IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pdig00/0000178.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Wearable sensor-based performance status assessment in cancer: A pilot multicenter study from the Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology (A19_Pilot2)

Author

Listed:
  • William A Wood
  • Deepika Dilip
  • Andriy Derkach
  • Natalie S Grover
  • Olivier Elemento
  • Ross Levine
  • Gita Thanarajasingam
  • John A Batsis
  • Charlotte Bailey
  • Arun Kannappan
  • Steven M Devine
  • Andrew S Artz
  • Jennifer A Ligibel
  • Ethan Basch
  • Erin Kent
  • Jacob Glass

Abstract

Clinical performance status is designed to be a measure of overall health, reflecting a patient’s physiological reserve and ability to tolerate various forms of therapy. Currently, it is measured by a combination of subjective clinician assessment and patient-reported exercise tolerance in the context of daily living activities. In this study, we assess the feasibility of combining objective data sources and patient-generated health data (PGHD) to improve the accuracy of performance status assessment during routine cancer care. Patients undergoing routine chemotherapy for solid tumors, routine chemotherapy for hematologic malignancies, or hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HCT) at one of four sites in a cancer clinical trials cooperative group were consented to a six-week prospective observational clinical trial (NCT02786628). Baseline data acquisition included cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) and a six-minute walk test (6MWT). Weekly PGHD included patient-reported physical function and symptom burden. Continuous data capture included use of a Fitbit Charge HR (sensor). Baseline CPET and 6MWT could only be obtained in 68% of study patients, suggesting low feasibility during routine cancer treatment. In contrast, 84% of patients had usable fitness tracker data, 93% completed baseline patient-reported surveys, and overall, 73% of patients had overlapping sensor and survey data that could be used for modeling. A linear model with repeated measures was constructed to predict the patient-reported physical function. Sensor-derived daily activity, sensor-derived median heart rate, and patient-reported symptom burden emerged as strong predictors of physical function (marginal R2 0.429–0.433, conditional R2 0.816–0.822).Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov Id NCT02786628.Author summary: Performance status acquisition relies on clinician judgment though additional data sources could inform its assessment. Physical performance testing is safe in patients with cancer undergoing treatment, though the feasibility of obtaining cardiopulmonary exercise testing during routine care is unclear. Patient-generated health data acquisition during cancer treatment is feasible but the contribution of these data to understanding performance status is not known. In this multicenter observational study, we used fitness trackers in addition to validated survey instruments as a means of remotely and continuously monitoring patient physical function, a concept closely related to performance status. We found that this approach was more feasible than advanced physical performance testing during routine cancer care. Daily physical activity, heart rate, and patient-reported symptom burden provided meaningful information relevant to physical function. Prospective studies analyzing these data in the context of clinical endpoints are needed to determine whether this type of assessment could be used in place of traditional performance status assessment. Multicenter consortia could facilitate development of refined models in cancer patients and identify opportunities for interventions to improve clinical outcomes.

Suggested Citation

  • William A Wood & Deepika Dilip & Andriy Derkach & Natalie S Grover & Olivier Elemento & Ross Levine & Gita Thanarajasingam & John A Batsis & Charlotte Bailey & Arun Kannappan & Steven M Devine & Andre, 2023. "Wearable sensor-based performance status assessment in cancer: A pilot multicenter study from the Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology (A19_Pilot2)," PLOS Digital Health, Public Library of Science, vol. 2(1), pages 1-16, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pdig00:0000178
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pdig.0000178
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/digitalhealth/article?id=10.1371/journal.pdig.0000178
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/digitalhealth/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pdig.0000178&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pdig.0000178?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
    ---><---

    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:plo:pdig00:0000178. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: digitalhealth (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/digitalhealth .

    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.