Abstract:Background: A steady increase in colorectal and prostate cancer survivors and patients with these cancers is expected in the upcoming years. As a result of primary cancer treatments, patients have numerous additional complaints, increasing the need for cancer aftercare. However, referrals to appropriate cancer aftercare remain inadequate, despite a wide range of aftercare options. Caregivers and patients often do not know which aftercare is the most appropriate for the individual patient. Since characteristics and complaints of patients within a diagnosis group may differ, predefined patient clusters could provide substantive and efficient support for professionals in the conversation about aftercare. By using advanced data analysis methods, clusters of patients who are different from one another within a diagnosis group can be identified. Objective: This study had a 2-fold objective: (1) to identify, visualize, and describe potential patient clusters within the colorectal and prostate cancer population and (2) to explore the potential usability of these clusters in clinical practice. Methods: First, we used cross-sectional data from patients with colorectal cancer and patients with prostate cancer provided by the population-based PROFILES (Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Initial Treatment and Long-Term Evaluation of Survivorship) registry, which were originally collected between 2008 and 2012. To identify and visualize different clusters among the 2 patient populations, we conducted cluster analyses by applying the K-means algorithm and multiple-factor analyses. Second, in a qualitative study, we presented the patient clusters to patients with prostate, patients with colorectal cancer, and oncology professionals. To assess the usability of these clusters, we held expert panel group interviews. The interviews were video recorded and transcribed. Three researchers independently performed content-directed data analyses to understand and describe the qualitative data. Quotes illustrate the most important results. Results: We identified 3 patient clusters among colorectal cancer cases (n=3989) and 5 patient clusters among prostate cancer cases (n=696), which were described in tabular form. Patient experts (6/8, 75%) and professional experts (17/20, 85%) recognized the patient clustering based on distinguishing variables. However, the tabular form was evaluated as less applicable in clinical practice. Instead, the experts suggested the development of a conversation tool (eg, decision tree) to guide professionals through the hierarchy of variables. In addition, participants suggested that information about possible aftercare initiatives should be offered and integrated. This would also ensure a good overview and seemed to be a precondition for finding suitable aftercare. Conclusions: This study demonstrates that a fully data-driven approach can be used to identify distinguishable and recognizable (ie, in routine care) patient clusters in large data sets within cancer populations. Patient clusters can be a source of support for health professionals in the aftercare conversation. These clusters, when integrated into a smart digital conversation and referral tool, might be an opportunity to improve referral to cancer aftercare. Trial Registration: Netherlands Trial Register NL9226; https://trialsearch.who.int/Trial2.aspx?TrialID=NL9226

Clustering care pathways of people with alcohol dependence using a data linkage of routine data in Bremen, Germany

Estimating the prevalence of alcohol-related disorders and treatment utilization in Bremen 2016/2017 through routine data linkage

Alcohol Dependence Inpatients Classification with GLM and Hierarchical Clustering Integration Using Fmri Data of Alcohol Multiple Scenario Cues

Classifying national drinking patterns in Europe between 2000 and 2019: A clustering approach using comparable exposure data

Data linkage of German statutory health insurance claims data and care needs assessments preceding a population-based cohort study on nursing home admission

Clusters from chronic conditions in the Danish adult population

Who receives treatment for alcohol use disorders in the European Union? A cross-sectional representative study in primary and specialized health care

Hospitalization Pattern, Inpatient Service Utilization and Quality of Care in Patients with Alcohol Use Disorder: A Sequence Analysis of Discharge Medical Records.

Hierarchical associations of alcohol use disorder symptoms in late adolescence with markers during early adolescence

Identifying Comorbidity Patterns in People with and without Alzheimer's Disease Using Latent Dirichlet Allocation

Clustering functional data with application to electronic medication adherence monitoring in HIV prevention trials

Health care public reporting utilization - user clusters, web trails, and usage barriers on Germany's public reporting portal Weisse-Liste.de

Identification and Potential Use of Clusters of Patients With Colorectal Cancer and Patients With Prostate Cancer in Clinical Practice: Explorative Mixed Methods Study

Using Clustering Methods to Map the Experience Profiles of Dementia Caregivers

Unsupervised cluster analysis of clinical and metabolite characteristics in patients with chronic complications of T2DM: an observational study of real data

Dopamine D2/3 receptor availability in alcohol use disorder and individuals at high risk: Towards a dimensional approach

Interdisciplinary collaboration in the treatment of alcohol use disorders in a general hospital department: a mixed-method study

Clinical pathways analysis of patients in medical institutions based on hard and fuzzy clustering methods

Supporting alcohol brief interventions and pharmacotherapy provision in Australian First Nations primary care: exploratory analysis of a cluster randomised trial

Subgroup Identification and Interpretation with Bayesian Nonparametric Models in Health Care Claims Data