The classic website will no longer be available as of June 25, 2024. Please use the modernized ClinicalTrials.gov.
Working…
ClinicalTrials.gov
ClinicalTrials.gov Menu

Lung Transplant READY CF 2: A Multi-site RCT

The safety and scientific validity of this study is the responsibility of the study sponsor and investigators. Listing a study does not mean it has been evaluated by the U.S. Federal Government. Know the risks and potential benefits of clinical studies and talk to your health care provider before participating. Read our disclaimer for details.
 
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT06030206
Recruitment Status : Recruiting
First Posted : September 8, 2023
Last Update Posted : December 5, 2023
Sponsor:
Collaborator:
National Institute of Nursing Research (NINR)
Information provided by (Responsible Party):
Kathleen Ramos, University of Washington

Brief Summary:

Lung transplant is an option for treating end-stage lung disease in cystic fibrosis (CF). In the United States, more people with CF and low lung function die each year than undergo lung transplant. More than half of people with CF who die without a lung transplant were never referred for consideration. Patient preference not to undergo lung transplant may account for 25-40% of decisions to defer referral. Rates of death without transplant are higher for people with CF who are members of marginalized communities, including those with Black race, Hispanic ethnicity, or low socioeconomic status. Increasing awareness of lung transplant among people with CF, and promoting understanding of the risks and benefits of transplant, can potentially reduce the number of people with CF who die without a lung transplant.

The CF Foundation (CFF) lung transplant referral guidelines were developed to optimize the timing of referral for lung transplant. These guidelines recommend annual conversations with people with CF once their forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) is <50% predicted. Considering lung transplant as a treatment option before it is medically needed will allow more time to learn about lung transplant and address any barriers to lung transplant that may exist.

Investigators are interested in understanding how people with CF use lung transplant educational resources and how one prepares for having discussions and/or making decisions about lung transplant as a treatment option for advanced CF. The purpose of this study is to test whether a research website improves patient preparedness for discussions about lung transplant. Investigators also aim to understand whether there are unique factors that affect people with CF from communities with decreased access to transplant ("communities of concern").

Study involvement will span 6 months and study activities will involve the following:

  • Four Zoom research sessions (15-30 minutes each)
  • Survey assessments
  • Access to a research website that contains educational resources about lung transplant
  • Audio recording of a routine CF clinic visit to determine if and how lung transplant is discussed between a participant and his/her/their CF doctor

Condition or disease Intervention/treatment Phase
Cystic Fibrosis Behavioral: Investigator-designed lung transplant education resource (Research Intervention) Behavioral: Publicly available transplant education resource (Attention-control) Not Applicable

Detailed Description:

Lung transplant is an option for treating end-stage lung disease in cystic fibrosis (CF). In the United States, more people with CF with forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) less than 30% of predicted die each year than undergo lung transplant. More than half of people with CF who die without lung transplant were never referred for consideration, with patients of lower socioeconomic status, Black race, or Hispanic ethnicity disproportionately impacted by limited access to lung transplant. Patient preference not to undergo lung transplant may account for 25-40% of decisions to defer referral. The CF Foundation established lung transplant referral guidelines that recommend people with CF have annual conversations about lung transplant with their CF doctor once their FEV1 is less than 50% of predicted. Considering lung transplant as a treatment option before it is medically needed will allow more time to learn about lung transplant and address any barriers to lung transplant that may exist. By introducing an educational resource that can increase awareness of lung transplant among patients, and promote understanding of the risks and benefits of lung transplant, investigators aim to empower people with CF to take part in shared decision-making with their CF providers, which could reduce the number of people with CF who die without lung transplant.

Based on prior research, investigators developed a novel lung transplant educational resource that addresses patient-identified knowledge gaps and provides personalized educational content to help people with CF prepare for lung transplant discussions and decisions. The web-based educational resource couples real-life CF patient experiences of lung transplant in the form of personal narratives with up-to-date, CF-specific, and guideline-based medical information about lung transplant.

The overall research objectives for this study are to test the efficacy of the investigator-designed educational resource to improve patient preparedness for shared decision making about lung transplant and knowledge about lung transplant, and to evaluate the impact on mental health outcomes (depression and anxiety). The investigator-designed website will be compared to an attention control website to better understand how people with CF use and rank different educational resources' utility. The central hypothesis is that use of the new investigator-designed website that incorporates disease severity data (FEV1 % predicted, supplemental oxygen use, exacerbations) to identify relevant personal narratives and guideline-based educational content will increase a patient's preparedness to engage in discussions about lung transplant beyond the standard information presented on the attention control website.

The study will be a randomized controlled trial. Participants will be randomly assigned 1:1 to one of two educational resources, described above, stratified by FEV1 category (FEV1 30-50% or FEV1 <30% of predicted), CF Center, and whether they are members of the "communities of concern"). The communities of concern include people with Medicaid insurance, high school education or less, Hispanic ethnicity, or Black/Asian/Other race (not White race). Baseline surveys will evaluate knowledge about lung transplant, a Likert scale rating of preparedness for lung transplant discussions, decisional conflict about lung transplant, and mental health. For three months, participants will have access to one of two educational resources via a login to a secure research website. At 2 weeks, there will be a study visit that includes repeated surveys from baseline and the Preparedness for Shared Decision Making (PrepDM) Scale. At 2 to 3 months after randomization, participants will have a routine CF clinic visit, which may be audio-recorded for evaluation of lung transplant discussion. At 3 months after randomization, there will be a study visit that includes repeated surveys from baseline and the PrepDM Scale. After the 3-month study visit, participants will have access to both educational resources via individual login to the secure research website. At 6-months, there will be a study visit to repeat the surveys. Throughout the 6-months and for a long-term follow up period of 4 years, web analytics will be captured at the individual level to determine usage patterns for both educational resources.

Layout table for study information
Study Type : Interventional  (Clinical Trial)
Estimated Enrollment : 132 participants
Allocation: Randomized
Intervention Model: Crossover Assignment
Masking: Double (Investigator, Outcomes Assessor)
Primary Purpose: Other
Official Title: Preparation for Lung Transplant Discussions and Decisions Among People With Cystic Fibrosis
Actual Study Start Date : September 6, 2023
Estimated Primary Completion Date : September 30, 2026
Estimated Study Completion Date : July 31, 2027

Resource links provided by the National Library of Medicine


Arm Intervention/treatment
Experimental: Intervention
Access to an investigator-designed web-based educational resource with information about lung transplant for three months.
Behavioral: Investigator-designed lung transplant education resource (Research Intervention)
Participants will access the investigator-designed educational resource via their login to a secure website. After three months, participants will gain access to the publicly available website (attention control) and will have an additional three months of access to both of these resources.

Active Comparator: Attention-control
Access to a publicly available web-based educational resource with information about transplant for three months.
Behavioral: Publicly available transplant education resource (Attention-control)
Participants will access the publicly available education resource via their login to a secure website. After three months, participants will gain access to the investigator-designed educational resource (research intervention) and will have an additional three months of access to both of these resources.




Primary Outcome Measures :
  1. Preparedness for Shared Decision Making (PrepDM) Scale [ Time Frame: Measured at the 3-month study visit ]
    The primary endpoint is an intention-to-treat assessment of the difference in mean Preparedness for Shared Decision Making (PrepDM) Scale in the intervention versus attention-control arms of the study at the 3-month study visit using linear mixed models. Scores range on a scale from 0 to 100 with higher scores indicating a higher perceived level of preparation for decision making.


Secondary Outcome Measures :
  1. Confidence-weighted true false knowledge about lung transplant (14-question investigator-designed survey) [ Time Frame: Measured at 3-month study visit ]
    Difference in mean change in confidence-weighted true false (CTF) knowledge score will be measured in the intervention versus control arms of the study using linear mixed models. CTF scoring adds points for certainty in correct responses and deducts points for certainty in incorrect responses. Participants receive +2 points when "sure" about a correct response, +1 if unsure about a correct response, -1 if unsure about an incorrect response and -2 if sure about an incorrect response. For a 14-item knowledge test, the maximum score is +28 and the minimum score is -28, with higher scores indicating more knowledge about lung transplant.

  2. Decisional Conflict Scale [ Time Frame: Baseline to 3-month study visit ]
    Decisional Conflict Scale change will be measured from the baseline study visit to the 3-month study visit. The intention-to-treat analysis will compare mean change in the Decisional Conflict Scale between the intervention and control arms of the study. Scores range from 0 [no decisional conflict] to 100 [extremely high decisional conflict].

  3. Likert-scale rating of preparedness to discuss lung transplant (0-4) [ Time Frame: Measured at 3-month study visit ]
    Likert rating of preparedness to discuss lung transplant will be measured at each study visit (0=Don't know, 1= Not at all prepared, 2 = A little prepared, 3 = Moderately prepared, 4 = Very prepared). The intention-to-treat analysis will compare mean change in Likert-scale rating between the intervention and attention-control arms of the study using linear mixed models.

  4. Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) [ Time Frame: Measured at 3-month study visit ]
    PHQ-9 is a scale that measures symptoms of depression in the prior 2 weeks on a 0-27 scale, with higher scores indicating worsening depression and a score of 10 or higher consistent with a diagnosis of depression. The intention-to-treat analysis will compare mean change in PHQ-9 between the intervention and attention-control arms of the study using linear mixed models. Investigators will also determine the proportion with new PHQ-9 score greater than or equal to 10 in each arm.

  5. Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7-item (GAD-7) Scale [ Time Frame: Measured at 3-month study visit ]
    GAD-7 is a scale that measures symptoms of anxiety in the prior 2 weeks on a 0-21 scale, with higher scores indicating worsening anxiety and a score of 10 or higher consistent with a diagnosis of generalized anxiety disorder. The intention-to-treat analysis will compare mean change in GAD-7 between the intervention and attention-control arms of the study using linear mixed models. Investigators will also determine the proportion with new GAD-7 score greater than or equal to 10 in each arm.


Other Outcome Measures:
  1. 6-month assessment of Preparedness for Shared Decision Making (PrepDM) Scale [ Time Frame: Measured at 6-month study visit ]
    The PrepDM Scale will be measured for all participants with respect to the investigator-designed educational resource (research intervention) and mean score will be compared for participants in the intervention (6 months of exposure) versus control arms (3 months of exposure) using linear mixed models. PrepDM scores range on a scale from 0 to 100 with higher scores indicating a higher perceived level of preparation for decision making.

  2. 6-month assessment for confidence-weighted true false knowledge about lung transplant (14-question investigator-designed survey) [ Time Frame: Measured at 6-month study visit ]
    Change in confidence-weighted true false knowledge about lung transplant (14-question investigator-designed survey) will be assessed from baseline to 6-months and from 3-month to 6-month study visits. Mean difference in the change in knowledge score will be compared between study arms for the two time periods (0 to 6 months and 3 to 6 months). Higher scores indicate more knowledge about lung transplant.

  3. 6-month assessment for Decisional Conflict Scale [ Time Frame: Measured at 6-months study visit ]
    Change in Decisional Conflict Scale will be assessed from baseline to 6-months and from 3-month to 6-month study visits. Mean difference in the change in Decisional Conflict Scale will be compared between study arms for the two time periods (0 to 6 months and 3 to 6 months). Scores range from 0 [no decisional conflict] to 100 [extremely high decisional conflict].

  4. 6-month assessment for Likert-scale rating of preparedness to discuss lung transplant [ Time Frame: Measured at baseline, 3-month and 6-month study visits ]
    Evaluate the proportion "Very prepared" at baseline, 3-months and 6-months in the intervention and control arms. Compare proportions across study arms at each time point.

  5. Time spent using the research website [ Time Frame: Baseline to 3-month study visit ]
    Average time spent using the research website from baseline to 3-months will be compared across study arms. Further, time spent using the investigator-designed website will be assessed as a predictor of: 1. change in confidence-weighted true false knowledge about lung transplant (14-question investigator-designed survey) from baseline to 3-month study visit, 2. change in Likert preparedness from baseline to 3-month study visit, 3. change in Decisional Conflict Scale from baseline to 3-month study visit, and 4. mean PrepDM Scale at 3-months.

  6. Between-arm comparisons of Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9) [ Time Frame: Routine CF Clinic visit during the trial ]
    The analysis will be an intention-to-treat assessment of the difference in mean Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9) in the intervention versus attention-control arms of the study at the routine CF Clinic visit using linear mixed models. The SDM-Q-9 scale has a range of (0 to 45), with higher scores indicating higher quality of shared decision making from the patient's perspective. A change in SDM-Q-9 of 12 to 15 has been considered clinically meaningful.

  7. Between-arm comparisons of Shared Decision Making Questionnaire for physicians (SDM-Q-doc) [ Time Frame: Routine CF Clinic visit during the trial ]
    The analysis will be an intention-to-treat assessment of the difference in mean Shared Decision Making Questionnaire for physicians (SDM-Q-doc) in the intervention versus attention-control arms of the study at the routine CF Clinic visit using linear mixed models. The SDM-Q-doc scale has a range of (0 to 45), with higher scores indicating higher quality of shared decision making from the physician's perspective.

  8. Preparedness for Shared Decision Making (PrepDM) Scale among members of communities of concern. [ Time Frame: Measured at 3-month study visit ]
    In a prespecified subgroup analysis, investigators will assess the Preparedness for Shared Decision Making (PrepDM) Scale at 3 months within the cohort of participants who are members of communities of concern. This is an intention-to-treat assessment of the difference in mean Preparedness for Shared Decision Making (PrepDM) Scale in the intervention versus attention-control arms of the study at the 3-month study visit using linear mixed models in the subset of individuals who are members of communities of concern (Medicaid insurance, high-school education or less, Hispanic ethnicity, Black/Asian/Other race). Scores range on a scale from 0 to 100 with higher scores indicating a higher perceived level of preparation for decision making.

  9. Decisional Conflict Scale among members of communities of concern. [ Time Frame: Baseline to 3-month study visit ]
    In a prespecified subgroup analysis, investigators will assess Decisional Conflict Scale change within the cohort of participants who are members of communities of concern (Medicaid insurance, high-school education or less, Hispanic ethnicity, Black/Asian/Other race). Decisional Conflict Scale change will be measured from the baseline study visit to the 3-month study visit. The intention-to-treat analysis will compare mean change in the Decisional Conflict Scale between the intervention and control arms of the study in the subset of individuals who are members of communities of concern. Scores range from 0 [no decisional conflict] to 100 [extremely high decisional conflict].

  10. Confidence-weighted true false knowledge about lung transplant (14-question investigator-designed survey) among members of communities of concern. [ Time Frame: Baseline to 3-month study visit ]
    In a prespecified subgroup analysis, investigators will assess the difference in mean change from baseline to 3 months in Confidence-weighted true false (CTF) knowledge score will be measured in the intervention versus control arms of the study using linear mixed models within the cohort of participants who are members of communities of concern (Medicaid insurance, high-school education or less, Hispanic ethnicity, Black/Asian/Other race). CTF scoring adds points for certainty in correct responses and deducts points for certainty in incorrect responses. Participants receive +2 points when "sure" about a correct response, +1 if unsure about a correct response, -1 if unsure about an incorrect response and -2 if sure about an incorrect response. For a 14-item knowledge test, the maximum score is +28 and the minimum score is -28, with higher scores indicating more knowledge about lung transplant.

  11. Likert rating of preparedness to discuss lung transplant among members of communities of concern. [ Time Frame: Baseline to 3-month study visit ]
    In a prespecified subgroup analysis, investigators will assess change from baseline to 3 months in Likert rating of preparedness to discuss lung transplant within the cohort of participants who are members of communities of concern (Medicaid insurance, high-school education or less, Hispanic ethnicity, Black/Asian/Other race). The intention-to-treat analysis will compare mean change in the Likert rating of preparedness to discuss lung transplant between the intervention and control arms of the study in the subset of individuals who are members of communities of concern. Likert rating of preparedness to discuss lung transplant will be measured at each study visit (0=Don't know, 1= Not at all prepared, 2 = A little prepared, 3 = Moderately prepared, 4 = Very prepared).

  12. Evaluation of CF Clinic audio-recordings and transcripts [ Time Frame: Routine CF Clinic visit (at least 6 weeks after randomization/until 3-Month Session) during the trial ]
    Recordings will be listened to by at least two members of the study team for assessment or implicit bias (e.g. speech rate, verbal dominance) and whether the topic of LTx is raised with different frequency among participants from communities of concern.



Information from the National Library of Medicine

Choosing to participate in a study is an important personal decision. Talk with your doctor and family members or friends about deciding to join a study. To learn more about this study, you or your doctor may contact the study research staff using the contacts provided below. For general information, Learn About Clinical Studies.


Layout table for eligibility information
Ages Eligible for Study:   18 Years and older   (Adult, Older Adult)
Sexes Eligible for Study:   All
Accepts Healthy Volunteers:   No
Criteria

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Diagnosis of cystic fibrosis
  • FEV1 less than 50% of predicted

Exclusion Criteria:

  • People who are unable to provide informed consent
  • People who are lung transplant recipients
  • Unable to read or understand English or Spanish to complete surveys or access the website (currently only available in English and Spanish)

Information from the National Library of Medicine

To learn more about this study, you or your doctor may contact the study research staff using the contact information provided by the sponsor.

Please refer to this study by its ClinicalTrials.gov identifier (NCT number): NCT06030206


Contacts
Layout table for location contacts
Contact: Lauren Bartlett, BS, CCRC 503-583-2869 lrejman@uw.edu

Locations
Layout table for location information
United States, California
University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) Not yet recruiting
Los Angeles, California, United States, 980095
Contact: DeeAnna Serna    424-381-6507    DSerna@mednet.ucla.edu   
Principal Investigator: Grant Turner, MD, MHA, FACP         
United States, Colorado
National Jewish Health Recruiting
Denver, Colorado, United States, 80206
Contact: Katie Poch, BS    303-398-1805    PochK@NJHealth.org   
Principal Investigator: Milene Saavedra, MD         
United States, Connecticut
Yale University Recruiting
New Haven, Connecticut, United States, 06520
Contact: Badrun Rahman    203-430-8391    badrun.rahman@yale.edu   
Principal Investigator: Jonathan Koff, MD         
United States, Kansas
University of Kansas Recruiting
Kansas City, Kansas, United States, 66160
Contact: Mayank Kothari, MBBS, CCRC    913-588-2881    mkothari@kumc.edu   
Principal Investigator: Charles Bengtson, MD         
Principal Investigator: Joel Mermis, MD         
United States, Maine
Maine Health Recruiting
Portland, Maine, United States, 04102
Contact: Emma Koukos    207-662-6550    Emma.Koukos@mainehealth.org   
Principal Investigator: Edmund Sears, MD         
United States, Minnesota
University of Minnesota Recruiting
Minneapolis, Minnesota, United States, 55455
Contact: Brooke Noren, RN, BSN, CCRC    612-625-7995    boer0039@umn.edu   
Principal Investigator: Jordan Dunitz, MD         
United States, Ohio
University of Cincinnati Recruiting
Cincinnati, Ohio, United States, 45267
Contact: Nicole Hummel, LPN    513-558-7036    hummelne@ucmail.uc.edu   
Principal Investigator: Veronica Indihar, MD         
United States, Pennsylvania
University of Pittsburgh Recruiting
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States, 15213
Contact: Adrienne Dericco, BSN, RN, CCRC    412-692-8069    adrienne.dericco2@upmc.edu   
Principal Investigator: Joseph Pilewski, MD         
United States, Washington
University of Washington Medical Center - Montlake Recruiting
Seattle, Washington, United States, 98195
Contact: Lauren Bartlett, BS, CCRC    503-583-2869    lrejman@uw.edu   
Principal Investigator: Kathleen Ramos, MD, MSc         
Sponsors and Collaborators
University of Washington
National Institute of Nursing Research (NINR)
Investigators
Layout table for investigator information
Principal Investigator: Kathleen Ramos, MD, MSc University of Washington
  Study Documents (Full-Text)

Documents provided by Kathleen Ramos, University of Washington:
Informed Consent Form  [PDF] August 29, 2023

Publications:
Layout table for additonal information
Responsible Party: Kathleen Ramos, Associate Professor, School or Medicine, University of Washington
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT06030206    
Other Study ID Numbers: STUDY00016585
1R01NR020470-01A1 ( U.S. NIH Grant/Contract )
First Posted: September 8, 2023    Key Record Dates
Last Update Posted: December 5, 2023
Last Verified: December 2023
Individual Participant Data (IPD) Sharing Statement:
Plan to Share IPD: Yes
Plan Description: De-identified individual participant data (IPD) may be shared with other researchers for secondary analyses with the approval of the appropriate Human Subjects Division(s) and the study's principal investigator (PI).
Supporting Materials: Study Protocol
Informed Consent Form (ICF)
Time Frame: Data will become available after publication of the results of the primary analyses of the study. The data will be available for up to 3 years after the end of the study.
Access Criteria: Qualified researchers with appropriate clinical research training and/or mentorship will be allowed to have access to IPD after approval is obtained from Human Subjects Division(s) and the study PI.

Layout table for additional information
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Drug Product: No
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Device Product: No
Keywords provided by Kathleen Ramos, University of Washington:
Cystic Fibrosis
Lung Transplantation
Advanced Lung Disease
Decision Support Tool
Additional relevant MeSH terms:
Layout table for MeSH terms
Cystic Fibrosis
Fibrosis
Pathologic Processes
Pancreatic Diseases
Digestive System Diseases
Lung Diseases
Respiratory Tract Diseases
Genetic Diseases, Inborn
Infant, Newborn, Diseases