Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Cancer 1/2024

Open Access 01-12-2024 | Study Protocol

iCare – a self-directed, interactive online program to improve health and wellbeing for people living with upper gastrointestinal or hepato-pancreato-biliary cancers, and their informal carers: the study protocol for a Phase II randomised controlled trial

Authors: Patricia M Livingston, Natalie Winter, Anna Ugalde, Liliana Orellana, Antonina Mikocka-Walus, Michael Jefford, John Zalcberg, Neil Orford, Alison M Hutchinson, Andrew Barbour, Nicole Kiss, Bernard Mark Smithers, David I Watson, Nikki McCaffrey, Victoria White, the iCare Advisory Group

Published in: BMC Cancer | Issue 1/2024

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Up to 70% of people diagnosed with upper gastrointestinal (GI) tract or hepato-pancreato-biliary (HPB) cancers experience substantial reductions in quality of life (QoL), including high distress levels, pain, fatigue, sleep disturbances, weight loss and difficulty swallowing. With few advocacy groups and support systems for adults with upper GI or HPB cancers (i.e. pancreas, liver, stomach, bile duct and oesophageal) and their carers, online supportive care programs may represent an alternate cost-effective mechanism to support this patient group and carers. iCare is a self-directed, interactive, online program that provides information, resources, and psychological packages to patients and their carers from the treatment phase of their condition. The inception and development of iCare has been driven by consumers, advocacy groups, government and health professionals. The aims of this study are to determine the feasibility and acceptability of iCare, examine preliminary efficacy on health-related QoL and carer burden at 3- and 6-months post enrolment, and the potential cost-effectiveness of iCare, from health and societal perspectives, for both patients and carers.

Methods and analysis

A Phase II randomised controlled trial. Overall, 162 people with newly diagnosed upper GI or HPB cancers and 162 carers will be recruited via the Upper GI Cancer Registry, online advertisements, or hospital clinics. Patients and carers will be randomly allocated (1:1) to the iCare program or usual care. Participant assessments will be at enrolment, 3- and 6-months later. The primary outcomes are i) feasibility, measured by eligibility, recruitment, response and attrition rates, and ii) acceptability, measured by engagement with iCare (frequency of logins, time spent using iCare, and use of features over the intervention period). Secondary outcomes are patient changes in QoL and unmet needs, and carer burden, unmet needs and QoL. Linear mixed models will be fitted to obtain preliminary estimates of efficacy and variability for secondary outcomes. The economic analysis will include a cost-consequences analysis where all outcomes will be compared with costs.

Discussion

iCare provides a potential model of supportive care to improve QoL, unmet needs and burden of disease among people living with upper GI or HPB cancers and their carers.

Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry

ACTRN12623001185651. This protocol reflects Version #1 26 April 2023.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. Health system expenditure on cancer... in Australia, 2015–16. 2021. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. Health system expenditure on cancer... in Australia, 2015–16. 2021.
2.
go back to reference Berman R, et al. Supportive Care: An Indispensable Component of Modern Oncology. Clin Oncol. 2020;32(11):781–8.CrossRef Berman R, et al. Supportive Care: An Indispensable Component of Modern Oncology. Clin Oncol. 2020;32(11):781–8.CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Pancare. State of the Nation: Upper Gastrointestinal (GI) Cancers in Australia. Pancare; 2022. Pancare. State of the Nation: Upper Gastrointestinal (GI) Cancers in Australia. Pancare; 2022. 
4.
go back to reference Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. Colorectal and other digestive-tract cancers. AIHW; 2018. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. Colorectal and other digestive-tract cancers.  AIHW; 2018.
5.
go back to reference Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. Cancer in Australia 2021. Australian Government: Canberra; 2022. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. Cancer in Australia 2021. Australian Government: Canberra; 2022.
6.
go back to reference Kissane DW, et al. Psychiatric disorder in women with early stage and advanced breast cancer: a comparative analysis. ANZ J Psychiatry. 2004;38(5):320–6. Kissane DW, et al. Psychiatric disorder in women with early stage and advanced breast cancer: a comparative analysis. ANZ J Psychiatry. 2004;38(5):320–6.
7.
go back to reference Mercadante S, et al. Sleep Disturbances in Patients With Advanced Cancer in Different Palliative Care Settings. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2015;50(6):786–92.CrossRefPubMed Mercadante S, et al. Sleep Disturbances in Patients With Advanced Cancer in Different Palliative Care Settings. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2015;50(6):786–92.CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Grabsch B, et al. Psychological morbidity and quality of life in women with advanced breast cancer: a cross-sectional survey. Palliat Support Care. 2006;4(1):47–56.CrossRefPubMed Grabsch B, et al. Psychological morbidity and quality of life in women with advanced breast cancer: a cross-sectional survey. Palliat Support Care. 2006;4(1):47–56.CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Otutaha B, Srinivasa S, Koea J. Patient information needs in upper gastrointestinal cancer: what patients and their families want to know. ANZ J Surg. 2019;89(1–2):20–4.CrossRefPubMed Otutaha B, Srinivasa S, Koea J. Patient information needs in upper gastrointestinal cancer: what patients and their families want to know. ANZ J Surg. 2019;89(1–2):20–4.CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Ugalde A, et al. Effective integration of caregivers and families. Aust J Gen Pract. 2021;50:527–31.CrossRefPubMed Ugalde A, et al. Effective integration of caregivers and families. Aust J Gen Pract. 2021;50:527–31.CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Al-Janabi H, McCaffrey N, Ratcliffe J. Carer preferences in economic evaluation and healthcare decision making. Patient. 2013;6(4):235–9.CrossRefPubMed Al-Janabi H, McCaffrey N, Ratcliffe J. Carer preferences in economic evaluation and healthcare decision making. Patient. 2013;6(4):235–9.CrossRefPubMed
12.
13.
go back to reference Glajchen M. The emerging role and needs of family caregivers in cancer care. J Support Oncol. 2004;2(2):145–55.PubMed Glajchen M. The emerging role and needs of family caregivers in cancer care. J Support Oncol. 2004;2(2):145–55.PubMed
14.
go back to reference Cancer Council NSW. Cost of Cancer in NSW. Sydney: Cancer Council NSW; 2007. Cancer Council NSW. Cost of Cancer in NSW. Sydney: Cancer Council NSW; 2007.
15.
go back to reference Livingston PM, et al. Outcomes of a randomized controlled trial assessing a smartphone Application to reduce unmet needs among people diagnosed with CancEr (ACE). Cancer Med. 2020;9(2):507–16.CrossRefPubMed Livingston PM, et al. Outcomes of a randomized controlled trial assessing a smartphone Application to reduce unmet needs among people diagnosed with CancEr (ACE). Cancer Med. 2020;9(2):507–16.CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Dober, M., et al., Perspectives on an Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) based program for patients with inflammatory bowel disease and comorbid anxiety and/or depressive symptoms. Psychotherapy Research, 2020: p. 1–14. Dober, M., et al., Perspectives on an Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) based program for patients with inflammatory bowel disease and comorbid anxiety and/or depressive symptoms. Psychotherapy Research, 2020: p. 1–14.
17.
go back to reference Ugalde A, et al. Priorities for cancer caregiver intervention research: A three-round modified Delphi study to inform priorities for participants, interventions, outcomes, and study design characteristics. Psychooncology. 2020;29:2091–6.CrossRefPubMed Ugalde A, et al. Priorities for cancer caregiver intervention research: A three-round modified Delphi study to inform priorities for participants, interventions, outcomes, and study design characteristics. Psychooncology. 2020;29:2091–6.CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Chow, R., et al., Interventions to improve outcomes for caregivers of patients with advanced cancer: a meta-analysis. JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 2023. 115(8): p. 896–908. Chow, R., et al., Interventions to improve outcomes for caregivers of patients with advanced cancer: a meta-analysis. JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 2023. 115(8): p. 896–908.
19.
go back to reference Zhai S, et al. Digital health interventions to support family caregivers: An updated systematic review. Digit Health. 2023;9:20552076231171970.PubMedPubMedCentral Zhai S, et al. Digital health interventions to support family caregivers: An updated systematic review. Digit Health. 2023;9:20552076231171970.PubMedPubMedCentral
20.
go back to reference Heynsbergh N, et al. Feasibility, useability and acceptability of technology-based interventions for informal cancer carers: a systematic review. BMC Cancer. 2018;18(1):244.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Heynsbergh N, et al. Feasibility, useability and acceptability of technology-based interventions for informal cancer carers: a systematic review. BMC Cancer. 2018;18(1):244.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
21.
go back to reference Rosenbloom ST, Steitz BD, Warner JL. Window of Opportunity: Patient Portals and Cancer. J Oncol Pract. 2018;14(11):639–41.CrossRefPubMed Rosenbloom ST, Steitz BD, Warner JL. Window of Opportunity: Patient Portals and Cancer. J Oncol Pract. 2018;14(11):639–41.CrossRefPubMed
22.
go back to reference Yazdanian A, et al. Mobile-Based Self-management Application Requirements for Patients With Gastric Cancer: Quantitative Descriptive Study of Specialist and Patient Perspectives. JMIR Cancer. 2022;8(2):e36788.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Yazdanian A, et al. Mobile-Based Self-management Application Requirements for Patients With Gastric Cancer: Quantitative Descriptive Study of Specialist and Patient Perspectives. JMIR Cancer. 2022;8(2):e36788.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
23.
go back to reference Winter, N., et al., iCare – Protocol... in Int Psych-Onco Soc Conference. 2022. Winter, N., et al., iCare – Protocol... in Int Psych-Onco Soc Conference. 2022.
24.
go back to reference Darling G, et al. Validation of the functional assessment of cancer therapy esophageal cancer subscale. Cancer. 2006;107(4):854–63.CrossRefPubMed Darling G, et al. Validation of the functional assessment of cancer therapy esophageal cancer subscale. Cancer. 2006;107(4):854–63.CrossRefPubMed
25.
go back to reference Bonevski B, et al. Evaluation of an instrument to assess the needs of patients with cancer. Support Care Rev Group Cancer. 2000;88(1):217–25. Bonevski B, et al. Evaluation of an instrument to assess the needs of patients with cancer. Support Care Rev Group Cancer. 2000;88(1):217–25.
26.
go back to reference Bedard M, et al. The Zarit Burden Interview: a new short version and screening version. Gerontologist. 2001;41(5):652–7.CrossRefPubMed Bedard M, et al. The Zarit Burden Interview: a new short version and screening version. Gerontologist. 2001;41(5):652–7.CrossRefPubMed
27.
go back to reference Girgis A, Lambert S, Lecathelinais C. The supportive care needs survey for partners and caregivers of cancer survivors: development and psychometric evaluation. Psychooncology. 2011;20(4):387–93.CrossRefPubMed Girgis A, Lambert S, Lecathelinais C. The supportive care needs survey for partners and caregivers of cancer survivors: development and psychometric evaluation. Psychooncology. 2011;20(4):387–93.CrossRefPubMed
28.
go back to reference Weitzner MA, et al. The Caregiver Quality of Life Index-Cancer (CQOLC) scale: development and validation of an instrument to measure quality of life of the family caregiver of patients with cancer. Qual Life Res. 1999;8(1–2):55–63.CrossRefPubMed Weitzner MA, et al. The Caregiver Quality of Life Index-Cancer (CQOLC) scale: development and validation of an instrument to measure quality of life of the family caregiver of patients with cancer. Qual Life Res. 1999;8(1–2):55–63.CrossRefPubMed
29.
go back to reference Glasgow RE, Vogt TM, Boles SM. Evaluating the public health impact of health promotion interventions: the RE-AIM framework. Am J Public Health. 1999;89(9):1322–7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Glasgow RE, Vogt TM, Boles SM. Evaluating the public health impact of health promotion interventions: the RE-AIM framework. Am J Public Health. 1999;89(9):1322–7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
32.
go back to reference Heynsbergh N, et al. Development of a Smartphone App for Informal Carers of People With Cancer: Processes and Learnings. JMIR Form Res. 2019;3(2):e10990.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Heynsbergh N, et al. Development of a Smartphone App for Informal Carers of People With Cancer: Processes and Learnings. JMIR Form Res. 2019;3(2):e10990.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
33.
go back to reference Heynsbergh N, et al. A Smartphone App to Support Carers of People Living With Cancer: A Feasibility and Usability Study. JMIR Cancer. 2019;5(1):e11779.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Heynsbergh N, et al. A Smartphone App to Support Carers of People Living With Cancer: A Feasibility and Usability Study. JMIR Cancer. 2019;5(1):e11779.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
34.
go back to reference Morris NS, et al. The Single Item Literacy Screener: Evaluation of a brief instrument to identify limited reading ability. BMC Fam Pract. 2006;7(1):21.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Morris NS, et al. The Single Item Literacy Screener: Evaluation of a brief instrument to identify limited reading ability. BMC Fam Pract. 2006;7(1):21.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
35.
go back to reference Short CE, et al. Measuring Engagement in eHealth and mHealth Behavior Change Interventions: Viewpoint of Methodologies. J Med Internet Res. 2018;20(11):e292.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Short CE, et al. Measuring Engagement in eHealth and mHealth Behavior Change Interventions: Viewpoint of Methodologies. J Med Internet Res. 2018;20(11):e292.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
36.
go back to reference Dionne-Odom JN, et al. A lay navigator-led, early palliative care intervention for African American and rural family caregivers of individuals with advanced cancer (Project Cornerstone): Results of a pilot randomized trial. Cancer. 2022;128(6):1321–30.CrossRefPubMed Dionne-Odom JN, et al. A lay navigator-led, early palliative care intervention for African American and rural family caregivers of individuals with advanced cancer (Project Cornerstone): Results of a pilot randomized trial. Cancer. 2022;128(6):1321–30.CrossRefPubMed
37.
go back to reference Hawthorne G, Richardson J, Osborne R. The Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL) instrument: a psychometric measure of health-related quality of life. Qual Life Res. 1999;8(3):209–24.CrossRefPubMed Hawthorne G, Richardson J, Osborne R. The Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL) instrument: a psychometric measure of health-related quality of life. Qual Life Res. 1999;8(3):209–24.CrossRefPubMed
38.
go back to reference Richards-Jones S, et al. An economic evaluation of a telephone outcall intervention for informal carers of cancer patients in Australia: An assessment of costs and quality-adjusted-life-years. Psychooncology. 2019;28(3):525–32.CrossRefPubMed Richards-Jones S, et al. An economic evaluation of a telephone outcall intervention for informal carers of cancer patients in Australia: An assessment of costs and quality-adjusted-life-years. Psychooncology. 2019;28(3):525–32.CrossRefPubMed
39.
go back to reference Heckel L, Gunn KM, Livingston PM. The challenges of recruiting cancer patient/caregiver dyads: informing randomized controlled trials. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2018;18(1):146–146.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Heckel L, Gunn KM, Livingston PM. The challenges of recruiting cancer patient/caregiver dyads: informing randomized controlled trials. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2018;18(1):146–146.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
40.
go back to reference Luckett T, et al. Assessing HRQOL in gynecologic oncology: a systematic review. Int J Gyn Canc. 2010;20(4):664–84.CrossRef Luckett T, et al. Assessing HRQOL in gynecologic oncology: a systematic review. Int J Gyn Canc. 2010;20(4):664–84.CrossRef
41.
go back to reference Preston NJ, et al. Recommendations for managing missing data, attrition and response shift in palliative and end-of-life care research: part of the MORECare research method guidance on statistical issues. Palliat Med. 2013;27(10):899–907.CrossRefPubMed Preston NJ, et al. Recommendations for managing missing data, attrition and response shift in palliative and end-of-life care research: part of the MORECare research method guidance on statistical issues. Palliat Med. 2013;27(10):899–907.CrossRefPubMed
43.
go back to reference Emery J, et al. Management of common clinical problems experienced by survivors of cancer. The Lancet. 2022;399(10334):1537–50.CrossRef Emery J, et al. Management of common clinical problems experienced by survivors of cancer. The Lancet. 2022;399(10334):1537–50.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
iCare – a self-directed, interactive online program to improve health and wellbeing for people living with upper gastrointestinal or hepato-pancreato-biliary cancers, and their informal carers: the study protocol for a Phase II randomised controlled trial
Authors
Patricia M Livingston
Natalie Winter
Anna Ugalde
Liliana Orellana
Antonina Mikocka-Walus
Michael Jefford
John Zalcberg
Neil Orford
Alison M Hutchinson
Andrew Barbour
Nicole Kiss
Bernard Mark Smithers
David I Watson
Nikki McCaffrey
Victoria White
the iCare Advisory Group
Publication date
01-12-2024
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Cancer / Issue 1/2024
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2407
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-024-11861-2

Other articles of this Issue 1/2024

BMC Cancer 1/2024 Go to the issue
Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are novel agents that have shown promise across multiple tumor types. Explore the current landscape of ADCs in breast and lung cancer with our experts, and gain insights into the mechanism of action, key clinical trials data, existing challenges, and future directions.

Dr. Véronique Diéras
Prof. Fabrice Barlesi
Developed by: Springer Medicine