IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/patien/v14y2021i5d10.1007_s40271-020-00487-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Patient and Public Involvement Refines the Design of ProtOeus: A Proposed Phase II Trial of Proton Beam Therapy in Oesophageal Cancer

Author

Listed:
  • Owen J. Nicholas

    (South West Wales Cancer Centre, Singleton Hospital
    Swansea University Medical School)

  • Olivier Joseph

    (Manchester University NHS Trust)

  • Annie Keane

    (Manchester University NHS Trust)

  • Kate Cleary

    (Cardiff University)

  • Sue H. Campbell

    (Patient Representative)

  • Sarah H. Gwynne

    (South West Wales Cancer Centre, Singleton Hospital)

  • Tom Crosby

    (Velindre University NHS Trust)

  • Ganesh Radhakrishna

    (The Christie NHS Foundation Trust)

  • Maria A. Hawkins

    (University of Oxford)

Abstract

Background Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for oesophageal cancer significantly improves overall survival but is associated with severe post-operative complications. Proton beam therapy may reduce these toxicities by sparing normal tissues compared with standard radiotherapy. ProtOeus is a proposed randomised phase II study of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in oesophageal cancer that compares proton beam therapy to standard radiotherapy techniques. As proton beam therapy services are often centralised in academic centres in major cities, proton beam therapy trials raise distinct challenges including patient acceptance of travelling for proton beam therapy, coordination of treatments with local centres and ensuring equity of access for patients. Methods Focus groups were held early in the trial development process to establish patients’ views on the trial proposal. Topics discussed include perception of proton beam therapy, patient acceptability of the trial pathway and design, patient-facing materials, and common clinical scenarios. Focus groups were led by the investigators and facilitated by patient involvement teams from the institutions who are involved in this research. Responses for each topic were analysed, and fed back to the trial’s development group. Results Three focus groups were held in separate locations in the UK (Manchester, Cardiff, Wigan). Proton beam therapy was perceived as superior to standard radiotherapy making the trial attractive. Patients felt strongly that travel costs should be reimbursed to ensure equity of access to proton beam therapy. They were very supportive of a shorter treatment schedule and felt that toxicity reduction was the most important endpoint. Discussion and Conclusions Incorporating patient views early in the trial development process resulted in significant trial design refinements including travel/accommodation provisions, choice of primary endpoint, randomisation ratio and fractionation schedule. Focus groups are a reproducible and efficient method of incorporating the patient and public voice into research.

Suggested Citation

  • Owen J. Nicholas & Olivier Joseph & Annie Keane & Kate Cleary & Sue H. Campbell & Sarah H. Gwynne & Tom Crosby & Ganesh Radhakrishna & Maria A. Hawkins, 2021. "Patient and Public Involvement Refines the Design of ProtOeus: A Proposed Phase II Trial of Proton Beam Therapy in Oesophageal Cancer," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 14(5), pages 545-553, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:patien:v:14:y:2021:i:5:d:10.1007_s40271-020-00487-8
    DOI: 10.1007/s40271-020-00487-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40271-020-00487-8
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40271-020-00487-8?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paula Lorgelly & Jack Pollard & Patricia Cubi-Molla & Amanda Cole & Duncan Sim & Jon Sussex, 2020. "Outcome-Based Payment Schemes: What Outcomes Do Patients with Cancer Value?," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 13(5), pages 599-610, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.

      More about this item

      Statistics

      Access and download statistics

      Corrections

      All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:patien:v:14:y:2021:i:5:d:10.1007_s40271-020-00487-8. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

      If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

      If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

      If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

      For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

      Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

      IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.