Neoplasms

Skin and Connective Tissue Diseases

All Conditions

Urinary Tract, Sexual Organs, and Pregnancy Conditions

Respiratory Tract (Lung and Bronchial) Diseases

Breast Neoplasms

Prostatic Neoplasms

Lung Neoplasms

Genital Neoplasms, Male

Urogenital Neoplasms

Genital Diseases

Genital Diseases, Male

Urogenital Diseases

Prostatic Diseases

Male Urogenital Diseases

Patients whose radiation oncologist are blinded to their patient preference survey results

Patients whose radiation oncologist are not blinded to their patient preference survey results

Access to initial Patient preference survey results

Physician behavior related to Patient Preference Survey

Patient Preference Results

Ajay Bhatnagar, MD

Limited data exists for the cancer patients' preferences on their patient-doctor interaction with their radiation oncologist. These physicians have the opportunity to develop intimate relationships with their patients since these patients typically require daily radiation treatments anywhere from one to seven weeks. Thus, by having a greater understanding of the individual patient preferences, the radiation oncologists will be able to better serve their patients leading to improved patient satisfaction with their physician and healthier outlook on life. This is the premise and the hypothesis of this study.

An instrument, a questionnaire, previously developed by our group (IRB# 0512075) will be used to determine these cancer patient/subjects' preferences for the following six categories (see Appendix 1)

1. How should the radiation oncologist address them (by their first name or Mr/Mrs)?
2. Should the radiation oncologists wear a white coat?
3. Should the radiation oncologist discuss their prognosis and survival with them?
4. Should the radiation oncologist have physical contact with their patient (hold hand or hug the patient.)?
5. Should the radiation oncologist inquire about their religious beliefs to help cope with their cancer?
6. Should the radiation oncologist use basic, lay language or more technical terminology when describing the radiation treatment?

This research study will consist of a randomized study of breast, prostate, and lung cancer patients/subjects receiving radiation therapy at the University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute and UPMC Cancer Centers who will complete this questionnaire. Radiation therapy can be either for definitive or palliative therapy. This creates six distinct cohorts in the study (definitive breast, prostate, and lung cancer, palliative breast, prostate, and lung cancer) that provide an adequate representation of the cancer patient/subject cohorts that receive radiation therapy.

Patients/subjects will answer this questionnaire at the time of the initial consultation with the radiation oncologist (before meeting the radiation oncologist), once midway during radiation therapy, and at the completion of the radiation treatment. At completion, there will be additional questions used from a modified version of an established validated instrument currently being used at the University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute to assess patient/subject satisfaction. (Appendix 2). Participants will rate the importance of each item on a 5-point scale: strongly disagree, disagree, neither agree nor disagree, agree, or strongly agree. They will also use a parallel ranking from 0-100 on each item to more finely assess the satisfaction differences for the survey in Appendix 2 only.

After subjects answer the questionnaire at time of initial consultation, the subject will then be randomized to either an experimental or control group. In the experimental group, the radiation oncologist participants will read their patient's responses to this questionnaire prior to their initial consultation and try to adapt to the subject's (patient's) preferences. In the control group, the radiation oncologist participant will be blinded to the results of their patient's questionnaire. At the end of treatment, the radiation oncologists who viewed their patient preferences will have to answer the following question according to the 5 point scale system: "Did knowledge of your patient's preferences influence your behavior?" The radiation oncologist participant will not have access to the patient satisfaction survey.

The duration of study per patient participant will the duration of the radiation treatment which has an average length of 4 weeks. A subject accrual of 500 patient participants and 30 radiation oncologist participants is expected at the University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute and UPMC Cancer Centers, consisting of 19 Radiation Oncology centers across Western Pennsylvania. The expected duration of the entire study is 1 year. The data will be collected through these instruments to generate a database collected in our database management system. The data will be coded and maintained by the clinical study coordinator.

Patient Preference Survey for Radiation Oncologists

How Can Radiation Oncologists Better Serve Their Patients? A Randomized Study to Determine Whether Radiation Oncologists Can Improve Patient Satisfaction by Attempting to Meet Their Patients' Preferences

University of Pittsburgh

PI Mentor

Digestive System Diseases

Carcinoma, Hepatocellular

Liver Neoplasms

Carcinoma

Gastrointestinal Neoplasms

Digestive System Neoplasms

Gastrointestinal Diseases

Liver Diseases

Adenocarcinoma

Neoplasms, Glandular and Epithelial

Neoplasms by Histologic Type

Antineoplastic Agents

All Drugs and Chemicals

Chlorotrianisene

Sorafenib

Protein Kinase Inhibitors

Enzyme Inhibitors

Patient preferences associated with oral anti-cancer therapy (Sorafenib), repeated TACE, and HAIC and their perceptions regarding the respective treatment characteristics

Oral anti-cancer therapy (Sorafenib, an multiple kinase inhibitor), repeated transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) procedures, and hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC)

Hepatocellular Cancer (HCC) treatments including oral anti-cancer therapy [Nexavar (Sorafenib, BAY43-9006)]

Bayer Study Director

This non-interventional cross-sectional online survey will evaluate preferences among patients with self-reported HCC. The survey will ask patients to express their preferences regarding descriptions of HCC treatments, which will include sorafenib (which will be described as 'oral anti-cancer therapy'), repeated transarterial chemoembolization (TACE), and hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC). Please note that all interventions that patients may have received before completing this online survey were given regardless of their participation in this survey. Questions also include asking patients to rank various treatment characteristics (e.g., mechanism of action, risk of adverse effects, etc.) relative to each other. The ultimate goal is to better understand patient perceptions of these treatments and to provide evidence to help in patients' and physicians' treatment decision-making in HCC.

HCC Patient Preferences in Japan

Patient Preferences for Treatments for Hepatocellular Cancer (HCC) in Japan

Best-Worst Scaling scores for each attribute:

1. Prevents formation of new blood vessels
2. 2 tablets twice a day
3. Risk of hand-foot skin reaction
4. Risk of diarrhea
5. Risk of stopping treatment because of side effects
6. Artery branches in liver are plugged
7. Several hour medical procedure under sedation with hospitalization
8. Medical procedure repeated when needed
9. Risk of liver damage
10. Ongoing chemotherapy drugs to the liver
11. Container and a catheter implanted in the body
12. Risk of fever, abdominal pain, and nausea
13. Risk of complications with catheter

Specific scale responses: dislike a lot, dislike, neither like or dislike, like, like a lot

Mean percentage acceptable risk on a scale from 0% (will not accept any risk of hand-foot skin reaction) to 100% (will definitely accept a risk of hand-foot skin reaction)

Mean percentage acceptable risk on a scale from 0% (will not accept any risk of life-threatening side effect) to 100% (will definitely accept a risk of life-threatening side effect)

Bayer

Colorectal Neoplasms

Intestinal Neoplasms

Colonic Diseases

Intestinal Diseases

Rectal Diseases

and treatment type (chemotherapeutic adjuvant (i.e., chemotherapy delivered after primary therapy/surgery) or neoadjuvant (i.e., chemotherapy delivered prior to primary therapy/surgery) treatment, chemotherapeutic treatment for metastatic disease, or chemotherapeutic treatment through a clinical trial).

After the presentation of the of IBM Watson Oncology at the opening of the focus group, participants will be asked to fill out a de-identified brief 15-item questionnaire to assess participants' first impressions of IBM Watson Oncology. The questionnaire will be self administered, and will take approximately 5 minutes to complete. Completed questionnaires will be collected by a member of the study staff, and the focus group will proceed with introductions. The focus group will be audio recorded from the completion of the introductions and notes will be taken. The focus group guide will address the study aims. At the end of the focus group, participants will complete a 7-item questionnaire to capture simple demographic information including education, income, and health literacy. This questionnaire will take 3-5 minutes to complete.

Focus groups

Jada Hamilton, PhD, MPH

The purpose of this study is to learn what cancer patients think about IBM Watson Oncology. IBM Watson Oncology is a computer program designed to help inform oncologists about the best chemotherapy choices for their patients. The investigators will conduct focus groups with cancer patients who have received chemotherapy treatment at MSK in order to understand cancer patients' thoughts about IBM Watson Oncology.

Examining Patient Preferences About the IBM Watson Oncology Clinical Decision Support System

Data collected through the brief questionnaires (e.g.,initial impressions of IBM Watson Oncology, sociodemographics) will be entered into an SPSS data file on the secure MSK server.

Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center

Behaviors and Mental Disorders

Rare Diseases

Melanoma

Neuroendocrine Tumors

Neuroectodermal Tumors

Neuroectodermal Tumors, Primitive

Neoplasms, Germ Cell and Embryonal

Neoplasms, Nerve Tissue

Nevus, Pigmented

Nevus

Nevi and Melanomas

Skin Neoplasms

Skin Diseases

Quality of Life

Ocular Melanoma

Intraocular Melanoma

Neuroendocrine Tumor

Neuroepithelioma

Uveal melanoma patients treated with Ruthenium-106 plaque brachytherapy

Uveal melanoma patients treated with proton therapy

Uveal melanoma patients treated with enucleation

Collection of patient-reported outcomes concerning general and health-related quality of life and impact of uveal melanoma diagnosis

Quality of life questionnaires

Assessment of patient preferences for outcomes of proton therapy and enucleation

Discrete choice experiment

Assessment of shared decision-making from the perspective of the patient (by questionnaire), physician (by questionnaire) and a neutral observer (by audiotape), combined with patient-reported satisfaction and regret of the treatment decision (by questionnaire)

Shared decision-making analysis

Assessment of the impact of side-effects by questionnaire

Impact of side-effects analysis

Nanda Horeweg, MD PhD

Coen RN Rasch, MD PhD

Gré PM Luyten, MD PhD

Marina Marinkovic, MD

Arwen H Pieterse, PhD

Nanda Horeweg, Md PhD

PROQEM is a prospective cohort study among patients diagnosed with uveal melanoma to assess quality of life before and in the first five years after treatment.

PROQEM is a prospective observational cohort study wherein patients with uveal melanoma are registered at diagnosis and are requested to fill in an array of questionaires before treatment and at 3, 6, 12, 24, 36 and 60 months after treatment. A comprehensive overview of the impact of their disease and treatment on quality of life is obtained by systematic assessment of the psychological impact of the initial diagnosis, eye symptoms, physical, emotional, social and role functioning.

In addition, the PROQEM has a substudy called the PROQEM-pco (Preferences, Choices and Outcomes) for the subgroup of patients who are eligible for both proton therapy and enucleation. They are invited to participate in research on patient preferences and shared decision-making. The consultations wherein the treatment decision is made are audiotaped and data on perceived shared decision-making, preferences, decision satisfaction and -regret are collected by questionaires at baseline and in the first 36 months after treatment.

Prospective Registration Of Patient Data and Quality of Life in Eye Melanoma Patients

The PROQEM study adheres to the FAIR principles of data stewardship. Due to privacy regulations the data of the PROQEM study will not be made publicly accessible, but can be made available upon request.

Audiotape, iSHARE, satisfaction with decision scale, decision regret scale

Questionnaire specifically developed for uveal melanoma

Leiden University Medical Center

Senior researcher, department of radiation oncology

Anti-Inflammatory Agents

Antirheumatic Agents

Anti-Infective Agents

Central Nervous System Depressants

Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal

Ethanol

Subjects randomized to the control arm will review the web-based decision aid (http://www.colorectalcancerscreening4u.com) just prior to a scheduled visit with their provider.

Subjects randomized to the experimental arm will complete the ACNI risk assessment tool after reviewing the web-based decision aid (http://www.colorectalcancerscreening4u.com) just prior to a scheduled office visit with their provider.

Patients randomized to the experimental arm will be asked a complete the ACNI risk assessment tool after reviewing a web-based colorectal cancer decision aid. The ACNI uses a point based system to stratify patients into low (mean rate of ACN \~3%) versus intermediate/high (\~ 8%) risk groups based on responses to 6 items: age (50-59, 60-69, 70+), sex (male/female), race/ethnicity (non-Hispanic black, other), smoking history (never, \<20 years, 20+ years), daily alcohol intake (\< 2 vs. \>/=2 drinks) and use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (ever, never). The index represents a prototype version of the Advanced Colorectal Neoplasia Index (Am J Gastroenterol 2015;110:1062-71).

Risk Assessment

Paul C Schroy III, MD, MPH

Shared decision-making (SDM) has been advocated as a strategy for increasing colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates. Our studies to date suggest that while the use of a novel computer-based decision aid facilitates several components of SDM from both the patient and provider perspective, there is a reluctance among providers to acquiesce to patient preferences for a particular screening strategy when its differs from their own. The overall objective of this study is to assess whether risk stratification for advanced colorectal neoplasia influences clinical decision-making related to screening test selection and adherence within a SDM framework. Eligible subjects will be randomized to either an experimental arm, in which they will be asked to complete a 6-item risk assessment questionnaire known as the "Advanced Colorectal Neoplasia Index \[ACNI\]" after reviewing a web-based decision aid, or a control arm, in which they will only review the decision aid. Both interventions will take place just before a prearranged office visit with their provider. The primary outcome will be screening test ordered; secondary outcomes will include test completion rates, concordance between test preference and test ordered,, patient satisfaction with decision-making process, screening intentions, 6-month test completion rates and provider satisfaction. Outcomes will be evaluated using computerized tracking systems or validated instruments.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second leading cause of cancer-related death in the United States. Screening by any of at least 6 different methods is a cost-effective yet underutilized strategy for reducing both CRC incidence and mortality. Because these methods differ with respect to risks and benefits and because existing evidence fails to identify a single best strategy, most authoritative groups advocate a shared decision-making (SDM) approach when selecting an appropriate screening strategy. SDM is a sequential, interactive process involving information exchange, values clarification, decision-making and mutual agreement. To facilitate this process, patient-oriented decision aids have been developed to enable patients to identify a preferred strategy based on personal values and empower them to participate in the decision-making process. Our recent studies to date find that although decision aids enable patients to make informed choices, providers are often unwilling to acquiesce to patient preferences when they differ from their own. Since accurate risk assessment is a critical component of effective clinical decision-making, the investigators postulate that risk stratification for the point prevalence of advanced colorectal neoplasia will enable providers to incorporate objective risk-based criteria in their decision-making when considering patient preferences for screening. To that end, the investigators have recently developed and validated the so-called "Advanced Colorectal Neoplasia Index \[ACNI\]" that stratifies patients into low versus intermediate/high risk categories based on available clinical data, including age, sex, race/ethnicity, smoking history, daily alcohol intake and use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. The overall objective of this study is to determine whether risk stratification using the ACNI influences clinical decision-making related to screening test selection and adherence to screening within a SDM framework.

Hypothesis: Providers who incorporate risk estimates of ACN in their decision-making when recommending screening tests are more likely to consider patient preferences for options other than colonoscopy than providers lacking this information.

Risk Stratification to Promote Effective Shared Decision-Making for Colorectal Cancer Screening

Impact of Risk Stratification on Shared Decision-Making for Colorectal Cancer Screening

Test-specific concordance between patient preference for colonoscopy and test ordered for standard care versus risk assessment groups. It is defined as the number of patients who had their preferred test ordered.

Test-specific concordance between patient preference for a screening test other than colonoscopy (fecal occult blood testing, flexible sigmoidoscopy, double-contrast barium enema, CT colonography and stool DNA) and test ordered for standard care versus risk assessment arms. It is defined as the number of patients who had their preferred test ordered.

Test-specific concordance between patient preference for colonoscopy and test ordered for high versus low risk patients. It is defined as the number of patients who had their preferred test ordered.

Test-specific concordance between patient preference for a screening test other than colonoscopy (fecal occult blood testing, flexible sigmoidoscopy, double-contrast barium enema, CT colonography and stool DNA) and test ordered for high versus low risk patients. It is defined as the number of patients who had their preferred test ordered.

Concordance is a measure of the agreement between the patient's test preference and actual test ordered for standard care vs. risk assessment patients. It is defined as the number of patients who had their preferred test ordered.

Concordance between patient preference and test ordered for high versus low risk patients. It is defined as the number of patients who had their preferred test ordered.

SDMP was assessed on the posttest using the validated 12-item Satisfaction with the Decision-Making Process scale. Individual items are assigned a point value ranging from 1 for ''strongly disagree'' (or ''poor'') to 5 for ''strongly agree'' (or ''excellent''). A cumulative score is then calculated based on the summed response scores for each item (maximum score = 60). Data was missing for 11 patients in the concordant group and 6 patients in the discordant group

Screening intentions were assessed on the posttest. Patients were asked how sure they were that they would complete the screening test that got scheduled Scores ranged from 5 = ''completely'' to 1 = ''not at all sure.'' Data was missing for 11 patients in the concordant group and 6 patients in the discordant group.

Test completion rates were tracked using BMC's electronic medical record, which captures results for all endoscopic procedures, imaging studies, and stool blood tests.

Provider satisfaction was assessed based on responses to a 3-item pretest administered prior to commencement of the study and the same 3-item posttest. The 3 items assessed to the extent to which providers felt that personalized risk assessment would be useful for: (1) selecting an appropriate screening test for their average risk patients \[test selection\]; (2) reduce time to decide on an appropriate screening modality \[save time\]; and (3) make them more receptive to patient preferences and possibly order a screening test other than colonoscopy \[receptive to patient preferences\]. Responses were assigned a point value ranging from 5= "strongly agree" and 1 = "strongly disagree".

Boston Medical Center

BMC Attending Physician

Subjects randomized to the experimental arm will review the web-based decision aid (http://www.colorectalcancerscreening4u.com) just prior to a scheduled office visit with their provider.

Standard Care

Subjects randomized to the control arm reviewed the web-based decision aid (http://www.colorectalcancerscreening4u.com) just prior to a scheduled visit with their provider.

Subjects randomized to the experimental arm completed the ACNI risk assessment tool after reviewing the web-based decision aid (http://www.colorectalcancerscreening4u.com) just prior to a scheduled office visit with their provider.

Risk Assessment: Patients randomized to the experimental arm will be asked a complete the ACNI risk assessment tool after reviewing a web-based colorectal cancer decision aid The ACNI uses a point based system to stratify patients into low (mean rate of ACN \~3%)versus intermediate/high (\~ 8%) risk groups based on responses to 6 items: age 50-59,60-69, 70+), sex (male/female), race/ethnicity (non-Hispanic black, other), smoking history (never, \<20 years, \>20 years), daily alcohol intake (\< 2 vs. \>/=2 drinks) and use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (ever, never).

Total

Age, Continuous

Sex: Female, Male

Ethnicity : Hispanic

Ethnicity : Non-Hispanic

Ethnicity : Refused

Race : White

Race : Black

Race : Other

Race/Ethnicity, Customized

Education

Marital status

Insurance

Desired role in decision-making

Single institution setting; lack of provider education about the utility of risk stratification into their decision-making.

Paul C. Schroy III, MD, MPH

Subjects randomized to the standard care arm reviewed the web-based decision aid (http://www.colorectalcancerscreening4u.com) just prior to a scheduled office visit with their provider.

Subjects randomized to the experimental arm completed the ACNI risk assessment tool after reviewing the web-based decision aid (http://www.colorectalcancerscreening4u.com) just prior to a scheduled office visit with their provider.

Concordance Between Patient Preference and Test Ordered

Patients with cumulative ACNI scores of 5 to 12 were classified as intermediate/high risk (hereafter referred to as high risk), with a mean ACN rate of 8.3% (95% CI, 7.1% - 29.6%)

High Risk

Patients with cumulative scores of less than 5 were classified as low risk, with a mean ACN rate of 3.1% (95% confidence interval \[CI\], 2.4% - 24.1%).

Low Risk

Patients with cumulative ACNI scores of 5 to 12 were classified as intermediate/high risk (hereafter referred to as high risk), with a mean ACN rate of 8.3% (95% CI, 7.1% - 29.6%). Patients with cumulative scores of less than 5 were classified as low risk, with a mean ACN rate of 3.1% (95% confidence interval \[CI\], 2.4% - 24.1%).

Concordance Between Patient Preference and Test Ordered for High vs. Low Risk Patients

The subgroup of patients who had their preferred test ordered, regardless of study arm or risk-category.

Concordance

The subgroup of patients who had a non-preferred test ordered, regardless of study arm or risk-category.

Discordance

The subgroup of patients who had their preferred test ordered, regardless of study arm or risk-category. The subgroup of patients who had a non-preferred test ordered, regardless of study arm or risk-category.

Satisfaction With Decision-making Process (SDMP)

Screening Intentions

Screening Test Completion

Test selection

Save time

Receptive to patient preferences

Provider responses to a 3-item pretest administered prior the commencement of the study.

Pretest

Provider responses to the same 3-item posttest administered after completion of study enrollment. Provider responses to a 3-item pretest administered prior the commencement of the study.

Posttest

The difference in the number of providers reflect provider attrition during the 2-year study period.

Provider Satisfaction

Subjects randomized to the experimental arm reviewed the web-based decision aid (http://www.colorectalcancerscreening4u.com) just prior to a scheduled office visit with their provider.

Concordance Between Patient Preference for Colonoscopy and Test Ordered

Concordance Between Patient Preferences for Screening Tests Other Than Colonoscopy and Test Ordered

Concordance Between Patient Preference for Colonoscopy and Test Ordered for High Versus Low Risk Patients

Concordance Between Patient Preferences for a Screening Tests Other Than Colonoscopy and Test Ordered for High Versus Low Risk Patients

Subjects randomized to the experimental arm reviewed the web-based decision aid (http://www.colorectalcancerscreening4u.com) and the ACNI risk assessment tool just prior to a scheduled office visit with their provider.

Risk Assessment: Patients randomized to the experimental arm will be asked a complete the ACNI risk assessment tool after reviewing a web-based colorectal cancer decision aid The ACNI uses a point based system to stratify patients into low (mean rate of ACN \~3%)versus intermediate/high (\~ 8%) risk groups based on responses to 6 items: age 50-59,60-69, 70+), sex (male/female), race/ethnicity (non-Hispanic black, other), smoking history (never, \<20 years, \>20 years), daily alcohol intake (\< 2 vs. \>/=2 drinks) and use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (ever, never).

Study title	NCT ID	Conditions	Interventions	Eligibility	Organization
Patient Preference Survey for Radiation Oncologists	NCT00595218	Breast Cancer Prostate Cancer Lung Cancer	Physician behav... Patient Prefere...	18 Years -	University of Pittsburgh
HCC Patient Preferences in Japan	NCT02616692	Hepatocellular ...	Hepatocellular ...	20 Years -	Bayer
Patient Preference Survey for Radiation Oncologists	NCT00595218	Breast Cancer Prostate Cancer Lung Cancer	Physician behav... Patient Prefere...	18 Years -	University of Pittsburgh
Examining Patient Preferences About the IBM Watson Oncology Clinical Decision Support System	NCT02565017	Breast Cancer Lung Cancer Colorectal Canc...	Focus groups	18 Years -	Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center
HCC Patient Preferences in Japan	NCT02616692	Hepatocellular ...	Hepatocellular ...	20 Years -	Bayer
Prospective Registration Of Patient Data and Quality of Life in Eye Melanoma Patients	NCT05377957	Uveal Melanoma	Quality of life... Discrete choice... Shared decision... Impact of side-...	18 Years -	Leiden University Medical Center
Risk Stratification to Promote Effective Shared Decision-Making for Colorectal Cancer Screening	NCT01596582	Colorectal Canc...	Risk Assessment	50 Years - 75 Years	Boston Medical Center
The Treatment Preferences of Women Diagnosed With Ovarian Cancer	NCT03367260	Ovarian Cancer Fallopian Tube ... Primary Periton...	Preference Elic...	18 Years - 89 Years	Duke University
Impact of a Patient Decision Aid Intervention	NCT05573022	Cancer, Breast Cancer Colorect...	Pre-consultatio... In-consultation...	18 Years -	Vejle Hospital
Impact of a Patient Decision Aid Intervention	NCT05573022	Cancer, Breast Cancer Colorect...	Pre-consultatio... In-consultation...	18 Years -	Vejle Hospital
STRONG for Surgery & Strong for Life - Against All Odds: Intensive Prehabilitation for Risk Reduction in Cancer Surgery	NCT04088968	Risk Reduction Urological Canc... Surgery Life Style	Prehabilitation	18 Years - 100 Years	Bispebjerg Hospital
PrOVE QUERI Project #1	NCT02765412	Prevention and ...	Webinar, Promot... LEAP Audit and Feedb... Academic Detail...	55 Years - 80 Years	VA Office of Research and Development
Prospective Registration Of Patient Data and Quality of Life in Eye Melanoma Patients	NCT05377957	Uveal Melanoma	Quality of life... Discrete choice... Shared decision... Impact of side-...	18 Years -	Leiden University Medical Center

Spots Global Cancer Trial Database for patient preferences