The Effect of Positive SWOG Treatment Trials on Survival of Patients With Cancer in the US Population

Population, Clinical, and Scientific Impact of National Cancer Institute's National Clinical Trials Network Treatment Studies

PURPOSE

In the United States, the National Cancer Institute National Cancer Clinical Trials Network (NCTN) groups have conducted publicly funded oncology research for 50 years. The combined impact of all adult network group trials has never been systematically examined.

METHODS

We identified randomized, phase III trials from the adult NCTN groups, reported from 1980 onward, with statistically significant findings for ≥ 1 clinical, time-dependent outcomes. In the subset of trials in which the experimental arm improved overall survival, gains in population life-years were estimated by deriving trial-specific hazard functions and hazard ratios to estimate the experimental treatment benefit and then mapping this trial-level benefit onto the US cancer population using registry and life-table data. Scientific impact was based on citation data from Google Scholar. Federal investment costs per life-year gained were estimated. The results were derived through December 31, 2020.

RESULTS

One hundred sixty-two trials comprised of 108,334 patients were analyzed, representing 29.8% (162/544) of trials conducted. The most common cancers included breast (34), gynecologic (28), and lung (14). The trials were cited 165,336 times (mean, 62.2 citations/trial/year); 87.7% of trials were cited in cancer care guidelines in favor of the recommended treatment. These studies were estimated to have generated 14.2 million (95% CI, 11.5 to 16.5 million) additional life-years to patients with cancer, with projected gains of 24.1 million (95% CI, 19.7 to 28.2 million) life-years by 2030. The federal investment cost per life-year gained through 2020 was $326 in US dollars.

CONCLUSION

NCTN randomized trials have been widely cited and are routinely included in clinical guidelines. Moreover, their conduct has predicted substantial improvements in overall survival in the United States for patients with oncologic disease, suggesting they have contributed meaningfully to this nation's health. These findings demonstrate the critical role of government-sponsored research in extending the lives of patients with cancer.

Participation of Patients With Limited English Proficiency in Gynecologic Oncology Clinical Trials

BACKGROUND

Significant disparities exist in recruitment of minorities to clinical trials, with much of the prior literature focused on race/ethnicity only. Limited English proficiency (LEP) is a known barrier in healthcare that may also drive disparities in trial enrollment. We sought to determine participation rates in gynecologic oncology trials among patients with LEP and to explore barriers to their participation.

METHODS

In a retrospective cohort study, electronic health record data from >2,700 patients treated over 2 years at one academic gynecologic oncology practice were abstracted and the primary exposure of having LEP was identified. The primary outcome was enrollment in a clinical trial. Demographic, financial, clinical, and healthcare access-related covariates were also abstracted and considered as potential confounders in a multivariable logistic regression model. Age, race, ethnicity, and insurance status were further examined for evidence of effect modification. In addition, a survey was administered to all gynecologic oncology research staff and gynecologic oncology providers (n=25) to assess barriers to research participation among patients with LEP.

RESULTS

Clinical trial enrollment was 7.5% among fluent English speakers and 2.2% among patients with LEP (risk ratio, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.11-0.78; P=.007), and remained significantly lower in patients with LEP after adjusting for the identified confounders of Hispanic ethnicity and insurance payer (odds ratio, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.12-0.97; P=.043). There was a trend toward race and LEP interaction: Asian patients were equally likely to participate in research regardless of language fluency, whereas White and Black patients with LEP were less likely to participate than non-LEP patients in both groups (P=.07). Providers reported that the most significant barriers to enrollment of patients with LEP in research were unavailability of translated consent forms and increased time needed to enroll patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with LEP were 3.4 times less likely to participate in gynecologic oncology trials than fluent English speakers. De-aggregation of race, ethnicity, and language proficiency yielded important information about enrollment disparities. These findings offer avenues for future interventions to correct disparities.

Fundamentals of Conducting Cooperative Group Trials Through the National Clinical Trials Network

This review discusses the benefits of performing multidisciplinary trials through the cooperative group mechanism, outlines the process from trial concept to activation, and discusses opportunities for surgeons to become involved in cancer cooperative trials.

Envisioning clinical trials as complex interventions

Clinical trials are critical components of modern health care and infrastructure. Trials benefit society through scientific advancement and individual patients through trial participation. In fact, billions of dollars are spent annually in support of these benefits. Despite the massive investments, clinical trials often fail to accomplish their primary aims and trial enrollment rates remain low. Prior efforts to improve trial conduct and enrollment have had limited success, perhaps due to oversimplification of the complex, multilevel nature of trials. For these reasons, the authors propose applying implementation science to the clinical trials context. In this commentary, the authors posit clinical trials as complex, multilevel evidence-based interventions with significant societal and individual benefits yet with persistent gaps in implementation. An application of implementation science concepts to the clinical trials context as means to build common vocabulary and establish a platform for applying implementation science and practice to improve clinical trial conduct is introduced. Applying implementation science to the clinical trials context can augment improvement efforts and build capacity for better and more efficient evidence-based care for all patients and trial stakeholders throughout the clinical trials enterprise.

The 50 years' war: The history and outcomes of the National Cancer Act of 1971

The National Cancer Act of 1971 instigated 50 years of momentum that raised the federal investment in cancer research from $500 million in 1972 to $6.5 billion in 2021. This investment has fueled basic, translational, and clinical research that has had a tremendous impact on our understanding of cancer and our ability to prevent, diagnose, and treat it. It has also affected many other diseases.

Effect of Clinical Trial Participation on Costs to Payers in Metastatic Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer

PURPOSE

The costs associated with clinical trial enrollment remain uncertain. We hypothesized that trial participation is associated with decreased total direct medical costs to health care payers in metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study, we linked clinical data from electronic medical records to sociodemographic data from a cancer registry and claims data from Medicare and two private insurance plans. We used a difference-in-difference analysis to estimate mean per patient per month total direct medical costs for patients enrolled on a second-line (2L) trial versus patients receiving standard-of-care 2L systemic therapy.

RESULTS

Among 70 eligible patients, the difference-in-difference of mean per patient per month total direct medical costs between 2L trial participants and nonparticipants was -$6,663 (P = .01), for a mean savings of $45,308 per patient for the duration of 2L trial therapy. In a secondary analysis by primary insurance payer, this difference-in-difference was -$5,526 (P = .26) for patients with commercial insurance and -$7,432 (P = .01) for patients with Medicare.

CONCLUSION

Participation in a 2L trial was associated with a $6,663 per month cost savings to health care payers for the duration of trial participation. Further studies are necessary to elucidate differences in cost savings from trial participation for Medicare and commercial payers. If confirmed, these results support health care payer investment in programs to improve clinical trial access and enrollment.

National Cancer Institute: Restructuring to Support the Clinical Trials of the Future

OBJECTIVES

To describe the evolution and structure of the National Cancer Institute clinical trials programs, their notable accomplishments, nurses' roles in these accomplishments, and the essential role of nursing today and in the future.

DATA SOURCES

Manuscripts, government publications, websites, and professional communications.

CONCLUSION

Change is inevitable and a constant factor in the world of advancing science and clinical research. Nurses' contribution to research and evidence-based practice will continue to grow and is vital as the scientific landscape evolves.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE

As the understanding of cancer biology increases and clinical trials evolve, nurses will need to remain key team members and leaders in National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program and National Cancer Trials Network trials and their associated infrastructure.

Association of Patient Demographic Characteristics and Insurance Status With Survival in Cancer Randomized Clinical Trials With Positive Findings

IMPORTANCE

Few new treatments tested in phase 3 cancer randomized clinical trials show an overall survival benefit. Although understanding whether the benefits are consistent among all patient groups is critical for informing guideline care, individual trials are designed to assess the benefits of experimental treatments among all patients and are too small to reliably determine whether treatment benefits apply to demographic or insurance subgroups.

OBJECTIVE

To systematically examine whether positive treatment effects in cancer randomized clinical trials apply to specific demographic or insurance subgroups.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Cohort study of pooled patient-level data from 10 804 patients in SWOG Cancer Research Network clinical treatment trials reported from 1985 onward with superior overall survival for those receiving experimental treatment. Patients were enrolled from 1984 to 2012. Maximum follow-up was 5 years.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Interaction tests were used to assess whether hazard ratios (HRs) for death comparing standard group vs experimental group treatments were associated with age (≥65 vs <65 years), race/ethnicity (minority vs nonminority populations), sex, or insurance status among patients younger than 65 years (Medicaid or no insurance vs private insurance) in multivariable Cox regression frailty models. Progression- or relapse-free survival was also examined. Data analyses were conducted from August 2019 to February 2020.

RESULTS

In total, 19 trials including 10 804 patients were identified that reported superior overall survival for patients randomized to experimental treatment. Patients were predominantly younger than 65 years (67.3%) and female (66.3%); 11.4% were black patients, and 5.7% were Hispanic patients. There was evidence of added survival benefits associated with receipt of experimental therapy for all groups except for patients with Medicaid or no insurance (HR, 1.23; 95% CI, 0.97-1.56; P = .09) compared with those with private insurance (HR, 1.66; 95% CI, 1.44-1.92; P < .001; P = .03 for interaction). Receipt of experimental treatment was associated with reduced added overall survival benefits in patients 65 years or older (HR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.11-1.32; P < .001) compared with patients younger than 65 years (HR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.30-1.53; P < .001; P = .01 for interaction), although both older and younger patients appeared to strongly benefit from receipt of experimental treatment. The progression- or relapse-free survival HRs did not differ by age, sex, or race/ethnicity but differed between patients with Medicaid or no insurance (HR, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.06-1.64; P = .01) vs private insurance (HR, 1.74; 95% CI, 1.54-1.97; P < .001; P = .03 for interaction).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Patients with Medicaid or no insurance may have smaller added benefits from experimental therapies compared with standard treatments in clinical trials. A better understanding of the quality of survivorship care that patients with suboptimal insurance receive, including supportive care and posttreatment care, could help establish how external factors may affect outcomes for these patients.

Budgeting of non-commercial clinical trials: development of a budget tool by a public funding agency

Background

Investigator-led multicentre randomised trials are essential to generate evidence on the optimal use of medical interventions. These non-commercial trials are often hampered by underfunding, which may lead to difficulties in gathering a team with the necessary expertise, a delayed trial start, slow recruitment and even early trial discontinuation. As a new public funder of pragmatic clinical trials, the KCE Trials programme was committed to correctly pay all trial activities in order to assure timely delivery of high-quality trial results. As no appropriate trial budget tool was readily publicly available that took into account the costs for the sponsor as well as the costs for participating sites, we developed a tool to make the budgeting of a clinical trial efficient, transparent and fair across applicants.

Methods

All trial-related activities of the sponsor and sites were categorised, and cost drivers were identified. All elements were included in a spreadsheet tool allowing the sponsor team to calculate in detail the various activities of a clinical trial and to appreciate the budget impact of specific cost drivers, e.g. a delay in recruitment. Hourly fees by role were adapted from published data. Fixed amounts per activity were developed when appropriate.

Results

This publicly available tool has already been used for 17 trials funded since the start of the KCE Trials programme in 2016, and it continues to be used and improved. This budget tool is used together with additional risk-reducing measures such as a multistep selection process with advance payments, a recruitment feasibility check by sponsor and funder, a close monitoring of study progress and a milestone-based payment schedule with the last payment made when the manuscript is submitted.

Conclusions

The budget tool helps the KCE Trials programme to answer relevant research questions in a timely way, within budget and with high quality, a necessary condition to achieve impact of this programme for patients, clinical practice and healthcare payers.

Current Activities of the Coalition of Cancer Cooperative Groups

The Coalition of Cancer Cooperative Groups is an organization representing the interests of patients and researchers who conduct research through the National Cancer Institute-supported National Clinical Trials Network (NCTN). The NCTN provides a crucial mechanism for executing practice-changing cancer clinical research to achieve both cancer control and development of new therapeutic agents or modality approaches. Public funding, largely through the National Cancer Institute, ensures that the work of the NCTN achieves important research that would not otherwise be accomplished in the private sector. In fall 2017, the Coalition of Cancer Cooperative Groups convened a Scientific Leadership Council to review the current state of the network with regard to research capabilities and to develop a list of research questions to be prioritized by the network. This report presents the results of this meeting, detailing a roadmap for future work by the NCTN.

Financial Toxicity and Equitable Access to Clinical Trials

Financial barriers to clinical trial enrollment are an area of active investigation. Financial toxicity as a concept describes how high costs and financial burden can lead to compromised care and outcomes. Despite the potential to yield large survival benefits and improved access to cutting-edge therapies, less than 5% of adult patients with cancer are enrolled in a clinical trial. Disparities in trial enrollment exist along age, ethnic, and sociodemographic lines, with younger, poorer, nonwhite patients with private insurance-the exact population who may be at highest risk for financial toxicity-less likely to participate. Cost and insurance concerns remain an obstacle for clinical trial enrollment for certain patient populations. Changing the clinical trial paradigm with a focus on addressing structural and clinical barriers to clinical trial enrollment is paramount. This includes expanding access to clinical trials within community populations, advocating for health policy changes to guarantee insurance coverage of clinical trial standard-of-care health care, and considering noncoercive financial assistance (particularly for indirect costs like travel and lodging) for participants to defray their additional costs of participation. Additional steps toward education, cost transparency, and expansion of foundation assistance may also improve equitable access to clinical trials for all.

Global Breast Cancer Research: Moving Forward

Breast cancer is a major global health problem and major cause of mortality. Although mortality trends are declining in high-income countries, trends are increasing in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Addressing global breast cancer research is a challenging endeavor, as notable disparities and extremely heterogeneous realities exist in different regions across the world. Basic global cancer health care needs have been addressed by the World Health Organization's (WHO) proposed list of essential medicines and by resource-stratified guidelines for screening and treatment. However, specific strategies are needed to address disparities in access to health care, particularly access to new therapies. Discussions about global research in breast cancer should take into account the ongoing globalization of clinical trials. Collaboration fostered by well-established research organizations in North America and Europe is essential for the development of infrastructure and human resources in LMICs so that researchers in these countries can begin to address regional questions. Specific challenges that impact the future of global breast cancer research include increasing the availability of trials in LMICs, developing strategies to increase patient participation in clinical trials, and creation of clear guidelines for the development of real-world evidence-based research. The main objective of this review is to encourage the discussion of challenges in global breast cancer research with the hope that collectively we will be able to generate workable proposals to advance the field.

Mechanisms and funding opportunities in genitourinary cancer clinical research

Progress in the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of genitourinary cancers is dependent on well-conducted clinical trials. The complexity and cost of clinical research continues to escalate, and success is dependent on adequate funding. Opportunities to fund such research include federal, industry, and private sources. The mechanisms whereby larger trials are conducted include contract research organizations, publically- and privately funded consortia, and the National Clinical Trials Network of the National Cancer Institute. The National Clinical Trials Network is the prime venue for investigators to conduct independent, phase III trials in the United States.

Decreased early mortality associated with the treatment of acute myeloid leukemia at National Cancer Institute-designated cancer centers in California

BACKGROUND

To the authors' knowledge, few population-based studies to date have evaluated the association between location of care, complications with induction therapy, and early mortality in patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML).

METHODS

Using linked data from the California Cancer Registry and Patient Discharge Dataset (1999-2014), the authors identified adult (aged ≥18 years) patients with AML who received inpatient treatment within 30 days of diagnosis. A propensity score was created for treatment at a National Cancer Institute-designated cancer center (NCI-CC). Inverse probability-weighted, multivariable logistic regression models were used to determine associations between location of care, complications, and early mortality (death ≤60 days from diagnosis).

RESULTS

Of the 7007 patients with AML, 1762 (25%) were treated at an NCI-CC. Patients with AML who were treated at NCI-CCs were more likely to be aged ≤65 years, live in higher socioeconomic status neighborhoods, have fewer comorbidities, and have public health insurance. Patients treated at NCI-CCs had higher rates of renal failure (23% vs 20%; P = .010) and lower rates of respiratory failure (11% vs 14%; P = .003) and cardiac arrest (1% vs 2%; P = .014). After adjustment for baseline characteristics, treatment at an NCI-CC was associated with lower early mortality (odds ratio, 0.46; 95% confidence interval, 0.38-0.57). The impact of complications on early mortality did not differ by location of care except for higher early mortality noted among patients with respiratory failure treated at non-NCI-CCs.

CONCLUSIONS

The initial treatment of adult patients with AML at NCI-CCs is associated with a 53% reduction in the odds of early mortality compared with treatment at non-NCI-CCs. Lower early mortality may result from differences in hospital or provider experience and supportive care. Cancer 2018;124:1938-45. © 2018 American Cancer Society.