Effectiveness of telephone support during chemotherapy in patients with diffuse large B cell lymphoma: The Ambulatory Medical Assistance (AMA) experience

Background During chemotherapy, patients experience disabling side effects or even sometimes life-threatening treatment-related complications, contributing to poor quality of life, reduced therapeutic compliance, decreased relative dose-intensity, and ultimately poorer outcomes. Objectives The Ambulatory Medical Assistance (AMA) project, a monitoring procedure based on a standardized telephone intervention, was aimed to improve ambulatory care quality in aggressive B-cell lymphomas treated with standard front-line R-CHOP therapy. Design Non-comparative prospective study. Setting and participants Over a three-years period, one hundred diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL) patients were treated in a single hospital and monitored in an ambulatory setting through planned telephone interventions delivered by a single nurse under the supervision of an oncologist. Methods In addition to biological monitoring, patients received a bi-weekly telephone call from an oncology-certified nurse. All events were recorded on a call form, which was forwarded to a supervisor oncologist. Nurse calls resulted in one of the following: no intervention, grade 1 intervention based on a pre-established protocol managed by the nurse under oncologist supervision, or grade 2 intervention related to more severe complications, managed directly by the oncologist, and mostly resulting in secondary hospitalization. Results The AMA procedure consisted of 3592 phone calls (600h) resulting in 989 interventions (27.5%). Grade 1 intervention represented 950 cases whereas grade 2 intervention was noted in only 39 cases (3.9%). AMA also appeared to improve medical management. Indeed, compared to the literature, we observed lower incidence in secondary hospitalization (6%), delayed treatment (6%), reduced relative dose-intensity (RDI) (no patient with RDI Conclusions AMA appears to improve R-CHOP therapy management. However, comparative studies are needed to demonstrate the advantage of the AMA over standard management, in terms of therapeutic compliance, progression-free survival, and medico-economics efficacy.