Cited by 482Lung Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentCancer survivorship and careTelemedicine and Telehealth Implementation

Randomized Trial Comparing a Web-Mediated Follow-up With Routine Surveillance in Lung Cancer Patients

Open access
Denis, Fabrice, Lethrosne, Claire, Pourel, Nicolas, Molinier, Olivier, Pointreau, Yoann, Domont, Julien, Bourgeois, Hugues, Senellart, Hélène +11 more·2017·JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute

Abstract

Background: The use of web-based monitoring for lung cancer patients is growing in interest because of promising recent results suggesting improvement in cancer and resource utilization outcomes. It remains an open question whether the overall survival (OS) in these patients could be improved by using a web-mediated follow-up rather than classical scheduled follow-up and imaging. Methods: Advanced-stage lung cancer patients without evidence of disease progression after or during initial treatment were randomly assigned in a multicenter phase III trial to compare a web-mediated follow-up algorithm (experimental arm), based on weekly self-scored patient symptoms, with routine follow-up with CT scans scheduled every three to six months according to the disease stage (control arm). In the experimental arm, an alert email was automatically sent to the oncologist when self-scored symptoms matched predefined criteria. The primary outcome was OS. Results: From June 2014 to January 2016, 133 patients were enrolled and 121 were retained in the intent-to-treat analysis; 12 deemed ineligible after random assignment were not subsequently followed. Most of the patients (95.1%) had stage III or IV disease. The median follow-up was nine months. The median OS was 19.0 months (95% confidence interval [CI] = 12.5 to noncalculable) in the experimental and 12.0 months (95% CI = 8.6 to 16.4) in the control arm (one-sided P = .001) (hazard ratio = 0.32, 95% CI = 0.15 to 0.67, one-sided P = .002). The performance status at first detected relapse was 0 to 1 for 75.9% of the patients in the experimental arm and for 32.5% of those in the control arm (two-sided P < .001). Optimal treatment was initiated in 72.4% of the patients in the experimental arm and in 32.5% of those in the control arm (two-sided P < .001). Conclusions: A web-mediated follow-up algorithm based on self-reported symptoms improved OS due to early relapse detection and better performance status at relapse.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/jnci/djx029

Cites

23 of 23 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • An app designed to screen patient reported outcomes for signs of disease recurrence to allow for early re-intervention in previously treated lung cancer patients improved median survival compared to optimized standard imaging follow-up (23 months vs 14.8 months; HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.39-0.995, P = 0.048).

    “For example, an app designed to screen patient reported outcomes for signs of disease recurrence to allow for early re-intervention in previously treated lung cancer patients improved median survival compared to optimized standard imaging follow-up (23 months in the experimental arm vs 14.8 months in the control arm (HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.39–0.995, P = 0.048)).”

    From What is the clinical value of mHealth for patients? (2020) · cites this paper as [7]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Denis, F., Lethrosne, C., Pourel, N., Molinier, O., Pointreau, Y., Domont, J., Bourgeois, H., Senellart, H., Trémolières, P., Lizée, T., Bennouna, J., Urban, T., El Khouri, C., Charron, A., Septans, A.-L., Balavoine, M., Landry, S., Solal-Céligny, P., & Letellier, C.
Affiliations
  • Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
  • Les Hôpitaux de Chartres (FR)
  • Institut Sainte Catherine (FR)
  • Centre Hospitalier du Mans (FR)
  • Centre Jean Bernard (FR)
  • Institut Inter-régional de Cancérologie Jean Bernard, Le Mans, France
  • Institut de Cancérologie de l'Ouest (FR)
  • Institut de Cancérologie de l’Ouest Paul Papin, Angers, France
  • Centre Hospitalier Universitaire d'Angers (FR)
  • Institut Catherine de Sienne, Nantes, France
  • Institut de Cancérologie de l’Ouest René Gauducheau, St Herblain, France
  • CORIA UMR 6614—Normandie Université, CNRS Université et INSA de Rouen, Campus Universitaire du Madrillet, Saint-Etienne du Rouvray, France
Corresponding author
Denis, Fabrice
Venue
JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute
Published
2017-04-10
Volume
109
Issue
9
Pages
djx029
ISSN
  • 0027-8874 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2105
OpenAlex
W2606041829
Cited by
482
References
23
Citations by year
2026: 36 · 2025: 49 · 2024: 48 · 2023: 62 · 2022: 74 · 2021: 65 · 2020: 60 · 2019: 33 · 2018: 35 · 2017: 17
FWCI
32.77
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Bonnie J. Addario Lung Cancer Foundation
  • Unicancer
  • Duke Cancer Institute
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Lung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
Keywords
lung cancer, self-reported symptoms, routine monitoring, overall survival, early relapse detection, computed tomography, performance status, advanced lung cancer
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Lung Neoplasms, Male, Middle Aged, Neoplasm Staging, Population Surveillance, Prospective Studies, Quality of Life, Time Factors, Chi-Square Distribution, Outcome Assessment, Health Care, Internet, Kaplan-Meier Estimate, Self Report, Diagnostic Self Evaluation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review