Journal Article

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in clinical trials and in clinical practice: report from the XXI national conference of the Italian Association of Medical Oncology (AIOM)

Puccini, Alberto, De Lorenzo Francesco, Iannelli Elisabetta, Efficace Fabio, Maiello Evaristo, Brunello Antonella, Zibellini Marco, Gitto Lara, Mignone Gianluca, Raimondi, Alessandra, Longo, Francesco, Beretta, Giordano Domenico, Gussoni Gualberto, Latiano Tiziana, Locati, Laura, Pagliuca Martina, Bossi, Paolo, Basch Ethan, Perrone, Francesco, Marandino, Laura, Ripamonti, Carla Ida, Petruzzelli Davide, Ciani Oriana, Piattelli Angela, Gianmauro, Numico, Viscardi Giuseppe, Di Maio Massimo, Quaglini Silvana, Pinto Carmine, Carrera, Pricivel M, Cinieri Saverio, Servetto, Alberto, Popoli Patrizia

2025

Overview

ObjectivePatient-reported outcomes (PROs) are considered the gold standard for the assessment of subjective symptoms, quality of life (QoL) and patient well-being in both clinical trials and clinical practice. Here, we report key discussions and findings from the 21st National Conference of the Italian Association of Medical Oncology, held in Bologna on 21–22 June 2024, with a focus on the integration and impact of PROs in oncology research and clinical practice.Methods and analysisLeading national and international experts presented and analysed data regarding the use of PROs in clinical trials and routine oncology care. Topics included the role of electronic PROs (ePROs), digital therapeutics, financial toxicity as a PRO and methodologies for standardising QoL assessment. Insights were drawn from expert presentations, consensus discussions and practical experiences shared during the conference sessions.ResultsExperts emphasised that PROs should be included as key endpoints in clinical trials, with timely publication of results and standardised methodologies for analysis and interpretation. The conference highlighted the critical importance of incorporating PROs and QoL measures throughout the cancer care continuum—from screening to survivorship. In clinical practice, PROs improve patient-centred care and communication, particularly when oncologists are trained to interpret QoL data. The use of ePROs was noted as a valuable tool to support digital health interventions. Financial toxicity emerged as a significant PRO, with screening tools recommended to identify and support at-risk patients. Key organisational challenges were identified, including technological barriers, resource constraints and the need for responsive infrastructure to support real-time PRO integration.ConclusionThe implementation of PROs, including ePROs and financial toxicity assessments, is essential for advancing quality cancer care. Standardisation, digital innovation and targeted clinician education are critical to integrating PROs effectively in both research and clinical settings. Addressing infrastructural and technological challenges will be vital for optimising patient outcomes and ensuring optimal care across the cancer journey.

• Publisher: BMJ Publishing Group LTD
• Subject: Archives & records / Cancer therapies / Clinical outcomes / Clinical trials / Data integrity / Digital infrastructure / Oncology / Patients / Quality of life / Toxicity / Well being / Working groups