Trial Outcomes & Findings for The Personal Patient Profile Decision Support for Patients With Bladder Cancer (NCT NCT05033067)
NCT ID: NCT05033067
Last Updated: 2026-04-24
Results Overview
Investigator-designed 12-items instrument to evaluate intervention participants' opinions and acceptance of study procedures and their satisfaction with the decisional aid. Responses for each item range from strongly agree (1) to strongly disagree (4), with higher scores indicating greater dissatisfaction with the intervention. Original responses (1-5 visual analogue scale) were categorized as Low (scores 1-2), Neutral (score 3), or High (scores 4-5). with higher scores indicating greater dissatisfaction with the intervention.
COMPLETED
NA
24 participants
1 month follow-up
2026-04-24
Participant Flow
After obtaining IRB approval for the feasibility study, we approached 114 patients for recruitment into The Personal Patient Profile Decision Support for Patients with Bladder Cancer (P3-BC) study. Of these, 24 patients consented to participate. Common reasons for declining included disease and treatment burden, limited time, and lack of confidence in using technology independently.
Among those who consented, 4 participants were lost to follow-up prior to participation, leaving 20 participants (83%) who engaged with the web-based tool's survey. Of these, 5 participants did not complete sufficient baseline survey engagement (i.e., completing the tool's survey that precedes the randomization step) with the tool and were therefore not assigned to a study group. The remaining 15 participants were randomized, with 10 assigned to the intervention group and 5 to the usual care.
Participant milestones
| Measure |
Participants With Bladder Cancer
Participants who consented to participate in the study and were offered to engage with the web-based tool's survey.
|
Intervention (P3-BC) Usual Care
In addition to receiving usual care, patients had access to the aid and related materials before consultation with the physician about cystectomy and urinary diversion.
|
Usual Care
Usual Care Control Group - The group received standard bladder cancer care information only.
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Consented, engaged with web-based tool
STARTED
|
24
|
0
|
0
|
|
Consented, engaged with web-based tool
COMPLETED
|
15
|
0
|
0
|
|
Consented, engaged with web-based tool
NOT COMPLETED
|
9
|
0
|
0
|
|
Randomization
STARTED
|
0
|
10
|
5
|
|
Randomization
COMPLETED
|
0
|
8
|
3
|
|
Randomization
NOT COMPLETED
|
0
|
2
|
2
|
Reasons for withdrawal
| Measure |
Participants With Bladder Cancer
Participants who consented to participate in the study and were offered to engage with the web-based tool's survey.
|
Intervention (P3-BC) Usual Care
In addition to receiving usual care, patients had access to the aid and related materials before consultation with the physician about cystectomy and urinary diversion.
|
Usual Care
Usual Care Control Group - The group received standard bladder cancer care information only.
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Consented, engaged with web-based tool
Lost to Follow-up
|
4
|
0
|
0
|
|
Consented, engaged with web-based tool
baseline survey not completed
|
5
|
0
|
0
|
|
Randomization
Withdrawal by Subject
|
0
|
1
|
1
|
|
Randomization
Lost to Follow-up
|
0
|
1
|
1
|
Baseline Characteristics
The Personal Patient Profile Decision Support for Patients With Bladder Cancer
Baseline characteristics by cohort
| Measure |
Intervention (P3-BC) Care
n=10 Participants
In addition to receiving usual care, patients had access to the aid and related materials before consultation with the physician about cystectomy and urinary diversion.
|
Usual Care
n=5 Participants
Usual Care Control Arm - The group received standard bladder cancer care information only.
|
Total
n=15 Participants
Total of all reporting groups
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Age, Continuous
|
67.9 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 3.1 • n=2 Participants
|
79.8 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 4.1 • n=1 Participants
|
70.1 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 7.1 • n=3 Participants
|
|
Sex: Female, Male
Female
|
1 Participants
n=2 Participants
|
2 Participants
n=1 Participants
|
3 Participants
n=3 Participants
|
|
Sex: Female, Male
Male
|
9 Participants
n=2 Participants
|
3 Participants
n=1 Participants
|
12 Participants
n=3 Participants
|
|
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Hispanic or Latino
|
0 Participants
n=2 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=1 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=3 Participants
|
|
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Not Hispanic or Latino
|
10 Participants
n=2 Participants
|
5 Participants
n=1 Participants
|
15 Participants
n=3 Participants
|
|
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
|
0 Participants
n=2 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=1 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=3 Participants
|
|
Race (NIH/OMB)
American Indian or Alaska Native
|
0 Participants
n=2 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=1 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=3 Participants
|
|
Race (NIH/OMB)
Asian
|
0 Participants
n=2 Participants
|
1 Participants
n=1 Participants
|
1 Participants
n=3 Participants
|
|
Race (NIH/OMB)
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
|
0 Participants
n=2 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=1 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=3 Participants
|
|
Race (NIH/OMB)
Black or African American
|
1 Participants
n=2 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=1 Participants
|
1 Participants
n=3 Participants
|
|
Race (NIH/OMB)
White
|
9 Participants
n=2 Participants
|
4 Participants
n=1 Participants
|
13 Participants
n=3 Participants
|
|
Race (NIH/OMB)
More than one race
|
0 Participants
n=2 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=1 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=3 Participants
|
|
Race (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
|
0 Participants
n=2 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=1 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=3 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants with Heart Disease
|
1 Participants
n=2 Participants
|
1 Participants
n=1 Participants
|
2 Participants
n=3 Participants
|
|
Number of participants with Diabetes
|
5 Participants
n=2 Participants
|
1 Participants
n=1 Participants
|
6 Participants
n=3 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants with Peripheral Neuropathy
|
1 Participants
n=2 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=1 Participants
|
1 Participants
n=3 Participants
|
|
Number of participants with Chronic Kidney disease
|
1 Participants
n=2 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=1 Participants
|
1 Participants
n=3 Participants
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: 1 month Follow-upPopulation: Data for participants who took the survey and thus randomized to the intervention group.
Percentage of participants who agreed with the statements taken from the Survey-based Acceptability Measure Acceptability is assessed with the 13-item web-based scale in addition to items designed by the research team for the 1-month follow-up to evaluate acceptability. The acceptability is defined as 80% acceptable ratings. Using well-established feasibility criteria to assess: 1) retention/drop-out rates, and 2) duration and completion rate of study assessments. The scale uses a 5-point response scale for each item (1=not acceptable, 5=highly acceptable). Responses were categorized to agree (scores 1-2 strongly agree/agree), or disagree (scores 3-5; strongly disagree, disagree, I don't know.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Intervention (P3-BC) Usual Care
n=8 Participants
In addition to receiving usual care, patients will have access to the aid and related materials before consultation with the physician about cystectomy and urinary diversion.
|
Disagree
(scores 3-5; strongly disagree, disagree, I don't know)
|
High (4-5)
1-5 visual analogue scale - scores 4-5
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Percent of Participants Who Agree Using the Acceptability Scale
Helped me make my treatment decisions
|
71.4 percentage of participants
|
—
|
—
|
|
Percent of Participants Who Agree Using the Acceptability Scale
Increased my knowledge about my treatment (diversion options)
|
62.5 percentage of participants
|
—
|
—
|
|
Percent of Participants Who Agree Using the Acceptability Scale
Sort out what's important to me for decision making
|
62.5 percentage of participants
|
—
|
—
|
|
Percent of Participants Who Agree Using the Acceptability Scale
Taught me how to use stoma appliances or catheters
|
62.5 percentage of participants
|
—
|
—
|
|
Percent of Participants Who Agree Using the Acceptability Scale
Helped me manage my disease
|
50.0 percentage of participants
|
—
|
—
|
|
Percent of Participants Who Agree Using the Acceptability Scale
Prepared me for the surgery side effects
|
37.5 percentage of participants
|
—
|
—
|
|
Percent of Participants Who Agree Using the Acceptability Scale
Made me feel less anxious or upset about my treatment
|
62.5 percentage of participants
|
—
|
—
|
|
Percent of Participants Who Agree Using the Acceptability Scale
Taught me how to care for myself after surgery
|
62.5 percentage of participants
|
—
|
—
|
|
Percent of Participants Who Agree Using the Acceptability Scale
Helped me reduce my anxiety about my treatment
|
62.5 percentage of participants
|
—
|
—
|
|
Percent of Participants Who Agree Using the Acceptability Scale
Helped me talk to doctors about my treatment options
|
50.0 percentage of participants
|
—
|
—
|
|
Percent of Participants Who Agree Using the Acceptability Scale
Helped me take care of myself
|
50.0 percentage of participants
|
—
|
—
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: 1 month followupPopulation: In addition to receiving usual care, participants had access to the aid and related materials before consultation with the physician about cystectomy and urinary diversion.Data for participants who took the survey and thus randomized to the intervention group.
A 1-month follow-up questionnaire included 11 additional items assessing participants' perceptions of study procedures, acceptance of the intervention, and satisfaction with the decision aid. Responses were categorized to agree (scores 1-2 strongly agree/agree), or disagree (scores 3-5; strongly disagree, disagree, I don't know).
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Intervention (P3-BC) Usual Care
n=8 Participants
In addition to receiving usual care, patients will have access to the aid and related materials before consultation with the physician about cystectomy and urinary diversion.
|
Disagree
n=8 Participants
(scores 3-5; strongly disagree, disagree, I don't know)
|
High (4-5)
1-5 visual analogue scale - scores 4-5
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Number of Participants Who Agree or Disagree With Statements on the Acceptability E-scale
Helped me take care of myself
|
4 Participants
|
4 Participants
|
—
|
|
Number of Participants Who Agree or Disagree With Statements on the Acceptability E-scale
Helped me reduce my anxiety about my treatment
|
5 Participants
|
3 Participants
|
—
|
|
Number of Participants Who Agree or Disagree With Statements on the Acceptability E-scale
Helped me talk to doctors about my treatment options
|
4 Participants
|
4 Participants
|
—
|
|
Number of Participants Who Agree or Disagree With Statements on the Acceptability E-scale
Helped me manage my disease
|
4 Participants
|
4 Participants
|
—
|
|
Number of Participants Who Agree or Disagree With Statements on the Acceptability E-scale
Prepared me for the surgery side effects
|
4 Participants
|
4 Participants
|
—
|
|
Number of Participants Who Agree or Disagree With Statements on the Acceptability E-scale
Taught me how to use stoma appliances or catheters
|
5 Participants
|
3 Participants
|
—
|
|
Number of Participants Who Agree or Disagree With Statements on the Acceptability E-scale
Taught me how to care for myself after surgery
|
5 Participants
|
3 Participants
|
—
|
|
Number of Participants Who Agree or Disagree With Statements on the Acceptability E-scale
Increased my knowledge about my treatment (diversion options)
|
5 Participants
|
3 Participants
|
—
|
|
Number of Participants Who Agree or Disagree With Statements on the Acceptability E-scale
Made me feel less anxious or upset about my treatment
|
5 Participants
|
3 Participants
|
—
|
|
Number of Participants Who Agree or Disagree With Statements on the Acceptability E-scale
Sort out what's important to me for decision making
|
5 Participants
|
3 Participants
|
—
|
|
Number of Participants Who Agree or Disagree With Statements on the Acceptability E-scale
Helped me make my treatment decisions
|
6 Participants
|
2 Participants
|
—
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: 1 month follow-upPopulation: Data collected for participants who completed the web-based survey. Some participants did not reply to each item. These participants, in addition to receiving usual care, patients had access to the aid and related materials before consultation with the physician about cystectomy and urinary diversion.
Investigator-designed 12-items instrument to evaluate intervention participants' opinions and acceptance of study procedures and their satisfaction with the decisional aid. Responses for each item range from strongly agree (1) to strongly disagree (4), with higher scores indicating greater dissatisfaction with the intervention. Original responses (1-5 visual analogue scale) were categorized as Low (scores 1-2), Neutral (score 3), or High (scores 4-5). with higher scores indicating greater dissatisfaction with the intervention.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Intervention (P3-BC) Usual Care
n=10 Participants
In addition to receiving usual care, patients will have access to the aid and related materials before consultation with the physician about cystectomy and urinary diversion.
|
Disagree
n=10 Participants
(scores 3-5; strongly disagree, disagree, I don't know)
|
High (4-5)
n=10 Participants
1-5 visual analogue scale - scores 4-5
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Percent of Participants Agreeing or Disagreeing With the Decision Using the Program Evaluation Scale
How understandable were the questions?
|
0 percent of participants
|
0 percent of participants
|
100 percent of participants
|
|
Percent of Participants Agreeing or Disagreeing With the Decision Using the Program Evaluation Scale
How easy was the program to use?
|
0 percent of participants
|
14 percent of participants
|
86 percent of participants
|
|
Percent of Participants Agreeing or Disagreeing With the Decision Using the Program Evaluation Scale
Overall satisfaction with the program
|
0 percent of participants
|
14 percent of participants
|
86 percent of participants
|
|
Percent of Participants Agreeing or Disagreeing With the Decision Using the Program Evaluation Scale
Usefulness of information on statistics
|
14 percent of participants
|
0 percent of participants
|
86 percent of participants
|
|
Percent of Participants Agreeing or Disagreeing With the Decision Using the Program Evaluation Scale
Was the amount of time to complete the program acceptable?
|
0 percent of participants
|
29 percent of participants
|
71 percent of participants
|
|
Percent of Participants Agreeing or Disagreeing With the Decision Using the Program Evaluation Scale
Usefulness of information about top concerns
|
28 percent of participants
|
14 percent of participants
|
58 percent of participants
|
|
Percent of Participants Agreeing or Disagreeing With the Decision Using the Program Evaluation Scale
How helpful was it to complete the program?
|
14 percent of participants
|
29 percent of participants
|
57 percent of participants
|
|
Percent of Participants Agreeing or Disagreeing With the Decision Using the Program Evaluation Scale
How valuable was the information?
|
14 percent of participants
|
14 percent of participants
|
72 percent of participants
|
|
Percent of Participants Agreeing or Disagreeing With the Decision Using the Program Evaluation Scale
Usefulness of videos
|
14 percent of participants
|
29 percent of participants
|
57 percent of participants
|
|
Percent of Participants Agreeing or Disagreeing With the Decision Using the Program Evaluation Scale
Usefulness of links to bladder cancer websites
|
0 percent of participants
|
17 percent of participants
|
83 percent of participants
|
|
Percent of Participants Agreeing or Disagreeing With the Decision Using the Program Evaluation Scale
Usefulness of examples of what to say to your doctor
|
28 percent of participants
|
29 percent of participants
|
43 percent of participants
|
|
Percent of Participants Agreeing or Disagreeing With the Decision Using the Program Evaluation Scale
Usefulness of information on role in decision-making
|
14 percent of participants
|
29 percent of participants
|
57 percent of participants
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: 1 month follow-upPopulation: One participant did not complete the 1 month follow up survey.
Shared decision making (SDM) was assessed by the SDMQ-9. The 9 items are rated on a 6-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (completely disagree) to 5 (completely agree). Final scores are sum of rating, which ranges between 0 and 45, higher score indicates more positive attitude towards SDM.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Intervention (P3-BC) Usual Care
n=10 Participants
In addition to receiving usual care, patients will have access to the aid and related materials before consultation with the physician about cystectomy and urinary diversion.
|
Disagree
n=4 Participants
(scores 3-5; strongly disagree, disagree, I don't know)
|
High (4-5)
1-5 visual analogue scale - scores 4-5
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9)
|
5.43 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.54
|
5.47 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.42
|
—
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: 3 months follow-upConsists of 16 item scale measuring effectiveness on decision making. Items are given a score value of 0 = strongly agree, 1 = agree, 2 = neither agree nor disagree, 3= disagree, and 4 = disagree, full scale from 0 - 64 with higher total scores indicating higher decisional conflict.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Intervention (P3-BC) Usual Care
n=8 Participants
In addition to receiving usual care, patients will have access to the aid and related materials before consultation with the physician about cystectomy and urinary diversion.
|
Disagree
n=3 Participants
(scores 3-5; strongly disagree, disagree, I don't know)
|
High (4-5)
1-5 visual analogue scale - scores 4-5
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Decisional Conflict Scale
|
4.28 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.39
|
4.56 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.39
|
—
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: 1 month follow-up and 3 month follow-upBrief Symptom Index (BSI-18) was used psychological to assess distress. BSI-18 is a self-report 18-item instrument. Index full scale is scored .00 to 0.94 with higher scores indicating more distress.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Intervention (P3-BC) Usual Care
n=8 Participants
In addition to receiving usual care, patients will have access to the aid and related materials before consultation with the physician about cystectomy and urinary diversion.
|
Disagree
n=3 Participants
(scores 3-5; strongly disagree, disagree, I don't know)
|
High (4-5)
1-5 visual analogue scale - scores 4-5
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Brief Symptom Index (BSI-18)
1 month follow up
|
0.51 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.73
|
0.15 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.21
|
—
|
|
Brief Symptom Index (BSI-18)
3 months follow up
|
0.26 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.32
|
0.07 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.08
|
—
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: 3 months follow-upThe Decisional Regret Scale consists of 5 item scale assessing regret of treatment decisions made. Each item scored from 1 to 5. Full scale is scored 1-25. Higher score indicates higher regret of treatment decisions.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Intervention (P3-BC) Usual Care
n=8 Participants
In addition to receiving usual care, patients will have access to the aid and related materials before consultation with the physician about cystectomy and urinary diversion.
|
Disagree
n=3 Participants
(scores 3-5; strongly disagree, disagree, I don't know)
|
High (4-5)
1-5 visual analogue scale - scores 4-5
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Decisional Regret Scale
|
4.38 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.59
|
4.67 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.42
|
—
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: 1 month follow-upThe Cancer Rehabilitation Evaluation System (CARES-MIS) - Medical Interaction Subscale was used to assess perceived problems with communication with providers. The CARES - Medical Interaction Subscale includes 11 items rated on 5-point scale, where 0 represents "not at all" and 4 represents that problem occurred "very much". Total scores range from 0-44 for The CARES-MIS. 5 items were selected from The CARES-MIS, total subscale score range is 0-20, with higher scores indicating poorer perceived communication
Outcome measures
Outcome data not reported
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: 3 months follow-upPopulation: Data available for participants who completed the survey
A 14 investigator-designed items evaluating patients' knowledge about bladder cancer. Scores range from 1 (Completely certain that is true) to 5 (Completely certain that is false). After recording the items to 1 (true) and 0 (false) total sum score of this scale range from 0 -14, with higher scores indicating more knowledge about bladder cancer.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Intervention (P3-BC) Usual Care
n=8 Participants
In addition to receiving usual care, patients will have access to the aid and related materials before consultation with the physician about cystectomy and urinary diversion.
|
Disagree
n=3 Participants
(scores 3-5; strongly disagree, disagree, I don't know)
|
High (4-5)
1-5 visual analogue scale - scores 4-5
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Bladder Cancer Knowledge Scale
|
11.1250 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.10
|
11.333 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.58
|
—
|
Adverse Events
Intervention (P3-BC) Care
Usual Care
Serious adverse events
Adverse event data not reported
Other adverse events
Adverse event data not reported
Additional Information
Nihal Mohamed, PhD
Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai
Results disclosure agreements
- Principal investigator is a sponsor employee
- Publication restrictions are in place