S1477
Interdisciplinary - Patient involvement
ESTRO 2026
prostate cancer. Support Care Cancer. 2020;28:3331- 3342.Majdi A, Chraa FZ, Ezzouitina C, et al. Low-residue diet as bowel preparation in prostate radiotherapy: retrospective assessment. Clin Nutr ESPEN. 2022;(abstr P278).Piro F. Preventing rectal toxicity in prostate cancer: dietary strategies. IGMIN Res. 2024;9(1):161. Keywords: Prostate cancer, dietary preparation, radiotherapy
registered on the Open Science Frameworkhttps://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/B4DTJ Results: We followed PRISMA-ScR in a streamlined manner. Records were screened in duplicate and disagreements resolved by consensus. Identification: 376 records from databases. Screening: 342 titles/abstracts. Full-text eligibility: 37 reports assessed. Included: 19 studies. The most common instruments were EORTC QLQ-C30/BR23 (39%), PRO- CTCAE (28%), and breast/skin-specific tools such as RISRAS or POSI (22%), often used in combination. Digital ePROMs predominated (12/19), while six studies (33%) used paper forms. PROMs were collected weekly in 14/19 studies. Direct EMR integration or dashboard linkage was reported in 9/19, most commonly via institutional portals (MSK Engage, MROQC, POSI, eRAPID). Frequently assessed domains included pain (83%), fatigue (78%), skin toxicity (67%), and emotional or functional well-being (45%). Reported benefits were improved clinician–patient communication, earlier toxicity management, and feasibility of remote follow-up. Main barriers included workflow burden, limited interoperability, digital literacy issues, and alert fatigue. Facilitators comprised dedicated nursing support, automated reminders, institutional quality-assurance frameworks, and simplified triage rules for actionable alerts. Conclusion: Routine PROMs collection during breast RT is feasible and increasingly digital, yet interoperability and EMR- level integration remain inconsistent across centres. Establishing standardised core instruments and domains, developing real-time feedback pathways, and embedding PROMs into automated quality- improvement systems are essential next steps toward scalable, patient-centred radiotherapy.
Poster Discussion 1882
Implementation of patient-reported outcome measures during breast radiotherapy: a scoping review of clinical practice evidence Gonzalo Ulloa 1 , Raúl Aguilar-Barrientos 2,3 , Miguel Kreisberg 4 , Maria Gabriela Soto 5 , Rocío Novoa 1 , Juan Pablo Canales 1 , Tomas Merino 1,3 , Pablo Munoz- Schuffenegger 1,3 , Eugenio Vinés 1 , Paula Reyes 1 1 Department of Hematology – Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile. 2 Institute of Public Health Policies (IPSUSS), Facultad de medicina y ciencias Universidad San Sebastián, Santiago, Chile. 3 Center for Cancer Prevention and Control (CECAN), Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile. 4 Faculty of Medicine, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile. 5 Department of Family and Community Medicine, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile Purpose/Objective: Integration of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in radiotherapy enables early symptom detection and enhances patient engagement. However, most PROM initiatives remain research- based rather than incorporated into clinical workflows. This scoping review aimed to map PROM instruments, digital platforms, and implementation strategies used in routine clinical practice during breast radiotherapy (RT), identifying integration patterns, assessed domains, and key barriers and facilitators. Material/Methods: A scoping review was conducted following the PRISMA- ScR framework. PubMed and Scopus were searched (2015–2025) using controlled terms related to breast cancer, radiotherapy, patient-reported outcome measures, and clinical implementation. Studies were eligible if they reported the use of PROMs during active breast RT within clinical workflows, including feasibility, integration with electronic medical records (EMR), or quality-improvement networks. Research- only or validation studies were excluded. Data were charted for PROM instrument, domains, administration mode, collection frequency, integration level, and reported outcomes. The protocol was
Made with FlippingBook - Share PDF online