INNV-26. Neuro-oncology anywhere (NOA) 242: Interim results from a pragmatic clinical trial evaluating telehealth versus in-person evaluations for individuals with glioma undergoing oral chemotherapy

Abstract BACKGROUND Access to in-person evaluations is challenging for patients with glioma due to disease-related disability and distance from specialized neuro-oncology centers. Telehealth is an alternative to in-person evaluations, but acceptability of and therapy compliance with this model has not been prospectively evaluated. METHODS In this single-arm non-randomized pragmatic clinical trial, we compared patient satisfaction with telehealth and in-person assessments among patients with glioma undergoing chemotherapy with temozolomide. Participants acted as their own controls, alternating between telehealth and in-person visits. Patient satisfaction with care delivered was evaluated by Press-Ganey surveys with Likert response scales (1-5, 1=very poor, 5=very good). A digital pill diary (DPD) was implemented to track chemotherapy compliance. RESULTS We accrued 30 patients (median age 59, 38% female) between October 2024 and May 2025. Half of the patients (n=15) reported a primary residence greater than 150 miles from our institution. Surveys from 25 participants were reviewed, with 17/25 completing one or more surveys following an in-person visit, and 21/25 completing one or more surveys following a telehealth visit. Overall average Press-Ganey scores were similar between the two visit modalities with high scores (telehealth=4.8; in-person=4.7). Median scores for specific modalities were similarly highly rated: likelihood of recommending practice to others (telehealth=5.0; in-person=5.0), concern the care provider showed (telehealth=5.0, in-person=4.7), provider’s discussion of treatment options (telehealth=5.0, in-person=5.0), provider effort to include patients in decision-making (telehealth=5.0, in-person=5.0). DPDs used to monitor treatment compliance indicated adherence to all prescribed doses of temozolomide in 75/79 cycles; the other 4 (of 79) treatment cycles were halted per provider instructions. CONCLUSION This interim assessment demonstrates feasibility of treating patients with similar patient satisfaction of care delivered between telehealth and in-person visits. The DPD was effective in tracking chemotherapy administration. Additional results including visit type preference and acute care utilization data are maturing.