Pilot trial of virtual and in-person symptom screening with targeted early palliative care (STEP2).

12074 Background: Routine early palliative care (EPC) for patients with advanced cancer improves quality of life. To increase scalability, models of triggered EPC have been encouraged. We assessed feasibility of hybrid virtual/in person Symptom screening and Targeted Early Palliative care (STEP2) to provide EPC triggered by symptoms. Methods: Patients with advanced cancer, ECOG 0-2, prognosis 6-36 months, were recruited from lung, gastrointestinal, genitourinary, breast and gynecology outpatient oncology clinics. Symptoms were screened virtually/in person ≤48 hours before oncology visits using Edmonton Symptom Assessment System-revised (ESAS-r+). Moderate to severe symptom scores (“screen positive”) triggered an alert to a nurse, who called the patient, offering an EPC visit (in-person/virtual, as per patient preference). Participants completed measures at baseline, 2, 4, and 6 months. The primary endpoint was feasibility, with the following criteria: ≥40 patients accrued in 4 months; ≥60% complete screening for ≥70% of visits; ≥50% triggering a call have ≥1 EPC visit; ≥60% complete all measures. Results: From 30/03/2025-26/06/2025 40 patients were enrolled (median age [range], 62 [39-88]; 21/40 [53%] female). Disease site distribution was: 12/40 (30%) lung, 9/40 (23%) gynecology, 8/40 (20%) genitourinary, 6/40 (15%) gastrointestinal, 5/40 (13%) breast. Of the 40 patients enrolled, 36 (90%) completed screening for ≥70% of visits and 29 (73%) screened positive: 18 at baseline and 11 later during the trial. The most common triggering symptoms were anxiety (18/29, 62%), sleep (17/29, 59%), depression (10/29, 35%), pain (8/29, 28%), and dyspnea (8/29, 28%); 21/29 (72%) screen-positive and 0 screen-negative patients received EPC before trial end. Measure completion at 2, 4, and 6 months was 90% (36/40), 85% (34/40), and 83% (33/40). Initial EPC visits were in person for 14/21 (67%) and virtual for 7/21 (33%); 20/21 (95%) of patients received ≥2 follow-up visits. Results for measures at baseline and at trial end are shown in the Table. Conclusions: Virtual/in person STEP2 is feasible and directs EPC to those who most need it, with most screen-positive patients accepting EPC. A phase III trial is underway. Clinical trial information: NCT06326554 . Variable Measure (score range) Time point N Mean Standard Deviation Difference, 6 mo. vs. baseline (95% CI) Quality of life FACIT_PAL14 Baseline 40 42.2 7.2 0.3 (0-56; higher is better) 6 mo. 34 42.7 7.7 (-0.9, 1.6) Symptom ESAS_EDS Baseline 40 17.5 12.9 0.3 Control (0-90; higher is worse) 6 mo. 33 18.9 13.2 (-3.1, 3.7) Depression PHQ-9 Baseline 40 5.4 3.4 -1.0 (0-27; higher is worse) 6 mo. 34 4.6 3.1 (-1.9, 0.0) Anxiety GAD-7 Baseline 40 4.9 3.8 -1.4 (0-21; higher is worse) 6 mo. 34 3.7 3.5

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
2026-05-27
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2026.44.16_suppl.12074
Primary Topic
Cancer survivorship and care
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Pilot trial of virtual and in-person symptom screening with targeted early palliative care (STEP2).

Natasha B. Leighl, Neesha C. Dhani, Jenny Lau, Camilla Zimmermann et al.
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Cancer survivorship and care
article

Pilot trial of virtual and in-person symptom screening with targeted early palliative care (STEP2).

Natasha B. Leighl, Neesha C. Dhani, Jenny Lau, Camilla Zimmermann, Nazanin Fallah‐Rad, P Bedard, Madeline Li, Jacqueline Alcalde Castro, Monika K. Krzyzanowska, AM Oza, Katayoun Khorramak, Timo Carpén, Gary Rodin, Lawson Eng, Lisa W. Le, Jennifer J. Knox, Breffni Hannon, Stephanie Lheureux, Geoffrey Liu, Eitan Amir
article en

Abstract

12074 Background: Routine early palliative care (EPC) for patients with advanced cancer improves quality of life. To increase scalability, models of triggered EPC have been encouraged. We assessed feasibility of hybrid virtual/in person Symptom screening and Targeted Early Palliative care (STEP2) to provide EPC triggered by symptoms. Methods: Patients with advanced cancer, ECOG 0-2, prognosis 6-36 months, were recruited from lung, gastrointestinal, genitourinary, breast and gynecology outpatient oncology clinics. Symptoms were screened virtually/in person ≤48 hours before oncology visits using Edmonton Symptom Assessment System-revised (ESAS-r+). Moderate to severe symptom scores (“screen positive”) triggered an alert to a nurse, who called the patient, offering an EPC visit (in-person/virtual, as per patient preference). Participants completed measures at baseline, 2, 4, and 6 months. The primary endpoint was feasibility, with the following criteria: ≥40 patients accrued in 4 months; ≥60% complete screening for ≥70% of visits; ≥50% triggering a call have ≥1 EPC visit; ≥60% complete all measures. Results: From 30/03/2025-26/06/2025 40 patients were enrolled (median age [range], 62 [39-88]; 21/40 [53%] female). Disease site distribution was: 12/40 (30%) lung, 9/40 (23%) gynecology, 8/40 (20%) genitourinary, 6/40 (15%) gastrointestinal, 5/40 (13%) breast. Of the 40 patients enrolled, 36 (90%) completed screening for ≥70% of visits and 29 (73%) screened positive: 18 at baseline and 11 later during the trial. The most common triggering symptoms were anxiety (18/29, 62%), sleep (17/29, 59%), depression (10/29, 35%), pain (8/29, 28%), and dyspnea (8/29, 28%); 21/29 (72%) screen-positive and 0 screen-negative patients received EPC before trial end. Measure completion at 2, 4, and 6 months was 90% (36/40), 85% (34/40), and 83% (33/40). Initial EPC visits were in person for 14/21 (67%) and virtual for 7/21 (33%); 20/21 (95%) of patients received ≥2 follow-up visits. Results for measures at baseline and at trial end are shown in the Table. Conclusions: Virtual/in person STEP2 is feasible and directs EPC to those who most need it, with most screen-positive patients accepting EPC. A phase III trial is underway. Clinical trial information: NCT06326554 . Variable Measure (score range) Time point N Mean Standard Deviation Difference, 6 mo. vs. baseline (95% CI) Quality of life FACIT_PAL14 Baseline 40 42.2 7.2 0.3 (0-56; higher is better) 6 mo. 34 42.7 7.7 (-0.9, 1.6) Symptom ESAS_EDS Baseline 40 17.5 12.9 0.3 Control (0-90; higher is worse) 6 mo. 33 18.9 13.2 (-3.1, 3.7) Depression PHQ-9 Baseline 40 5.4 3.4 -1.0 (0-27; higher is worse) 6 mo. 34 4.6 3.1 (-1.9, 0.0) Anxiety GAD-7 Baseline 40 4.9 3.8 -1.4 (0-21; higher is worse) 6 mo. 34 3.7 3.5

Journal of Clinical OncologyVol. 44(16_suppl)
Sunnybrook Health Science Centre (CA), University Health Network (CA), University of Toronto (CA), Health Sciences Centre (CA), Princess Margaret Cancer Centre (CA)
Openalex Percentile: Top 12%
Cancer survivorship and care
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.