The GIMEMA-ALLIANCE Digital Health Platform for Patients With Hematologic Malignancies in the COVID-19 Pandemic and Postpandemic Era: Protocol for a Multicenter, Prospective, Observational Study.

Introduction

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic has recently transformed health care delivery all over the world by also remarkably increasing the complexity of clinical decision making in oncology [ 1 ].

Approaches to obviate the need for physical meeting between patients and health care providers (ie, telephone calls, communication by mail, and mobile phone apps) are now more frequently preferred to limit the risk of virus spread among uninfected patients [ 2 ]. A rapid integration of digital health technologies in the health care system is being embraced in several countries to achieve a new balance between self-isolation and health care delivery [ 3 , 4 ]. Addressing the physical and mental health-related concerns of patients is now critical [ 5 ] and may have major implications. For example, empirical data indicate that patients’ anxiety related to the COVID-19 pandemic may be associated with the risk of underestimating important symptoms of hematologic malignancies, thereby delaying diagnosis and appropriate treatment [ 6 ].

The COVID-19 emergency has prompted new questions about how to integrate the vulnerability of patients with cancer—because of either the disease itself, the effects of cancer treatments, or additional comorbidities—with the risk of COVID-19 [ 7 ].

Management of patients with hematologic malignancies during the COVID-19 pandemic can be particularly challenging for several reasons, including the need for expert supportive care services, which can be substantially limited during the current clinical scenario. For example, careful evaluation of how long patients with leukemia can be managed without in-person follow-up visits, blood tests, and therapies, as well as close monitoring of potential complications during therapy, are now critical components of patient management during this global pandemic [ 8 ]. Therefore, special recommendations to optimize treatments for patients with hematologic malignancies during the COVID-19 pandemic have been recently published [ 8 ]. A recent multicenter study, which included a large sample of more than 500 adult patients with hematologic malignancies who required hospitalization for COVID-19, also indicated high mortality rates [ 9 ]. This study showed that patients with hematologic malignancies with COVID-19 had worse outcomes than both the general population with COVID-19 and patients with hematologic malignancies without COVID-19 [ 9 ].

The Added Value of Patient-Reported Outcome Assessment in Routine Cancer Care

There is now convincing evidence of the clinical value of systematic collection and use of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in routine cancer practice [ 10 , 11 ]. Also, empirical data indicating that PROs, including symptoms and functional aspects, provide independent prognostic data for survival [ 12 , 13 ] further reinforces the need to more systematically assess PROs, as they provide unique information that cannot be captured via traditional clinical measures or laboratory exams.

Regular assessment of PROs in daily practice has been shown to provide a number of positive effects with regard to, for example, improved symptom control, timely identification of physical and psychosocial needs, improved patient-physician communication, and improved health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and emotional well-being, without increasing patient management activities for health care professionals [ 10 , 11 , 14 - 21 ].

Digital health technology now allows implementation of electronic PRO (ePRO) measures that patients can complete, for example, remotely via web platforms. Results obtained by completing ePROs via these platforms are typically graphically displayed in real time and available for physicians and clinical staff.

Notably, one randomized controlled trial (RCT) conducted in patients with advanced solid cancer reported that web-based self-reporting of symptoms with automated alerts to clinicians for severe or worsening symptoms was not only associated with a reduced number of emergency room visits and hospitalizations but also with significant improvement in overall survival [ 14 , 22 ]. Similarly, another RCT in patients with advanced-stage lung cancer showed that a web-mediated follow-up algorithm based on self-reported symptoms also improved overall survival [ 23 ]. A more recent RCT conducted in patients with solid cancer, who were mainly treated with curative intent, showed that real-time monitoring with ePROs improved physical well-being and self-efficacy without increasing hospital workload, and authors concluded that online symptom monitoring is a feasible approach to be implemented in routine care [ 24 ].

The key advantages of using ePROs during the COVID-19 pandemic have been recently highlighted [ 25 ] and these may include the following: the prevention of the occurrence of severe adverse events and the prompt management of medical needs. While some challenges exist to the implementation of ePRO instruments into routine practice, such as technical and organizational factors, a number of actions can be put in place to maximize efficiency and ensure successful collection of ePROs [ 26 ].

Study Rationale and Hypotheses

Italy was one of the most severely affected countries by the COVID-19 pandemic in early 2020 [ 27 ], putting enormous pressure on hematology departments across the country.

The current pandemic represents an opportunity to further boost use of digital health technologies in the hematology arena and maximize the use of remote ePRO data collection in patients with hematologic malignancies. As recently observed, the COVID-19 pandemic has precipitated a shift to remote technology-enabled care [ 24 ].

In this new clinical scenario, the Gruppo Italiano Malattie Ematologiche dell’Adulto (GIMEMA) led the development of a dedicated digital health tool for patients with hematologic malignancies. The tool was called An online platform to improve patient-centered care during the COVID-19 pandemic: A GIMEMA surveillance program in hematologic malignancies (ALLIANCE)—the GIMEMA-ALLIANCE platform.

GIMEMA is a nonprofit research organization with a long-standing history of clinical research in hematology; it consists of a well-established network of about 150 affiliated hematology centers throughout Italy, including both community and university-based hospitals, plus a data center located in Rome that coordinates research activities. The GIMEMA-ALLIANCE platform was devised in collaboration with Evaluation Software Development (ESD), a well-established spin-off digital health company, whose key product is the Computer-based Health Evaluation System (CHES) infrastructure. CHES is a tool for the electronic collection, calculation, analyses, and presentation of PROs. CHES is used worldwide in more than 75 hospitals and research institutions for the electronic capture of medical and PRO data [ 28 , 29 ].

We hypothesize that use of the GIMEMA-ALLIANCE platform in patients with hematologic malignancies would facilitate a more patient-centered care approach and would support hematologists in the earlier recognition of clinically important problems and symptoms of their patients. By using this platform, we also aimed to collect disease- and treatment-related information, as well as prospective PRO data, to answer important research questions.

Objectives

The main objectives of the GIMEMA-ALLIANCE platform are as follows:

To generate relevant data to better understand quality of life, symptoms, and medication adherence in adult patients with hematologic malignancies during the COVID-19 pandemic and postpandemic era, and to identify subgroups of patients at higher risk of poor outcomes.

To develop a large prospective real-life registry on cancer treatment outcomes of patients with hematologic cancer, with or without a diagnosis of COVID-19.

To facilitate patient-centered care in routine practice by using ePRO measures with automated alerts sent to treating hematologists.

Methods

Study Participants

Considering that we aimed to use the platform with patients seen in daily practice, very broad inclusion criteria were set up. Inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) diagnosis of any hematologic malignancy according to the 2016 World Health Organization classification [ 30 ], (2) adult patients (≥18 years of age), and (3) written informed consent. Exclusion criteria included (1) major cognitive deficits or psychiatric problems hampering a self-reported evaluation and (2) inability to read and understand the local language. Patients enrolled in clinical trials are still eligible for this protocol, and this information is recorded in the case report forms (CRFs) at the time of entry in this study to be used for sensitivity analyses.

Ethics Approval, Consent to Participate, and Trial Registration

This study is currently funded by GIMEMA and was approved by the Ethics Committee of the University of Sapienza, Rome (study reference No. 5822, Protocol 366/2020). Documented informed consent must be obtained for all patients. By means of the information sheet, all eligible patients will be informed about the aims of the project, the procedures to participate in the project, and the strict confidentiality of the patients’ data. It will be emphasized that participation is voluntary and that it might contribute to defining a more personalized and timely therapeutic approach. It will be also highlighted that either refusing to join the study or withdrawing afterwards at any time will not prejudice the patient’s subsequent care. This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT04581187 ).

Patient Recruitment Procedures

After approval by the local Ethics Committee of each participating center, patients who meet the inclusion criteria will be invited to participate by authorized investigators. At present, 27 centers have agreed to participate. Eligible patients willing to participate will be given a written information sheet and asked to sign the informed consent form. Considering the challenges posed by the pandemic, with inevitably less frequent face-to-face access in the hospital, and in line with current Italian regulatory guidelines, consent may also be anticipated, for example, via telephone or email [ 31 ].

All eligible and consenting patients will be registered in the platform via the dedicated physician portal, which allows for the downloading of patient log-in details and basic instructions to access the patient portal, to be handed over to patients.

Study Design and Logistics

This is a multicenter prospective observational study led by GIMEMA. All data will be centrally collected and analyzed at the GIMEMA Data Center, which operates according to high-quality and transparent standards of clinical research, as certified by the European Clinical Research Infrastructure Network (ECRIN) [ 32 ]. ECRIN certification ensures that a data center meets several procedural standards with respect to different aspects of clinical research. These include the design, development, and validation of CRFs; data entry and data management; coding of variables; validation of databases; and statistical analysis. ECRIN certification also concerns the management of information technology infrastructure; data security, storage, and access; and back-up procedures.

The platform will be open for 2 years to register new patients who will be followed up for 2 years from the date of registration; the platform consists of two password-protected secure portals, one for physicians [ 33 ] and one for patients [ 34 ]. Data security of the web-collection system in this study is fully compliant with the highest standards of security of data protection (see details in the next paragraph).

Once a participating center obtains local ethical approval and it is officially ready (ie, having sorted out all administrative steps to receive access to the platform by the GIMEMA Data Center), a training session is organized by the GIMEMA-ALLIANCE management team with the on-site clinical staff of the participating hospital. The session broadly aims at instructing the local staff in using the platform and in interpreting patient-reported data. A brief practical guide is also sent to the clinical staff at study start-up. A study newsletter is circulated on a regular basis to provide feedback on study progress and to invite users to report any questions or requests of assistance to the GIMEMA-ALLIANCE management team at their email address.

The Architecture of the GIMEMA-ALLIANCE Platform

All clinical and patient-reported data in this study will be collected through the dedicated web platform using the CHES infrastructure [ 28 ]. CHES is a sophisticated web-based software tool specifically designed for ePRO questionnaire administration, real-time graphical presentation of individual patient results, and clinical and PRO data collection, storage, and analysis. This platform runs in all common web browsers, devices, and operating systems; it has already been implemented in a number of national and international institutions engaging clinical studies with electronic capture of medical and PRO data as well as PRO data collection in routine oncology care [ 35 - 40 ]. Since CHES is a web-based application, the communication between the client (ie, browser) and the server needs to be protected from being read or modified by an attacker. This is done by only allowing Secure Sockets Layer–encrypted communication (ie, https). The https encrypts the data between the client and the server, so no other person can read or modify the data sent from the client to the server and from the server to the client. These secure web links are used for all participants within the CHES system: administrators, physicians, and patients. To further ensure data security, the system is divided into two different zones, the so-called trusted and untrusted zones. These zones are realized by two different servers that differ in their accessibility. The server in the trusted zone is only accessible within the GIMEMA network, whereas the server in the untrusted zone is accessible via the World Wide Web. A network connection exists only from the trusted zone to the untrusted zone but not vice versa. All sensitive patient data are stored in the trusted zone. Only data that cannot be linked to a patient are stored in the untrusted zone. To fetch data from the untrusted zone (eg, the completed survey), a software service runs in the trusted zone that merges the data from the untrusted zone into the database of the trusted zone. Only the trusted zone knows the mapping of the anonymous patient ID from the untrusted zone to the actual patient ID in the trusted zone ( Figure 1 ).

For accessing the system, two different weblinks exist. One weblink is used to access the patient portal in the untrusted zone, whereas the other weblink is used to access the physician portal in the trusted zone. Any system access requires at least a username and a password. Furthermore, for accessing the physician portal, a two-factor authentication mechanism is in place that requires each physician to enter a 6-digit code that is sent to his or her mobile phone when trying to log in. This token is valid only once and expires after 3 minutes if not used. The credentials for the physician portal will be provided by the GIMEMA-ALLIANCE management team to all investigators, who have been previously authorized to access the physician portal, prior to the study start date at each participating center. The credentials to the patient portal will be provided by the local investigators to the patients enrolled at their participating center. The physician web interface is designed for an easy-to-use approach, allowing quick access to all of their patients’ relevant data and real-time access to a visual summary of patient-reported information via the web browser of each patient enrolled within the same hospital. The physicians will hand out a flyer to their patients containing the individual credentials, along with the weblink to access the patient portal.

Once the patient is entered into the dedicated portal, three modules are displayed ( Figure 2 ). The first module mainly aims at collecting patient-reported information on quality of life, symptoms, and medication adherence (ie, the ALLIANCE survey, which is described in detail in the next section). The second module can be used by patients to provide real-time information to their treating hematologists regarding a potential risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection or a confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis. Items included in this module are as follows: having received a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19, having been in close contact with someone with a COVID-19 diagnosis, having reported a fever of more than 37.5 °C, and having experienced breathing difficulty, cough, or an altered sense of smell and/or taste over the last 2 weeks. The third module consists of the video consultation area, which allows patients to have online visits with their physicians and allows the actual scheduling of online visits via a user-friendly agenda.

The ALLIANCE Survey

The first module of the patient portal includes the ALLIANCE survey, which aims to assess the patient’s perspective on the following broad areas: global health status and quality of life, functional aspects, symptoms, and problems with adherence to therapy. In addition, a few information items (eg, questions about social support) are only included in the first survey. From the second assessment on, these few additional information items will no longer be requested of patients.

Just after registration in the study, patients will be asked by their treating hematologist to complete the survey at their earliest convenience. Considering the real-life nature of the study, and the wide range of clinical scenarios that could be represented in this platform, no prespecified time points for completion have been preplanned. In any case, the platform is designed to send regular reminders to patients to complete the survey, with the first one being sent after 1 week from date of registration, that is, if the first survey has not been completed within the first week of registration.

Global health status and quality of life, functional aspects, and symptoms are evaluated with the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire–Core (QLQ-C30) and ad hoc items from the EORTC Item Library. The EORTC QLQ-C30 is a brief, multidimensional HRQoL measure consisting of 30 items; the measure includes five functional scales (ie, physical, role, emotional, social, and cognitive), three symptoms (ie, fatigue, nausea and vomiting, and pain), a global health status and quality of life scale, and six single items (ie, dyspnea, insomnia, appetite loss, constipation, diarrhea, and financial difficulties) [ 41 ]. To further increase the sensitivity of HRQoL measurement for patients with hematologic malignancies, four ad hoc items from the EORTC Item Library are also included [ 42 ].

The decision on items to be included in the survey from the EORTC Item Library was based on clinical grounds after discussion with physicians involved in the project, on which symptoms not already covered by the EORTC QLQ-C30 would be most relevant for the majority of patients with hematologic malignancies. Also, we limited the inclusion to only four additional symptoms to reduce response burden as much as possible. Specifically, two items stemmed from the EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire–Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (QLQ-CLL17) module (ie, night sweats and bone pain), and two items stemmed from the EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire–Chronic Myeloid Leukemia (QLQ-CML24) module (ie, headache and muscular cramps).

We used the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire, as it covers not only functional aspects, global health status, and HRQoL of patients, but it also includes a core set of cancer symptoms that we considered important to monitor in our patients. This questionnaire has been used in a number of studies of patients with hematologic malignancies [ 43 ], and its measurement invariance in the setting of hematology has been supported [ 44 ]. In addition, the EORTC QLQ-C30 also allows the calculation of a single summary score, which has been validated across the whole spectrum of both solid and hematologic malignancies [ 45 , 46 ] and may be helpful in future analyses with data collected in our platform. Indeed, recent empirical data in the real-world setting, for example, have shown that this EORTC QLQ-C30 summary score has a strong prognostic value for overall survival across a wide range of cancer populations above and beyond that provided by traditional clinical and sociodemographic variables [ 12 ]. Furthermore, international general population normative data are available for this questionnaire [ 47 ], thereby facilitating future comparisons of the profiles of our patients with reference values. Finally, the availability of recently established evidence-based criteria for the definition of clinically important problems and symptoms that can be used to ease interpretation of data in daily clinical practice [ 35 ] is an additional key strength we valued highly for the inclusion of the EORTC QLQ-C30 in our platform. Indeed, as previously observed, one of the key challenges to the successful implementation of PRO data with health information technologies for use in routine care is clinician understanding of how to interpret and respond to PRO information [ 48 ].

Medication adherence is evaluated with the Adherence to Refills and Medications Scale (ARMS). We used the shortened 7-item version of the ARMS (ie, ARMS-7), which is a brief self-reported validated measure of medication adherence and correlates very highly with the full 12-item measure [ 49 , 50 ]. Each of the items allows patients to express, on a 4-point scale, how often they do not take or refill their medications under different circumstances. Scores on the ARMS-7 range from 7 to 28, with lower scores indicating better adherence; in addition, the scale is available in Italian.

Adherence to oral anticancer therapies is a known problem, and several factors have been found to be associated with poor medication-taking behaviors, including both treatment-related aspects and personal patient factors [ 51 ]. Considering the potential negative effects of suboptimal adherence on clinical efficacy, and the fact that many patients with hematologic malignancies are now treated with oral drugs, we aim to also include in the platform a brief and easy-to-use self-reported measure to assess medication adherence. Among the available self-report adherence measures that can be used in clinical practice [ 52 ], we selected the ARMS, which has been shown to be a valid and reliable scale, with optimal performance characteristics among patients with low literacy as well [ 49 ]. We considered this latter characteristic of critical importance for inclusion in our platform, considering that we aimed to capture this type of data in real life, hence, approaching patients with various levels of education.

Active Monitoring of Patients Via the GIMEMA-ALLIANCE Platform

Currently, the platform triggers automated email alerts to the treating hematologist based on the following criteria:

Presence of clinically important problems and symptoms.

Problems with adherence to therapy.

Risk of COVID-19 diagnosis.

The definition of clinically important problems and symptoms is based on previously defined thresholds for functional aspects (eg, physical and emotional functioning) and key cancer symptoms from the EORTC QLQ-C30 [ 35 ]. These thresholds for clinical importance were established to detect health problems that limit a patient’s daily life, cause worry to the patient and/or to his or her partner or family, or require help or care; all of these are criteria that have previously been identified as making a health problem relevant for the clinical encounter [ 35 ]. The scale-specific thresholds used are reported in Figure 3 .

Through their portal, physicians have real-time access to a visual summary of patient-reported information, with red bars flagging clinically important problems and symptoms. To further facilitate the timely recognition of potential problems of their patients, email alerts sent to physicians also contains a link directly connecting to the graphical summary generated by the patient ratings. Figure 4 depicts an example of a graphical display of patient-reported symptoms.

Our working definition of potential problems with adherence to therapy is based on the scoring instructions for the ARMS-7 questionnaire, which is used in the platform to assess medication adherence. The overall score from this questionnaire ranges from 7 (best adherence) to 28 (worst adherence) [ 49 , 53 ], and it can be dichotomized as 7 or >7. A score equal to 7 indicates an optimal adherence, while any score larger than 7 indicates some degree of nonadherence. Therefore, we designed the platform to send an alert for adherence if the total score from ARMS-7 is higher than 7.

Based on patients’ answers to items included in the risk of COVID-19 diagnosis module, the platform automatically generates real-time alerts if at least one of them is checked to be true. This alerting procedure aims to enhance physician ability to more proactively engage patients who are at heightened risk of being diagnosed with COVID-19 or who may have been actually diagnosed with the disease.

However, considering the real-life nature of this study involving several centers, the alerting algorithm currently implemented for triggering alerts could be further refined or revised during the study period. Such information will be recorded in study files.

Physicians are free to decide on which action they feel to be most appropriate for their patients. For example, depending on the type and/or frequency of patient-generated alerts, they could (1) arrange an ad hoc face-to-face visit in the hospital, (2) arrange a video consultation, (3) refer the patient to other specialists, or (4) simply contact the patient by phone to further understand the patient’s needs. The workflow of the alerting procedure is summarized in Figure 5 .

Automated alerts are only meant to help physicians in the early recognition of potential problems of their patients; therefore, predetermined actions in response to specific alerts are not suggested by the platform. Considering the large heterogeneity of patient characteristics and types of specific treatments patients may receive, we did not recommend specific actions to take in response to alerts.

In any case, information about actions taken by physicians will be collected with ad hoc surveys sent to them, to understand how the platform might have helped them in the clinical management of their patients. These surveys will include questions about actions taken after having received an alert, such as no action taken , phone call with the patient to further understand the patient’s needs, video consultation , or having arranged a visit in the hospital or referral to other specialists . In addition, the survey will ask the physician about the frequency of his or her access to the platform and will also include 14 questions about acceptability and feasibility of the portal; responses could include, for example, “Use of the platform improved my understanding of the actual patient burden of symptoms” or “I think that the platform might be improved by additional features.”

Physician-Reported Information

The physician portal also includes a set of CRFs that are to be completed by the treating hematologists at baseline (ie, at study entry) and at regular intervals. Also, ad hoc CRFs are to be completed regarding COVID-19 diagnosis and COVID-19 vaccination, if applicable. Table 1 provides a summary of CRFs currently uploaded in the physician portal.

The baseline form will require a number of sociodemographic as well as disease- and treatment-related variables. Some key information items collected in this form are provided Textbox 1 .

The main clinical and sociodemographic variables included in the baseline case report form to be completed at study entry.

Selected key variables:

Type of hematologic malignancy

Date of initial diagnosis

Patient date of birth

Sex

Education level

Smoking status

Type and number of comorbidities

Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status

Status of patient at study entry: options include newly diagnosed and yet untreated, initial diagnosis and receiving first-line treatment, in remission and not receiving treatment, in remission and receiving consolidation or maintenance treatment, stable but not in remission, and relapsed or refractory

Ongoing treatment (if applicable)

The follow-up form will be completed every 3 months and will require basic data about ongoing therapy, any major toxicity, response to therapy, as well as survival status. In addition, the COVID-19 form, which will be completed only if the patient receives a diagnosis of COVID-19, will require specific information related to COVID-19 occurrence and related treatment history, hospitalization, symptoms, and outcomes, including survival. Similarly, a COVID-19 vaccination form is available to be completed, as appropriate, to collect information on date and type of vaccine received.

However, given the evolving situation of the COVID-19 pandemic, additional information regarding the patient’s medical history or clinical course of the disease (eg, details on disease characteristics, treatments, and possible complications) may be further requested of investigators, who may be asked to answer specific research questions of clinical relevance.

Statistical Analysis

Given the nature of this study, a formal calculation of sample size and power was not performed. However, at the time of study design, we determined that 400 patients in 2 years was a reasonable estimate of the overall enrollment of this study. Each patient enrolled in this study will be followed up for 2 years from the date of registration. All the analyses described below will be performed overall and by patient subgroups (eg, either by type of hematologic disease at study entry, type of treatment, or diagnosis of COVID-19). We will estimate the trajectories over time of the scores from the scales from all PRO questionnaires by either a generalized linear mixed model (GLMM) or a growth curve model [ 54 ], depending on the actual observed timing of PRO assessments, to prospectively monitor HRQoL, symptoms, and adherence to therapy. We will also assess the prevalence over time of clinically important problems and symptoms, as measured by the EORTC QLQ-C30, using the GLMM. For each scale, the clinical relevance of HRQoL problems will be determined according to previously published thresholds [ 35 ]. The GLMM approach will be used to investigate factors associated with physical and mental health concerns and adherence to therapy. Depending on the type of outcome to be investigated, we will use either the GLMM, the Cox proportional hazards model, or the Fine-Gray model for competing risks [ 55 ] to assess the impact on patient outcomes (eg, survival outcomes) of key factors, including the diagnosis of COVID-19.

The clinical strategies adopted by physicians in response to patient-generated alerts, as well as patient characteristics and information about disease course and outcomes, will be summarized using means, proportions, medians, and interquartile ranges, according to the type of variable. Possible cross-sectional comparisons of outcomes between subgroups of patients, based on, for example, type of hematologic disease, type of treatment, or diagnosis of COVID-19, will be assessed using either Fisher exact, chi-square, Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney, or Kruskal-Wallis tests, according to the type of variable.

Results

Recruitment of participants started in December 2020. As of April 2021, a total of 116 patients have been enrolled in this study. The main outcomes from this project will include longitudinal patterns of patients’ self-reported health issues and needs related to their overall quality of life, symptoms, and medication adherence. In addition, the real-time flow of information between patients and their physicians will possibly improve communication and help physicians in adopting more timely interventions. Data accumulated via this platform may also lay the groundwork to better understand the implications of a COVID-19 diagnosis on the midterm to long-term mental and physical health of patients with hematologic malignancies.

All findings will be disseminated in international peer-reviewed journals and abstracts presented at major international conferences. The study coordinators and the GIMEMA Data Center must approve all publications, abstracts, and presentations based on patients included in this study. Given the paucity of information on the effects of COVID-19 in patients with cancer and the importance of promptly providing new information to the scientific community, as well as in the best interest of patients, interim analyses and publications are foreseen during the recruitment period.

Discussion

We expect this platform to eventually become a large database containing information on the clinical course of the disease, patient-reported quality of life, and symptom profiles of patients with hematologic malignancies. Data collected in this platform will also allow us to compare the outcomes of patients with hematologic malignancies who may have been diagnosed with COVID-19 with those without COVID-19. Indeed, there is evidence indicating that the COVID-19 pandemic poses major risks to patients with hematologic malignancies [ 9 ].

We also note that this new platform, whose development was prompted by the global pandemic, can be an opportunity to further boost a shift toward a more patient-centered healthcare paradigm in the hematology arena. An essential aspect of the platform is that of being based on PROs, hence, making the patient’s input a critical aspect for its functioning.

This platform has been devised to be used across all hematologic malignancies and can also be customized with additional specific modules and functionalities, for example, to address the needs of specific hematologic populations or to address specific research questions. The GIMEMA-ALLIANCE infrastructure may also be used for the conduct of multiple studies. Finally, having been purposely devised as a multilingual web-based tool, it can be easily used in international contexts and implemented for use in other countries. Therefore, given the enormous pressure put on health care systems since the surge of the COVID-19 pandemic and the urgent need to implement digital health tools that can facilitate cancer care, we also welcome international collaborators to join our efforts in this area.

Conflicts of Interest: BH holds intellectual property rights on the CHES software tool.

Abbreviations

An online platform to improve patient-centered care during the COVID-19 pandemic: A GIMEMA surveillance program in hematologic malignancies

Adherence to Refills and Medications Scale

7-item version of the Adherence to Refills and Medications Scale

Computer-based Health Evaluation System

case report form

European Clinical Research Infrastructure Network

European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer

electronic patient-reported outcome

Evaluation Software Development

Gruppo Italiano Malattie Ematologiche dell’Adulto

generalized linear mixed model

health-related quality of life

patient-reported outcome

Quality of Life Questionnaire–Core

Quality of Life Questionnaire–Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia

Quality of Life Questionnaire–Chronic Myeloid Leukemia

randomized controlled trial

1 Schrag D Hershman DL Basch E Oncology practice during the COVID-19 pandemic JAMA 2020 5 26 323 20 2005 2006 10.1001/jama.2020.6236 32282023 32282023

2 Willan J King AJ Hayes S Collins GP Peniket A Care of haematology patients in a COVID-19 epidemic Br J Haematol 2020 4 189 2 241 243 10.1111/bjh.16620 32173855 32173855 PMC7161908

3 Webster P Virtual health care in the era of COVID-19 Lancet 2020 4 11 395 10231 1180 1181 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30818-7 32278374 32278374 PMC7146660

4 Keesara S Jonas A Schulman K Covid-19 and health care's digital revolution N Engl J Med 2020 6 04 382 23 e82 10.1056/NEJMp2005835 32240581 32240581

5 Pfefferbaum B North CS Mental health and the Covid-19 pandemic N Engl J Med 2020 8 06 383 6 510 512 10.1056/NEJMp2008017 32283003 32283003

6 Molica M Mazzone C Cordone I Pasquale A Niscola P de Fabritiis P SARS-CoV-2 infection anxieties and general population restrictions delay diagnosis and treatment of acute haematological malignancies Br J Haematol 2020 7 190 1 e5 e8 10.1111/bjh.16785 32369605 32369605 PMC7267368

7 van de Haar J Hoes LR Coles CE Seamon K Fröhling S Jäger D Valenza F de Braud F De Petris L Bergh J Ernberg I Besse B Barlesi F Garralda E Piris-Giménez A Baumann M Apolone G Soria JC Tabernero J Caldas C Voest EE Caring for patients with cancer in the COVID-19 era Nat Med 2020 5 26 5 665 671 10.1038/s41591-020-0874-8 32405058 32405058

8 Zeidan AM Boddu PC Patnaik MM Bewersdorf JP Stahl M Rampal RK Shallis R Steensma DP Savona MR Sekeres MA Roboz GJ DeAngelo DJ Schuh AC Padron E Zeidner JF Walter RB Onida F Fathi A DeZern A Hobbs G Stein EM Vyas P Wei AH Bowen DT Montesinos P Griffiths EA Verma AK Keyzner A Bar-Natan M Navada SC Kremyanskaya M Goldberg AD Al-Kali A Heaney ML Nazha A Salman H Luger S Pratz KW Konig H Komrokji R Deininger M Cirici BX Bhatt VR Silverman LR Erba HP Fenaux P Platzbecker U Santini V Wang ES Tallman MS Stone RM Mascarenhas J Special considerations in the management of adult patients with acute leukaemias and myeloid neoplasms in the COVID-19 era: Recommendations from a panel of international experts Lancet Haematol 2020 8 7 8 e601 e612 10.1016/S2352-3026(20)30205-2 32563283 32563283 PMC7302757

9 Passamonti F Cattaneo C Arcaini L Bruna R Cavo M Merli F Angelucci E Krampera M Cairoli R Della Porta MG Fracchiolla N Ladetto M Gambacorti Passerini C Salvini M Marchetti M Lemoli R Molteni A Busca A Cuneo A Romano A Giuliani N Galimberti S Corso A Morotti A Falini B Billio A Gherlinzoni F Visani G Tisi MC Tafuri A Tosi P Lanza F Massaia M Turrini M Ferrara F Gurrieri C Vallisa D Martelli M Derenzini E Guarini A Conconi A Cuccaro A Cudillo L Russo D Ciambelli F Scattolin AM Luppi M Selleri C Ortu La Barbera E Ferrandina C Di Renzo N Olivieri A Bocchia M Gentile M Marchesi F Musto P Federici AB Candoni A Venditti A Fava C Pinto A Galieni P Rigacci L Armiento D Pane F Oberti M Zappasodi P Visco C Franchi M Grossi PA Bertù L Corrao G Pagano L Corradini P ITA-HEMA-COV Investigators Clinical characteristics and risk factors associated with COVID-19 severity in patients with haematological malignancies in Italy: A retrospective, multicentre, cohort study Lancet Haematol 2020 10 7 10 e737 e745 10.1016/S2352-3026(20)30251-9 32798473 32798473 PMC7426107

10 Basch E Barbera L Kerrigan CL Velikova G Implementation of patient-reported outcomes in routine medical care Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book 2018 5 23 38 122 134 10.1200/EDBK_200383 30231381 30231381

11 Holch P Warrington L Bamforth LCA Keding A Ziegler LE Absolom K Hector C Harley C Johnson O Hall G Morris C Velikova G Development of an integrated electronic platform for patient self-report and management of adverse events during cancer treatment Ann Oncol 2017 9 01 28 9 2305 2311 10.1093/annonc/mdx317 28911065 28911065 PMC5834137

12 Husson O de Rooij BH Kieffer J Oerlemans S Mols F Aaronson NK van der Graaf WTA van de Poll-Franse LV The EORTC QLQ-C30 summary score as prognostic factor for survival of patients with cancer in the "real-world": Results from the population-based PROFILES registry Oncologist 2020 4 25 4 e722 e732 10.1634/theoncologist.2019-0348 10.1634/theoncologist.2019-0348 32297435 32297435 PMC7160310

13 Efficace F Collins GS Cottone F Giesinger JM Sommer K Anota A Schlussel MM Fazi P Vignetti M Patient-reported outcomes as independent prognostic factors for survival in oncology: Systematic review and meta-analysis Value Health 2021 2 24 2 250 267 10.1016/j.jval.2020.10.017 33518032 33518032

14 Basch E Deal AM Kris MG Scher HI Hudis CA Sabbatini P Rogak L Bennett AV Dueck AC Atkinson TM Chou JF Dulko D Sit L Barz A Novotny P Fruscione M Sloan JA Schrag D Symptom monitoring with patient-reported outcomes during routine cancer treatment: A randomized controlled trial J Clin Oncol 2016 2 20 34 6 557 565 10.1200/JCO.2015.63.0830 26644527 26644527 PMC4872028

15 Velikova G Booth L Smith AB Brown PM Lynch P Brown JM Selby PJ Measuring quality of life in routine oncology practice improves communication and patient well-being: A randomized controlled trial J Clin Oncol 2004 2 15 22 4 714 724 10.1200/JCO.2004.06.078 14966096 14966096

16 Detmar SB Muller MJ Schornagel JH Wever LDV Aaronson NK Health-related quality-of-life assessments and patient-physician communication: A randomized controlled trial JAMA 2002 12 18 288 23 3027 3034 12479768 12479768 10.1001/jama.288.23.3027

17 Rotenstein LS Huckman RS Wagle NW Making patients and doctors happier - The potential of patient-reported outcomes N Engl J Med 2017 10 05 377 14 1309 1312 10.1056/NEJMp1707537 28976860 28976860

18 Shaw BE Brazauskas R Millard HR Fonstad R Flynn KE Abernethy A Vogel J Petroske C Mattila D Drexler R Lee SJ Horowitz MM Rizzo JD Centralized patient-reported outcome data collection in transplantation is feasible and clinically meaningful Cancer 2017 12 01 123 23 4687 4700 10.1002/cncr.30936 10.1002/cncr.30936 28817182 28817182 PMC5693638

19 Howell D Molloy S Wilkinson K Green E Orchard K Wang K Liberty J Patient-reported outcomes in routine cancer clinical practice: A scoping review of use, impact on health outcomes, and implementation factors Ann Oncol 2015 9 26 9 1846 1858 10.1093/annonc/mdv181 25888610 25888610

20 Basch E Patient-reported outcomes - Harnessing patients' voices to improve clinical care N Engl J Med 2017 1 12 376 2 105 108 10.1056/NEJMp1611252 28076708 28076708

21 Velikova G Keding A Harley C Cocks K Booth L Smith AB Wright P Selby PJ Brown JM Patients report improvements in continuity of care when quality of life assessments are used routinely in oncology practice: Secondary outcomes of a randomised controlled trial Eur J Cancer 2010 9 46 13 2381 2388 10.1016/j.ejca.2010.04.030 20570138 20570138

22 Basch E Deal AM Dueck AC Scher HI Kris MG Hudis C Schrag D Overall survival results of a trial assessing patient-reported outcomes for symptom monitoring during routine cancer treatment JAMA 2017 7 11 318 2 197 198 10.1001/jama.2017.7156 28586821 28586821 PMC5817466

23 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 Balavoine M Landry S Solal-Céligny P Letellier C Randomized trial comparing a web-mediated follow-up with routine surveillance in lung cancer patients J Natl Cancer Inst 2017 9 01 109 9 djx029 10.1093/jnci/djx029 28423407 28423407

24 Absolom K Warrington L Hudson E Hewison J Morris C Holch P Carter R Gibson A Holmes M Clayton B Rogers Z McParland L Conner M Glidewell L Woroncow B Dawkins B Dickinson S Hulme C Brown J Velikova G Phase III randomized controlled trial of eRAPID: eHealth intervention during chemotherapy J Clin Oncol 2021 3 01 39 7 734 747 10.1200/JCO.20.02015 33417506 33417506

25 Marandino L Necchi A Aglietta M Di Maio M COVID-19 emergency and the need to speed up the adoption of electronic patient-reported outcomes in cancer clinical practice JCO Oncol Pract 2020 6 16 6 295 298 10.1200/OP.20.00237 32364846 32364846 PMC7292478

26 Bennett AV Jensen RE Basch E Electronic patient-reported outcome systems in oncology clinical practice CA Cancer J Clin 2012 62 5 337 347 10.3322/caac.21150 10.3322/caac.21150 22811342 22811342

27 Odone A Delmonte D Scognamiglio T Signorelli C COVID-19 deaths in Lombardy, Italy: Data in context Lancet Public Health 2020 6 5 6 e310 10.1016/S2468-2667(20)30099-2 32339478 32339478 PMC7182509

28 Holzner B Giesinger JM Pinggera J Zugal S Schöpf F Oberguggenberger AS Gamper EM Zabernigg A Weber B Rumpold G The Computer-based Health Evaluation Software (CHES): A software for electronic patient-reported outcome monitoring BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2012 12 126 10.1186/1472-6947-12-126 23140270 23140270 PMC3529695

29 CHES 2021-05-10 https://ches.pro/

30 Swerdlow SH Campo E Harris NL Jaffe ES Pileri SA Stein H Thiele J WHO Classification of Tumours of Haematopoietic and Lymphoid Tissues. WHO Classification of Tumours, Revised 4th Edition, Volume 2 2017 Lyon, France International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC)

31 Comunicazione AIFA: Gestione degli studi clinici in Italia in corso di emergenza COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 19) (Versione 3 del 17 settembre 2020) Agenzia Italiana del Farmaco (AIFA) 2020 9 17 2021-05-13 https://www.aifa.gov.it/documents/20142/1123276/Comunicazione_gestione_studi_clinici_in_emergenza_COVID-19_17.09.2020.pdf/3a20a08a-7427-a0b1-fc92-dbd3fdf1a1d4

32 Requirements for Certification of ECRIN Data Centres with Explanation and Elaboration of Standards. Version 4.0 2018 4 2021-05-17 Paris, France European Clinical Research Infrastructure Network (ECRIN) https://ecrin.org/sites/default/files/Data%20centre%20certification/Standards%20v4%20201804.pdf

33 Physician portal GIMENA-ALLIANCE 2021-05-10 https://physician-alliance.gimema.it/alliance-main/public/app/#/auth/login

34 Patient portal GIMENA-ALLIANCE 2021-05-10 https://alliance.gimema.it/alliance-portal/public/app/#/public/home

35 Giesinger JM Loth FLC Aaronson NK Arraras JI Caocci G Efficace F Groenvold M van Leeuwen M Petersen MA Ramage J Tomaszewski KA Young T Holzner B EORTC Quality of Life Group Thresholds for clinical importance were established to improve interpretation of the EORTC QLQ-C30 in clinical practice and research J Clin Epidemiol 2020 2 118 1 8 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2019.10.003 31639445 31639445

36 Mouillet G Fritzsch J Paget-Bailly S Pozet A Es-Saad I Meurisse A Vernerey D Mouyabi K Berthod D Bonnetain F Anota A Thiery-Vuillemin A Health-related quality of life assessment for patients with advanced or metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated with a tyrosine kinase inhibitor using electronic patient-reported outcomes in daily clinical practice (QUANARIE trial): Study protocol Health Qual Life Outcomes 2019 2 04 17 1 25 10.1186/s12955-019-1085-1 30717745 30717745 PMC6360763

37 Giesinger J Oberguggenberger A Kemmler G Gamper E Steiner H Sztankay M Holzner B Electronic patient-reported outcome monitoring in testicular cancer patients Proceedings of the ISPOR 14th Annual European Congress 2011 ISPOR 14th Annual European Congress November 5-8, 2011 Madrid, Spain PA460 10.1016/j.jval.2011.08.1244

38 Sztankay M Neppl L Wintner LM Loth FL Willenbacher W Weger R Weyrer W Steurer M Rumpold G Holzner B Complementing clinical cancer registry data with patient reported outcomes: A feasibility study on routine electronic patient-reported outcome assessment for the Austrian Myelome Registry Eur J Cancer Care (Engl) 2019 11 28 6 e13154 10.1111/ecc.13154 31465136 31465136 PMC6900154

39 Kikawa Y Hatachi Y Rumpold G Tokiwa M Takebe S Ogata T Satake H Kato H Tsuji A Yasui H Holzner B Evaluation of health-related quality of life via the Computer-Based Health Evaluation System (CHES) for Japanese metastatic breast cancer patients: A single-center pilot study Breast Cancer 2019 3 26 2 255 259 10.1007/s12282-018-0905-1 30194662 30194662 PMC6394794

40 Sztankay M Giesinger JM Zabernigg A Krempler E Pall G Hilbe W Burghuber O Hochmair M Rumpold G Doering S Holzner B Clinical decision-making and health-related quality of life during first-line and maintenance therapy in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): Findings from a real-world setting BMC Cancer 2017 8 23 17 1 565 10.1186/s12885-017-3543-7 28835219 28835219 PMC5569463

41 Aaronson NK Ahmedzai S Bergman B Bullinger M Cull A Duez NJ Filiberti A Flechtner H Fleishman SB de Haes JC The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30: A quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology J Natl Cancer Inst 1993 3 03 85 5 365 376 10.1093/jnci/85.5.365 8433390 8433390

42 EORTC Item Library 2021-05-17 https://www.eortc.be/itemlibrary/

43 Chakraborty R Cannella L Cottone F Efficace F Quality of patient-reported outcome reporting in randomised controlled trials of haematological malignancies according to international quality standards: A systematic review Lancet Haematol 2020 12 7 12 e892 e901 10.1016/S2352-3026(20)30292-1 33242446 33242446

44 Sommer K Cottone F Aaronson NK Fayers P Fazi P Rosti G Angelucci E Gaidano G Venditti A Voso MT Baccarani M Vignetti M Efficace F Consistency matters: Measurement invariance of the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire in patients with hematologic malignancies Qual Life Res 2020 3 29 3 815 823 10.1007/s11136-019-02369-5 31782016 31782016

45 Giesinger JM Kieffer JM Fayers PM Groenvold M Petersen MA Scott NW Sprangers MAG Velikova G Aaronson NK Replication and validation of higher order models demonstrated that a summary score for the EORTC QLQ-C30 is robust J Clin Epidemiol 2016 1 69 79 88 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.08.007 26327487 26327487

46 Efficace F Cottone F Sommer K Kieffer J Aaronson N Fayers P Groenvold M Caocci G Lo Coco F Gaidano G Niscola P Baccarani M Rosti G Venditti A Angelucci E Fazi P Vignetti M Giesinger J Validation of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 summary score in patients with hematologic malignancies Value Health 2019 11 22 11 1303 1310 10.1016/j.jval.2019.06.004 31708068 31708068

47 Nolte S Liegl G Petersen MA Aaronson NK Costantini A Fayers PM Groenvold M Holzner B Johnson CD Kemmler G Tomaszewski KA Waldmann A Young TE Rose M EORTC Quality of Life Group General population normative data for the EORTC QLQ-C30 health-related quality of life questionnaire based on 15,386 persons across 13 European countries, Canada and the Unites States Eur J Cancer 2019 1 107 153 163 10.1016/j.ejca.2018.11.024 30576971 30576971

48 Penedo FJ Oswald LB Kronenfeld JP Garcia SF Cella D Yanez B The increasing value of eHealth in the delivery of patient-centred cancer care Lancet Oncol 2020 5 21 5 e240 e251 10.1016/s1470-2045(20)30021-8 32359500 PMC7643123

49 Kripalani S Risser J Gatti ME Jacobson TA Development and evaluation of the Adherence to Refills and Medications Scale (ARMS) among low-literacy patients with chronic disease Value Health 2009 12 1 118 123 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2008.00400.x 19911444 19911444

50 Kripalani S Goggins K Nwosu S Schildcrout J Mixon AS McNaughton C McDougald Scott AM Wallston KA Vanderbilt Inpatient Cohort Study Medication nonadherence before hospitalization for acute cardiac events J Health Commun 2015 20 Suppl 2 34 42 10.1080/10810730.2015.1080331 26513029 26513029 PMC4705844

51 Ruddy K Mayer E Partridge A Patient adherence and persistence with oral anticancer treatment CA Cancer J Clin 2009 59 1 56 66 10.3322/caac.20004 19147869 19147869

52 Garfield S Clifford S Eliasson L Barber N Willson A Suitability of measures of self-reported medication adherence for routine clinical use: A systematic review BMC Med Res Methodol 2011 11 03 11 149 10.1186/1471-2288-11-149 22050830 22050830 PMC3219622

53 Kripalani S Henderson LE Jacobson TA Vaccarino V Medication use among inner-city patients after hospital discharge: Patient-reported barriers and solutions Mayo Clin Proc 2008 5 83 5 529 535 10.4065/83.5.529 18452681 18452681

54 Fairclough DL Design and Analysis of Quality of Life Studies in Clinical Trials. 2nd edition 2010 New York, NY Chapman and Hall/CRC

55 Fine JP Gray RJ A proportional hazards model for the subdistribution of a competing risk J Am Stat Assoc 1999 6 94 446 496 509 10.1080/01621459.1999.10474144