SCOPING REVIEW OF REMOTE PATIENT MONITORING SOLUTIONS USING SENSOR-BASED TECHNOLOGIES IN ONCOLOGY CARE
Author(s)
Fiorella Yvette Guerrero Calle1, Elizabeth Kwong, PhD2, Paula Arnillas, MD3, Lesley Skalla, PhD1, Nikki Ow, PhD4, Ramya Palacholla, MD5, Elisabeth Piault-Louis, PharmD6, Yanyan Zhu, PhD6, Kevin Weinfurt, PhD1, Jill Bell, PhD7;
1Duke University, Durham, NC, USA, 2University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA, 3Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia, Lima, Peru, 4Evinova, AstraZeneca Group, Mississauga, ON, Canada, 5Evinova, AstraZeneca Group, Durham, NC, USA, 6Evinova, AstraZeneca Group, Waltham, MA, USA, 7Evinova, AstraZeneca Group, Gaithersburg, MD, USA
1Duke University, Durham, NC, USA, 2University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA, 3Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia, Lima, Peru, 4Evinova, AstraZeneca Group, Mississauga, ON, Canada, 5Evinova, AstraZeneca Group, Durham, NC, USA, 6Evinova, AstraZeneca Group, Waltham, MA, USA, 7Evinova, AstraZeneca Group, Gaithersburg, MD, USA
OBJECTIVES: Remote patient monitoring systems (RPMs) can continuously collect, transmit, and analyze patients’ health data outside traditional clinical settings. With the increasing need to enhance patient outcomes and reduce care burden, health systems are turning to RPMs; hence, understanding the maturity and features of sensor-based solutions is essential. This scoping review describes current applications of sensor-based RPMs in oncology for symptom monitoring and evaluates their components, implementation stage, and implications for broader adoption.
METHODS: The search for articles was conducted in Medline, Embase, Web of Sciences, and IEEE Xplore from database inception through September 2025. Included studies used any sensor-based device (e.g., wearables, in-built phone sensors, e-patches, and point-of-care technologies) to monitor symptoms during oncology treatments. Protocols and conference abstracts were excluded. Three researchers independently screened titles and abstracts, reviewed full-text articles, and extracted data using Covidence. Each article was evaluated by two reviewers, with discrepancies resolved through discussion.
RESULTS: A total of 1367 abstracts were screened, and 16 studies were included. RPMs were applied across multiple cancer populations, most commonly among hematologic malignancies (43.7%) and breast cancers (41.7%). All but one of the sixteen studies used devices that were wearables, while seven studies employed additional technological components such as phone in-built sensors, patient-reported outcomes, point-of-care devices, or e-patches. Symptoms were monitored for the early detection of potential treatment-related toxicities, including cytokine release syndrome (12.5%), neutropenia (18.8%), neuropathy (25%), and others. Device grade ranged from general-wellness (n=7) to research-grade (n=1) and medical-grade (n=8). While feasibility was reported in the majority of studies, only 12.5% of studies evaluated a fully integrated remote patient-monitoring solution.
CONCLUSIONS: Sensor-based RPMs show promise for early toxicity detection in oncology. To support implementation, additional evidence on patient and clinician burden, clinical outcomes, and cost-effectiveness is needed to advance the integration of RPM into oncology care pathways.
METHODS: The search for articles was conducted in Medline, Embase, Web of Sciences, and IEEE Xplore from database inception through September 2025. Included studies used any sensor-based device (e.g., wearables, in-built phone sensors, e-patches, and point-of-care technologies) to monitor symptoms during oncology treatments. Protocols and conference abstracts were excluded. Three researchers independently screened titles and abstracts, reviewed full-text articles, and extracted data using Covidence. Each article was evaluated by two reviewers, with discrepancies resolved through discussion.
RESULTS: A total of 1367 abstracts were screened, and 16 studies were included. RPMs were applied across multiple cancer populations, most commonly among hematologic malignancies (43.7%) and breast cancers (41.7%). All but one of the sixteen studies used devices that were wearables, while seven studies employed additional technological components such as phone in-built sensors, patient-reported outcomes, point-of-care devices, or e-patches. Symptoms were monitored for the early detection of potential treatment-related toxicities, including cytokine release syndrome (12.5%), neutropenia (18.8%), neuropathy (25%), and others. Device grade ranged from general-wellness (n=7) to research-grade (n=1) and medical-grade (n=8). While feasibility was reported in the majority of studies, only 12.5% of studies evaluated a fully integrated remote patient-monitoring solution.
CONCLUSIONS: Sensor-based RPMs show promise for early toxicity detection in oncology. To support implementation, additional evidence on patient and clinician burden, clinical outcomes, and cost-effectiveness is needed to advance the integration of RPM into oncology care pathways.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2026-05, ISPOR 2026, Philadelphia, PA, USA
Value in Health, Volume 29, Issue S6
Code
MT25
Topic
Medical Technologies
Disease
SDC: Oncology