Jelovac D, Papathakis K, Riley C, Stearns V, Thorner E, Zafman N, Levy HP, Dy SM, Wolff AC. Sharing in care: engaging care partners in the care and communication of breast cancer patients. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2019 Aug;177(1):127-136. doi: 10.1007/s10549-019-05306-9. Epub 2019 Jun 4.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 33579966Wolff JL, Aufill J, Echavarria D, Blackford AL, Connolly RM, Fetting JH, Jelovac D, Papathakis K, Riley C, Stearns V, Zafman N, Thorner E, Levy HP, Guo A, Dy SM, Wolff AC. A randomized intervention involving family to improve communication in breast cancer care. NPJ Breast Cancer. 2021 Feb 12;7(1):14. doi: 10.1038/s41523-021-00217-9.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No. This research involves the collection of data and identifying information from approximately 278 diverse study participants including up to 14 medical oncology clinicians, 132 breast cancer patients, and 132 family member or friend companions. The final dataset will include self-reported demographic and health status measures, information from electronic health records, and information about participant experiences. Even though the final dataset will be stripped of identifying information prior to analysis, the study team believes that there remains a possibility of deductive disclosure of subjects. Upon written request from members of the research community, the following resources will be shared: documentation of the process for accessing the study data and constructing the analytic dataset; the codebook for the master analytic dataset; the analytic plan for each study aim; the algorithms used for measurement of outcome variables; surveys and questionnaires.
Related trials for Active Breast Cancer Treatment
Enrolling by invitation
Dance-Based Exercise for Cancer-Related Fatigue in Breast Cancer Patients
Breast Neoplasms
RecruitingPhase 1/2
A Study of MR001 in Patients With Locally Recurrent or Metastatic Advanced Triple-Negative Breast Cancer (TNBC)
Triple-Negative Breast Cancer (TNBC)
Not yet recruitingPhase 1
A Study to Evaluate the Effects of GDC-4198 in Combination With Letrozole, Fulvestrant, or Giredestrant in Participants With Locally Advanced or Metastatic Hormone Receptor-Positive, HER2-Negatve Breast Cancer
Advanced or Metastatic Breast Cancer
RecruitingPhase 1
A Study With NKT5097 for Adults With Advanced/Metastatic Solid Tumors
HR+ Breast Cancer, Triple Negative Breast Cancer (TNBC)
Recruiting
Researching the Effect of Exercise on Cancer
Breast Cancer, Prostate Cancer
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Antonio Wolff, MD principal investigator
Johns Hopkins University
2 sites in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Checklist, MyChart, OpenNotes in people with Active Breast Cancer Treatment, run by Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins at 2 sites in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 3 inclusion and 2 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 19 Mar 2021. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 2 sites in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. Some participants in this study may receive a placebo. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 19 Mar 2021). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Between-group Differences in Patient Complete Illness Understanding at 9-months (time frame: 9 months). The study lists 6 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT03283553, which also lists 5 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 19 Mar 2021.