DISCO: Reducing Financial Burden of Cancer

This study, called DISCO, is looking at ways to help cancer patients manage the financial challenges that can come with treatment. It tests an iPad app, the DISCO App, which provides education about treatment costs and helps you talk to your doctor about them. Some participants will use the app, some will use the app with a follow-up email, and others will receive usual care. The study wants to see if using the app helps you feel more confident in discussing costs with your doctor and managing them, and if it increases your knowledge about treatment costs. You may be able to join if you are an adult with a new diagnosis of breast or prostate cancer, can read English, and have an email account. The current recruitment status is unclear.

Study design
This is an interventional study with 254 planned participants. Participants will be randomly assigned to one of three groups: the DISCO App, usual care, or the DISCO App plus a booster email.
What's involved
Participants in the DISCO App groups will use an iPad app before meeting with their oncologist. One group will also receive a follow-up email two months later.
Compensation
Not stated in the trial record.
Follow-up
Your confidence and knowledge will be measured immediately after your video-recorded interaction with your doctor.

AI-generated from the public study record. Only the study team can confirm whether you're eligible — confirm details with them before making decisions.

NCT04766190

DISCO: A Patient Intervention to Reduce the Financial Burden of Cancer

Active, Not Recruiting
NAAges 18+InterventionalHealth services
Lauren Hamel
~254 participants
Updated 2026-08-06 on ClinicalTrials.gov
What's tested:Group 2: The DISCO AppGroup 1: Usual CareGroup 3: The DISCO App + Booster

At a glance

Recruiting sites
0 of 1 listed site is recruiting right now
RecruitingSuspended, closed, or not yet open
What they're measuring
Self-efficacy in patient-physician interactions. An example item from the PEPPI scale: How confident are you in your ability to know what questions to ask your doctor? Data will be aggregated using means and standard deviations.
Measured over Immediately after the video-recorded patient-physician interaction
+8 more outcomes measured
Financial Toxicity
Cancer
Question Prompt List
Breast Cancer
Prostate Cancer
1 sites across 1 states
Michigan1
  • Lauren Hamel, PhD · PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR · Barbara Ann Karmanos Cancer Insitute

This trial hasn't published a contact. View it on ClinicalTrials.gov

Do you actually qualify for this trial?

Add a private profile and we'll compare every criterion below against your situation — and tell you which ones are met, uncertain, or excluding.

Check eligibility for this trial ~2 min · HIPAA-protected · delete anytime
Eligibility criteria

Inclusion

Oncologists are eligible if they treat patients with breast, prostate, lung, or colorectal cancers at Karmanos Cancer Institute. Data from oncologists will include their self-report data and video-recorded treatment discussions with participating patients.
Patients: Must be able to read and write in English; have an email account; and are newly diagnosed with breast, prostate, lung or colorectal cancer (stage I-IV) for which systemic therapy is a likely recommended treatment. Data from patients will include their self-report data, video-recorded treatment discussions with participating oncologists, and medical record data
  • Self-efficacy in patient-physician interactions. An example item from the PEPPI scale: How confident are you in your ability to know what questions to ask your doctor? Data will be aggregated using means and standard deviations.Immediately after the video-recorded patient-physician interaction

    How efficacious patients feel about communicating with physicians. Scale title: Self-efficacy in patient-physician interactions. Minimum = 1; Maximum = 5; higher is a better outcome.

  • Self-efficacy in managing treatment costs An example item from adapted scale: I am confident I can pay for the direct costs of my treatment. Data will be aggregated using means and standard deviations.Immediately after video-recorded patient-physician interaction

    How efficacious patients feel about managing their treatment costs. Scale title: Self-efficacy in managing treatment costs. Minimum = 1; Maximum = 5; higher is a better outcome.

  • Knowledge of types of treatment cost An example item from the original measure: Cancer treatment may cost me in the following ways? Data will be aggregated using frequency counts.Immediately after video-recorded patient-physician interaction

    If patients know the types of cost associated with cancer treatment

  • Perceived financial toxicity; Scale title: Adapted Comprehensive score for financial toxicity (COST) measure.Immediately after video-recorded patient-physician interaction

    Anticipated financial harm due to treatment cost. Scale title: Adapted Comprehensive score for financial toxicity (COST) measure. Minimum = 0; Maximum = 4; lower is a better outcome.

  • Perceived presence of treatment cost discussionImmediately after video-recorded patient-physician interaction

    Patient perception that treatment cost discussed with the physician

  • Patient self-report of level of satisfaction with any treatment cost discussions with physician assessed via an original scale: satisfaction with any treatment cost discussed with the physician that occurred.Immediately after video-recorded patient-physician interaction

    Scale title: Satisfaction with any treatment cost discussed with the physician that occurred. Minimum = 1; Maximum = 5; higher is a better outcome.

  • The observed frequency of a cost discussion assessed via an original coding system. Frequency is assessed as the number of distinct cost discussions that occur in each recorded interaction. Higher is a better outcome.During the video-recorded patient-physician interaction

    Observation of the frequency of a cost discussion. Minimum = 0; Maximum = undefined.

  • Patient-Centered Communication scale. The observed quality of patient-physician communication assessed a validated coding system. Minimum = 1; Maximum =5; higher is a better outcomeDuring the video-recorded patient-physician interaction

    Observation of the quality of patient-physician communication.

  • Referral to social work/financial navigatorImmediately after video-recorded patient-physician interaction

    If the patient was referred to a social worker or financial navigator. The number of patients who receive a referral to a social worker or a financial navigator.