Prospective assessment of the reliability, validity, and sensitivity to change of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Melanoma questionnaire

Adaptation and study protocol for harvest for health together Arizona: A mentored community garden intervention for survivors of cancer

Background

Current health behavior recommendations for skin cancer prevention, treatment, and survivorship are the same for survivors of other cancers; they include eating a healthy diet, being physically active, maintaining a healthy weight, and minimizing ultraviolet (U.V.) exposure. Few interventions exist to support health behaviors beyond U.V. exposure. We adapted Harvest for Health, a home-based mentored gardening intervention for cancer survivors, for implementation in Arizona as a community-based intervention.

Methods

Stakeholder-informed adaptations for Harvest for Health Together Arizona (H4H2-AZ) included updating intervention materials to be relevant to the arid desert environment, emphasizing the importance of sun safety in cancer survivorship, and shifting from a home-based to a community-based delivery model. Participants will be enrolled in cohorts aligned with growing seasons (e.g., spring, monsoon, fall) and matched to an individual 30 ft2 community garden plot for two growing seasons (6 months). Original intervention components retained are: 1) Master Gardeners deliver the intervention providing one-to-one mentorship and 2) gardening materials and supplies provided. This pilot six-month single-arm intervention will determine feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness of an evidence-based adapted mentored community gardening intervention for survivors of skin cancer as primary outcomes. Secondary outcomes are to explore the effects on cancer preventive health behaviors and health-related quality of life.

Discussion

This pilot single-arm intervention will determine feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness of an evidence-based adapted mentored community gardening intervention for survivors of skin cancer. If successful, the intervention could be widely implemented throughout existing Master Gardener programs and community garden networks for survivors of other cancers.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05648604. Trial registered on December 13, 2022.

The Symptom Experience of Patients with Advanced Melanoma Undergoing Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor (ICI) Therapy

OBJECTIVES

The advent of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy has vastly improved outcomes for patients with advanced melanoma. However, the symptom burden and intensity with their impact on quality-of-life (HRQoL) and functionality are heterogeneous and unpredictable. We used descriptive exploratory content analysis from interviews to capture the patient experience after they had completed quantitative data collection of their symptom burden and interference with the use of two patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments.

DATA SOURCES

Participants from a single center with advanced melanoma (n = 19) who are undergoing ICI therapy completed the Modified MD Anderson Symptom Inventory and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Melanoma and recorded semistructured interviews. Interpretive description informed the inductive and iterative analysis approach.

CONCLUSION

Participants had a heterogenous experience of ICI and melanoma-related symptoms: distress (84%), fatigue (68%), rash or skin changes (53%), pain (30%), diarrhea (30%), itching (26%), and shortness of breath (21%), with varying interference within HRQoL domains, mood (47%), relations with other people (26%), and activity (21%). Some noted a lack of physical interference (79%). Uncertainty was a pervasive theme in the interviews (68%) despite the majority having positive thoughts about ICI therapy (58%) and expectations of the success of therapy (53%). The physical and emotional burden of a melanoma diagnosis, undergoing therapy, and the uncertainty of the outcomes are pervasive for patients.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE

Communication surrounding the diagnosis, prognosis, treatment options, and outcomes need to be clear and acknowledge there are unknowns. Nurses may benefit from using a validated PRO instrument to help document and understand the patient's symptom experience while undergoing ICI therapy.

Real-world outcomes with immuno-oncology therapies in advanced melanoma: final results of the OPTIMIzE registry study

Aim: The OPTIMIzE registry study evaluated real-world outcomes in patients with advanced melanoma receiving immuno-oncology therapies. Materials and methods: Data were collected for patients treated with anti-programmed death 1 (PD-1) monotherapy (nivolumab or pembrolizumab; n = 147) or nivolumab plus ipilimumab (n = 81) from 2015-2017 and followed for ≥3 years. Results: Nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus anti-PD-1 monotherapy was associated with a nonsignificantly lower risk of death (adjusted HR: 0.83; 95% CI: 0.54-1.28; p = 0.41), higher disease control rate (72 vs 56%; p = 0.04), and stable quality of life, but more grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events (54 vs 26%; p < 0.0001). Conclusion: These results support the use of immuno-oncology therapy in advanced melanoma.

Impact of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Therapy on Quality of Life in Patients With Advanced Melanoma: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) were approved to treat advanced melanoma (AM) because of meaningful clinical benefit. These early data reported that ICI therapy is generally well tolerated, and despite symptoms, patients reported a high global health-related quality of life (HRQOL).

OBJECTIVE

Immune checkpoint inhibitors are widely used in the oncology community; the aim of this systematic review was to evaluate current data on ICI therapy and its impact on HRQOL of patients with AM.

METHODS

The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed during this systematic review to identify and select studies from the PubMed, OVID, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases. Selected studies were downloaded into Covidence and analyzed for trends in how ICI therapy impacts HRQOL in patients with AM. Multiple tools were used to assess the quality of the studies.

RESULTS

The 16 studies included 12 quantitative, 2 qualitative, and 2 mixed-methods studies. The quality of the studies was moderate (n = 7) or strong (n = 9). Symptoms that impacted HRQOL were fatigue, endocrine dysfunction, rash, diarrhea, cognitive impairment, emotional impact (anxiety and depression), and financial toxicity. Suicidal ideation and 1 attempt were reported in 2 studies, which had not been previously published.

CONCLUSION

Patient-reported symptoms due to ICI negatively impacted HRQOL. Anxiety and depression are prevalent. Current QOL instruments do not capture the entire patient experience.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Patients need to be asked if their symptoms are impacting their HRQOL. Further prospective research is needed to develop or adjust current patient-reported outcome instruments to adequately capture the impact of ICIs on HRQOL.

Real-World Effectiveness, Safety, and Health-Related Quality of Life in Patients Receiving Adjuvant Nivolumab for Melanoma in Belgium and Luxembourg: Results of PRESERV MEL

BACKGROUND

Nivolumab, an anti-programmed cell death 1 immuno-oncology therapy, is approved as an adjuvant treatment for patients with completely resected stage III or stage IV melanoma. PRESERV MEL (Prospective and REtrospective Study of nivolumab thERapy in adjuVant MELanoma) is a real-world observational study evaluating the effectiveness and safety of adjuvant nivolumab in patients with completely resected stage III or stage IV melanoma in clinical practice in Belgium and Luxembourg.

METHODS

Patients were enrolled prospectively and retrospectively during a 2-year period (January 2019-January 2021), and will be followed for 5 years. The results reported here are for the second interim analysis (cutoff date 31 December 2021). The index date was the date of first administration of adjuvant nivolumab. Patients received nivolumab for up to 12 months per label. Outcomes included relapse-free survival (RFS), adverse events (AEs)/treatment-related AEs (TRAEs), and health-related quality of life (HRQoL; assessed in prospectively enrolled patients using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire C30 (EORTC QLQ-C30), Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Melanoma (FACT-M), and EQ-5D-3L instruments). HRQoL was evaluated at group level (mean change in scores from baseline based on minimally important differences) and individual patient level (percentage of patients with clinically important scores based on threshold of clinical importance). Outcomes were analyzed descriptively.

RESULTS

The study enrolled 152 patients (125 prospective, 27 retrospective) at 15 hospitals in Belgium and Luxembourg. Minimum potential follow-up at time of analysis was 11.4 months. Median age was 60 years (range 29-85), and 53% of patients were male. At 12 and 18 months, the RFS rates were 74.7% (95% confidence interval (CI): 66.9-80.9) and 68.4% (95% CI: 60.0-75.5), respectively. Median RFS was not reached. Grade 3 or 4 TRAEs were reported in 14% of patients. AEs led to treatment discontinuation in 23% of patients. Deaths occurred in 3% of patients and were not related to treatment. Questionnaire completion rates for HRQoL were high at baseline (90-94%) and at 24 months (78-81%). In the group-level analysis for HRQoL, mean changes in scores from baseline remained stable and did not exceed prespecified thresholds for minimally important differences during and after treatment, except for a clinically meaningful improvement in FACT-M surgery subscale scores. In the individual patient-level analysis for EORTC QLQ-C30 subscales, the percentages of patients who reported clinically relevant scores for fatigue and cognitive impairment increased during treatment (at 9 months) compared with baseline. After treatment cessation (at 18 months), the percentage of patients who reported clinically relevant scores for fatigue decreased. However, the percentages of patients who reported clinically relevant scores for emotional, cognitive, and social impairment increased at 18 months compared with during treatment. Most patients with emotional impairment at 9 and 18 months did not experience disease recurrence (91% and 89%, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

These results confirm the real-world effectiveness and safety of nivolumab as an adjuvant treatment for patients with completely resected stage III or stage IV melanoma. Cancer-specific, disease-specific, and generic HRQoL were maintained during and after treatment. The percentage of patients reporting emotional and cognitive impairment increased after treatment cessation, emphasizing the need for further investigation and tailored supportive care in these patients.

A systematic review of patient-reported outcome measures for advanced skin cancer patients

Many patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have been used to study quality of life (QOL) in the skin cancer population. Advanced melanoma and non-melanoma skin cancer (NMSC) may be associated with increased morbidity, mortality, and treatment side effects; however, it is unclear which PROM is valid and appropriate to use in these populations for both clinical and research purposes. We aimed to identify the PROMs that have been used to measure QOL in advanced skin cancer patients and determine which of these PROMs have been validated to assess QOL outcomes in this population. A PubMed and EMBASE search was conducted from its inception to March 2021 according to PRISMA guidelines with a comprehensive list of search terms under three main topics: (1) PROM; (2) advanced skin cancer; and (3) staging and interventions. We included articles utilizing a PROM measuring QOL and having a patient population with advanced skin cancer defined as melanoma stage > T1a or non-melanoma AJCC stage T3 or greater. Advanced skin cancer patients were also defined as those with metastasis or requiring adjuvant therapy (systemic chemotherapy, radiation, and immunotherapy). Studies were excluded according to the following criteria: mix of low-risk and advanced skin cancer patients in the study population without stratification into low-risk and advanced groups, stage T1a melanoma or mix of stages without stratification, low-risk NMSC, no PROM (i.e., study specific questionnaires), non-English publication, review article or protocol paper, conference abstract, or populations including non-skin cancers. A total of 1,998 articles were identified. 82 met our inclusion criteria resulting in 22 PROMs: five generic health-related (QWB-SA, AQoL-8D, EQ-5D, SF-36, and PRISM), six general cancer (EORTC QLQ-C30, EORTC QLQ-C36, LASA, IOC, Rotterdam Symptom Checklist, and FACT-G), nine disease-focused or specialized (EORTC QLQ-H&N35, EORTC QLQ-MEL38, EORTC QLQ-BR23, Facial Disability Index, FACT-H&N, FACT-BRM, FACT-B, FACT-M, and scqolit), and two general dermatology (Skindex-16 and DLQI) PROMs. All PROMs have been generally validated except for EORTC QLQ-MEL38. Only two PROMs have been validated in the advanced melanoma population: FACT-M and EORTC QLQ-C36. No PROMS have been validated in the advanced NMSC population. The PROMs that were validated in the advanced melanoma population do not include QOL issues unique to advanced skin tumors such as odor, bleeding, itching, wound care burden, and public embarrassment. Breast cancer and head and neck cancer instruments were adapted but not validated for use in the advanced skin cancer population due to the lack of an adequate instrument for this population. This study highlights the need for PROM instrument validation or creation specifically geared toward the advanced skin cancer population. Future studies should aim to develop and validate a PROM to assess QOL in this population.

Health-related quality of life with nivolumab plus relatlimab versus nivolumab monotherapy in patients with previously untreated unresectable or metastatic melanoma: RELATIVITY-047 trial

BACKGROUND

In the phase II/III RELATIVITY-047 trial, a novel fixed-dose combination (FDC) of nivolumab plus relatlimab (NIVO + RELA; a programmed death-1 and a lymphocyte-activation gene 3 inhibitor, respectively) significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) versus NIVO in patients with previously untreated unresectable or metastatic melanoma (median follow-up, 13.2 months) with stable health-related quality of life (HRQoL), although grade three or four treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were more frequent with the combination. Updated HRQoL results (median follow-up, 19.3 months) are presented.

METHODS

Patients were randomised to receive intravenous NIVO + RELA (480 mg and 160 mg, respectively) or NIVO (480 mg) every 4 weeks. HRQoL was assessed using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Treatment-Melanoma (FACT-M) and EQ-5D-3L questionnaires at baseline, before dosing at each treatment cycle, and at follow-up (posttreatment) visits.

RESULTS

Consistent with the initial analysis, HRQoL remained stable with NIVO + RELA on treatment and was similar to that with NIVO. Mean changes from baseline did not exceed clinically meaningful thresholds. HRQoL results were consistent across instruments and scales/subscales. Despite an increased rate of grade three or four TRAEs with NIVO + RELA versus NIVO, the proportion of patients reporting that they were bothered 'quite a bit' or 'very much' by TRAEs was low and comparable between treatments.

CONCLUSION

Results from the RELATIVITY-047 trial show that the PFS benefit with NIVO + RELA FDC over NIVO was obtained with stable patient-reported HRQoL, supporting NIVO + RELA as a first-line treatment option for patients with advanced melanoma.

Description of supportive care and feasibility of physical exercise program to improve quality of life in advanced melanoma patients

Physical activity is the first-line treatment of cancer-related fatigue. It has shown benefits on patient's quality of life (QoL) when practiced during and after treatment. New treatments have drastically changed the prognosis of melanoma. Still, few data are available about research program of supportive care in advanced melanoma. The primary outcome was to assess the feasibility of setting up a prospective study evaluating the benefits of Adapted Physical Activity (APA) on the QoL of patients with advanced melanoma. Feasibility was defined with a combination of five criteria including completion of questionnaire, recruitment, participant retention, patient adhesion to supportive care, and absence of adverse event. Between September 2019 and March 2021, 271 melanoma patients were questioned. Around 60% of stage IV melanoma patients were interested in support care. Patient retention at 3 months was sufficient. Only one patient could not be evaluated after 3 months of enrolment because of deterioration of the general state. Adhesion to exercise and sessions was good. Supervised APA program appeared to be safe and well tolerated as no adverse events or discontinuations were reported. Setting up a prospective research program evaluating the benefits of physical activity in advanced melanoma patients seems feasible. With melanoma becoming a chronic disease, supportive care may reduce fatigue, improve QoL and help maintain a healthy lifestyle. Data supporting its benefits on this survivor population are needed.

Decision-Making and Health-Related Quality of Life in Patients with Melanoma Considering Adjuvant Immunotherapy

BACKGROUND

Adjuvant anti-PD1 treatment improves relapse-free survival (RFS) but has not been shown to improve overall survival (OS) in melanoma and is associated with risks of immune-related adverse events (irAEs), some permanent. We identified factors patients consider in deciding whether to undergo adjuvant anti-PD1 treatment and assessed prospective health-related quality of life (HRQoL), treatment satisfaction, and decisional regret.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with stage IIIB-IV cutaneous melanoma and free of disease, were candidates for adjuvant anti-PD1 immunotherapy, and had not yet discussed adjuvant treatment options with their oncologist were eligible. Participants viewed a 4-minute informational video tailored to their disease stage which communicated comprehensive, quantitative information about the risk of relapse both with and without adjuvant treatment, and risks of each irAE before deciding whether or not to opt for adjuvant therapy. We collected data on demographics, HRQoL, and attitudes toward adjuvant treatment over 1 year.

RESULTS

14/34 patients (41%) opted for adjuvant anti-PD1 immunotherapy, 20/34 (59%) opted for observation. Patients choosing adjuvant immunotherapy scored higher on HRQoL social well-being at pre-treatment, were more likely to endorse positive statements about adjuvant immunotherapy, and to perceive that their physician preferred adjuvant therapy. They had lower decisional regret and higher satisfaction, even if they experienced toxicity or recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

When provided with comprehensive quantitative information about risks and benefits of adjuvant anti-PD1 immunotherapy, 20/34 (59%) of patients opted for observation. Patients choosing adjuvant immunotherapy had lower decisional regret and higher satisfaction over time even if they had poorer outcomes in treatment.

Tumor Burden and Health-Related Quality of Life in Patients with Melanoma In-Transit Metastases

BACKGROUND

Few studies have investigated the health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in patients with melanoma in-transit metastases (ITM). The aim was to investigate the association between tumor burden and HRQOL, including disparities pertaining to sex and age, in treatment-naïve patients with ITM.

METHODS

Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Melanoma (FACT-M) questionnaire was used to assess HRQOL Pairwise comparisons using t-tests between clinical cutoffs are presented and multiple linear regression analysis showing the unique associations of gender, age, number of tumors, tumor size, presence of lymph node metastases, and tumor localization.

RESULTS

A total of 95 patients, 47% females and 53% males (median age 72 years) were included between 2012 and 2021. Women scored significantly lower on emotional well-being (p = 0.038) and lower on FACT-M (p = 0.058). Patients who had ≥10 tumors scored significantly lower on FACT-M (p = 0.015), emotional- and functional well-being (p = 0.04, p = 0.004, respectively), melanoma scale (p = 0.005), and FACT-G (p = 0.027). There was no significant difference in HRQOL depending on age, size of tumors, localization, or presence of lymph node metastases.

CONCLUSION

For patients with melanoma ITMs, the female sex and higher tumor burden (i.e., number of tumors) were significantly correlated with lower HRQOL. However, these findings do not fully explain HRQOL for this patient population, and future research should consider the possibility that there are specific questions for patients with ITM where current instruments might fail to measure their discomfort to the full extent.

Impact of patient-reported outcomes on symptom monitoring during treatment with checkpoint inhibitors: health-related quality of life among melanoma patients in a randomized controlled trial

Introduction

In a randomized controlled trial, we previously investigated if melanoma patients receiving checkpoint inhibitors had fewer severe immune-related adverse events (irAEs) when they reported symptoms using electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePRO) with triggered alerts as an add-on to standard care, compared to standard care alone. The aim of this study is to examine between-group differences in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and associations between irAEs severity and HRQoL.

Methods

The study population of 138 patients completed the EuroQol EQ-5D-5L Index and FACT-M questionnaires at baseline and weeks 24 and 48. We analyzed HRQoL from all patients who completed at least one questionnaire. Missing FACT-M items were imputed following existing guidelines.

Results

There was no difference in HRQoL at baseline as measured EQ-5D-5L between the intervention and the control group. Between baseline and 48 weeks, mean EQ-5D-5L scores were unchanged among patients in the intervention group (p = 0.81) but decreased significantly among patients in the control group (p = 0.03). Consequently, patients in the intervention group had higher mean scores than those in the control group (p = 0.05) at 48 weeks. Mean FACT-M scores did not differ significantly between the two groups at any of the time points. There were observed no between-group differences in mean EQ-5D-5 and mean FACT-M scores between patients with severe irAEs and patients who had none.

Conclusion

Melanoma patients receiving CPIs who self-reported irAEs using ePRO with triggered alerts as a supplement to standard care maintained their HRQoL compared to patients who received standard care alone. Patients in the intervention group had a significantly better HRQoL measured by EQ-5D-5L than controls 48 weeks after baseline. The results suggest that including ePRO in standard care increases melanoma patients´ well-being. Further and larger studies are needed to confirm this finding and examine the impact of severe irAEs on cancer patients’ HRQoL.

Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT03073031 Registered 8 March 2017, Retrospectively registeredhttps://clinicaltrials.gov/.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s41687-022-00414-5.

Relatlimab and Nivolumab versus Nivolumab in Untreated Advanced Melanoma

BACKGROUND

Lymphocyte-activation gene 3 (LAG-3) and programmed death 1 (PD-1) are distinct inhibitory immune checkpoints that contribute to T-cell exhaustion. The combination of relatlimab, a LAG-3-blocking antibody, and nivolumab, a PD-1-blocking antibody, has been shown to be safe and to have antitumor activity in patients with previously treated melanoma, but the safety and activity in patients with previously untreated melanoma need investigation.

METHODS

In this phase 2-3, global, double-blind, randomized trial, we evaluated relatlimab and nivolumab as a fixed-dose combination as compared with nivolumab alone when administered intravenously every 4 weeks to patients with previously untreated metastatic or unresectable melanoma. The primary end point was progression-free survival as assessed by blinded independent central review.

RESULTS

The median progression-free survival was 10.1 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 6.4 to 15.7) with relatlimab-nivolumab as compared with 4.6 months (95% CI, 3.4 to 5.6) with nivolumab (hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.62 to 0.92]; P = 0.006 by the log-rank test). Progression-free survival at 12 months was 47.7% (95% CI, 41.8 to 53.2) with relatlimab-nivolumab as compared with 36.0% (95% CI, 30.5 to 41.6) with nivolumab. Progression-free survival across key subgroups favored relatlimab-nivolumab over nivolumab. Grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 18.9% of patients in the relatlimab-nivolumab group and in 9.7% of patients in the nivolumab group.

CONCLUSIONS

The inhibition of two immune checkpoints, LAG-3 and PD-1, provided a greater benefit with regard to progression-free survival than inhibition of PD-1 alone in patients with previously untreated metastatic or unresectable melanoma. Relatlimab and nivolumab in combination showed no new safety signals. (Funded by Bristol Myers Squibb; RELATIVITY-047 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03470922.).

Effect of patient-reported outcomes as a dialogue-based tool in cancer consultations on patient self-management and health-related quality of life: a clinical, controlled trial

BACKGROUND

With increased survival among patients with metastatic melanoma and limited time with health care providers, patients are expected to assume a more active role in managing their treatment and care. Activated patients have the knowledge, skills, and confidence to make effective solutions to self-manage health. The use of patient-reported outcomes (PRO) could have the potential to enhance patient activation. However, PRO-based interventions that facilitate an activation in patients with metastatic melanoma are lacking and warranted.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In this prospective non-randomized controlled, clinical trial, patients with metastatic melanoma were assigned to either the intervention (systematic feedback and discussion of PRO during consultation) given at one hospital or the control group (treatment as usual) if they received treatment from two other hospitals in Denmark. The primary outcome was the patient activation measure (PAM), which reflects self-management. Secondary outcomes were health-related quality of life (HRQoL), self-efficacy, and Patient-Physician interaction. Outcomes were measured at baseline, and after 3, 6, and 12 months. The analysis of the effect from baseline to 12 months employed mixed-effects modeling.

RESULTS

Between 2017 and 2019, patients were allocated to either the intervention group (n = 137) or the control group (n = 142). We found no significant difference in the course of patient activation between the two groups over time. The course of HRQoL was statistically significantly improved by the intervention compared to the control group. Especially, females in the intervention group performed better than males. The other secondary outcomes were not improved by the intervention.

CONCLUSION

The intervention did not improve knowledge, skills, and confidence for self-management for patients with metastatic melanoma. Neither did it improve coping self-efficacy nor perceived efficacy in Patient-Physician interaction. However, the results suggest that the intervention can have a significant impact on HRQoL and in particular social and emotional well-being among the females.

Health-related quality of life using the FACT-M questionnaire in patients with malignant melanoma: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Since there are no formal definition of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) there may be a lack of coherence and understanding of how to interpret HRQOL-data. The aim of this study is to summarize HRQOL-results that have used the FACT-M questionnaire in patients with melanoma, and specifically to summarize FACT-M between tumor stage.

METHODS

This review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

original studies on cutaneous melanoma between 2005 and 2020, written in English, containing "Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy Melanoma" OR "Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy M" OR FACT-M OR FACT/M OR FACTM OR "FACT M" OR FACT-melanoma OR "FACT Melanoma" together with FACT-M numbered data and basic patient characteristics, using the databases Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed and PsycINFO.

RESULTS

16 articles describing 14 patient cohorts published 2008-2020 were included. The majority of the studies did not report subscale scores in accordance with FACT-M guidelines. The results did indicate that FACT-M total scores were inversely correlated with AJCC stage. Subscale analysis demonstrated varying degrees of correlation with AJCC stage. The Melanoma Surgery Subscale score was lowest in stage III patients, probably reflecting more advanced surgical procedures in this group of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Though this review is based on a questionnaire limited to the assessment of melanoma patients, it highlights the universal need for clinical studies to describe their selected HRQOL-questionnaires, its definition of HRQOL and its dimensions, as well as comply with the questionnaire's guidelines when reporting HRQOL-data.

Functional assessment of cancer therapy questionnaire for melanoma in the Serbian population: A factor analytic approach

The aim of this study was to examine the psychometric properties of the Functional Assessment Cancer Therapy—Melanoma (FACT-M) questionnaire in the Serbian language. The FACT-M was translated into Serbian using the standard methodology after obtaining the licence from the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT) translation project team. This version of FACT-M was distributed to a cohort of consecutive patients with histologically confirmed high-risk skin melanoma treated at the tertiary referral center. To examine construct validity of the FACT-M in Serbian, we performed exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). The FACT-General (FACT-G) did not fit the original 4-domain structure. Instead, we accepted a 7-domain structure which, aside from physical, emotional, social and functional well-being, had domains of ‘friends’ support’, ‘illness acceptance’ and ‘fear of death’. Melanoma scale (MS) and Melanoma surgery scale (MSS) did not fit the original one-dimensional structure. The MS was observed to have 4 domains: ‘pain’, ‘skin problems’, ‘abdominal metastases’ and ‘other problems’. The MSS was observed to have 2 domains: ‘having symptoms’ and ‘no symptoms’. It is suggested that the FACT-M questionnaire is analyzed using the newly extracted domains to examine quality of life of people with high-risk melanoma in Serbia.

Quality of life in patients with BRAF-mutant melanoma receiving the combination encorafenib plus binimetinib: Results from a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase III study (COLUMBUS)

BACKGROUND

In COLUMBUS, treatment with encorafenib plus binimetinib in patients with advanced BRAF-mutant melanoma showed improved progression-free and overall survival with favourable tolerability compared to vemurafenib treatment. Here, results on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) are presented.

METHODS

COLUMBUS was a two-part, open-label, randomised, phase III study in patients with BRAF-mutant melanoma. In PART-I, 577 patients were randomised (1:1:1) to encorafenib plus binimetinib, encorafenib or vemurafenib. The primary objective was to assess progression-free survival. As a secondary objective, HRQoL was assessed by the EQ-5D, the EORTC QLQ-C30 and the FACT-M questionnaires. Furthermore, time to definitive 10% deterioration was estimated with a Kaplan-Meier analysis and differences in mean scores between groups were calculated with a mixed-effect model for repeated measures. Hospitalisation rate and the impact of hospitalisation on HRQoL were also assessed.

RESULTS

Patients receiving the combination treatment showed improvement of their FACT-M and EORTC QLQ-C30 global health status scores, compared to those receiving vemurafenib (post-baseline score differences: 3.03 [p < 0.0001] for FACT M and 5.28 [p = 0.0042] for EORTC QLQ-C30), indicative of a meaningful change in patient's status. Furthermore, a delay in the deterioration of QoL was observed in non-hospitalised patients compared to hospitalised patients (hazard ratio [95% CI]: 1.16 [0.80; 1.68] for EORTC QLQ-C30 and 1.27 [0.81; 1.99] for FACT-M) and a risk reduction of 10% deterioration, favoured the combination in both groups.

CONCLUSION

The improved efficacy of encorafenib plus binimetinib compared to vemurafenib, translates into a positive impact on the perceived health status as assessed by the HRQoL questionnaires. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01909453 and EudraCT number 2013-001176-38.

Unemployment and Health-Related Quality of Life in Melanoma Patients During the COVID-19 Pandemic

The outbreak of coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) ineluctably caused social distancing and unemployment, which may bring additional health risks for patients with cancer. To investigate the association of the pandemic-related impacts with the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) among patients with melanoma during the COVID-19 pandemic, we conducted a cross-sectional study among Chinese patients with melanoma. A self-administered online questionnaire was distributed to melanoma patients through social media. Demographic and clinical data, and pandemic-related impacts (unemployment and income loss) were collected. HRQoL was determined by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) and its disease-specific module (the melanoma subscale, MS). A total of 135 patients with melanoma completed the study. The mean age of the patients was 55.8 ± 14.2 years, 48.1% (65/135) were male, and 17.04% (34/135) were unemployed since the epidemic. Unemployment of the patients and their family members and income loss were significantly associated with a lower FACT-G score, while the MS score was associated with the unemployment of the patients' family members. Our findings suggested that unemployment is associated with impaired HRQoL in melanoma patients during the COVID-19 epidemic.

Implementation of patient-reported outcome measures and patient-reported experience measures in melanoma clinical quality registries: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

To identify patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) in clinical quality registries, for people with cutaneous melanoma, to inform a new Australian Melanoma Clinical Outcomes Registry; and describe opportunities and challenges of routine PROM/PREM collection, especially in primary care.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Which PROMs and PREMs are used in clinical quality registries for people with cutaneous melanoma, how they are collected, frequency of collection, participant recruitment methods and funding models for each registry.

RESULTS

1134 studies were identified from MEDLINE, PreMEDLINE, Embase, PsychInfo, Cochrane Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects databases and TUFTS Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry, alongside grey literature, from database inception to 5th February 2020. Following screening, 14 studies were included, identifying four relevant registries: Dutch Melanoma Registry, Adelphi Real-World Disease-Specific Programme (Melanoma), Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Initial treatment and Long-term Evaluation of Survivorship Registry, and Cancer Experience Registry. These used seven PROMs: EuroQol-5 Dimensions, Functional Assessment of Cancer-General (FACT-G) and FACT-Melanoma (FACT-M), European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Cancer 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30), Fatigue Assessment Scale Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Information System-29 and one PREM; EORTC QLQ-Information Module 26. PROMs/PREMs in registries were reported to improve transparency of care; facilitate clinical auditing for quality assessment; enable cost-effectiveness analyses and create large-scale research platforms. Challenges included resource burden for data entry and potential collection bias toward younger, more affluent respondents. Feedback from patients with melanoma highlighted the relevance of PROMs/PREMs in assessing patient outcomes and patient experiences.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical registries indicate PROMs/PREMs for melanoma care can be incorporated and address important gaps, however cost and collection bias may limit generalisability.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42018086737.

Psychosocial distress in patients with cutaneous melanoma: validation of the Skin Cancer Index (SCI)

PURPOSE

The aim of this study is to examine the factor structure and psychometric properties of the Skin Cancer Index (SCI) in a sample of patients with melanoma.

METHODS

This study uses data from an observational study with longitudinal follow-up examining predictors of skin self-examination in melanoma patients from Montréal, Canada. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) were used to investigate the factor structure of the 15-item SCI scale. Correlations with other psychosocial measures of anxiety and depression, fear of cancer recurrence, quality of life, and emotional well-being were computed to examine construct validity.

RESULTS

EFA results with 241 participants revealed a two-factor structure with acceptable fit and no significant cross-loadings. CFA results with a subsample of 173 participants examining the two-factor structure and second-order structure found equivalent fit for the two solutions. Cronbach's alpha for the total scale score and both subscales was high. Both factors showed positive associations with measures of anxiety and depression and fear of cancer and negative associations with quality of life and emotional well-being.

CONCLUSION

Our study suggests that the SCI functions as a reliable two-factor scale assessing emotional and social distress in patients with melanoma, with the total SCI score assessing overall psychosocial distress.

Health-related quality of life of long-term advanced melanoma survivors treated with anti-CTLA-4 immune checkpoint inhibition compared to matched controls

BACKGROUND

Checkpoint inhibitors have changed overall survival for patients with advanced melanoma. However, there is a lack of data on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of long-term advanced melanoma survivors, years after treatment. Therefore, we evaluated HRQoL in long-term advanced melanoma survivors and compared the study outcomes with matched controls without cancer.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Ipilimumab-treated advanced melanoma survivors without evidence of disease and without subsequent systemic therapy for a minimum of two years following last administration of ipilimumab were eligible for this study. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer quality of life questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30), the Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory (MFI), the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Melanoma questionnaire (FACT-M) were administered. Controls were individually matched for age, gender, and educational status. Outcomes of survivors and controls were compared using generalized estimating equations, and differences were interpreted as clinically relevant according to published guidelines.

RESULTS

A total of 89 survivors and 265 controls were analyzed in this study. After a median follow-up of 39 (range, 17-121) months, survivors scored significantly lower on physical (83.7 vs. 89.8, difference (diff) = -5.80, p=.005), role (83.5 vs. 90, diff = -5.97, p=.02), cognitive (83.7 vs. 91.9, diff = -8.05, p=.001), and social functioning (86.5 vs. 95.1, diff = -8.49, p= <.001) and had a higher symptom burden of fatigue (23.0 vs. 15.5, diff = 7.48, p=.004), dyspnea (13.3 vs. 6.7, diff = 6.47 p=.02), diarrhea (7.9 vs. 4.0, diff = 3.78, p=.04), and financial impact (10.5 vs. 2.5, diff = 8.07, p=.001) than matched controls. Group differences were indicated as clinically relevant.

DISCUSSION

Compared to matched controls, long-term advanced melanoma survivors had overall worse functioning scores, more physical symptoms, and financial difficulties. These data may contribute to the development of appropriate survivorship care.

Update on the psychometric properties and minimal important difference (MID) thresholds of the FACT-M questionnaire for use in treatment-naïve and previously treated patients with metastatic Merkel cell carcinoma

OBJECTIVES

For valid and reliable assessment of patients' Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL), it is crucial to use psychometrically robust instruments. In the context of rare diseases such as Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC), validated disease-specific instruments are often not available. The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Melanoma (FACT-M) was originally developed for use in melanoma. Its psychometric performance for use in MCC and minimal important difference (MID) thresholds have been previously reported based on a cohort of metastatic MCC patients who had disease progression following one or more prior line of chemotherapy (NCT02155647 Part A; n = 70). Since then, new data from the phase II JAVELIN Merkel 200 trial among treatment-naïve patients are available (NCT02155647 Part B; n = 102). This study aims to increase accuracy and precision of previously established psychometric properties and MID thresholds of FACT-M in metastatic MCC patients.

METHODS

Published qualitative research suggests that patients with metastatic MCC had similar experiences and described similar concepts associated with their disease independent of whether they were treatment naïve or had prior treatment. Therefore, it was deemed appropriate to pool FACT-M data from Part A (previously treated) and Part B (treatment-naïve) cohorts for this study. Construct validity was assessed by evaluating item-factor correlations (convergent validity) and known-groups validity using ECOG performance status 0 versus 1. Concurrent validity was assessed using EQ-5D items. Internal consistency reliability was assessed using Cronbach's α. Anchor- and distribution-based approaches were used to derive MID thresholds.

RESULTS

Overall, psychometric tests based on various validity (convergent, known-groups, concurrent) and reliability (Cronbach α) analyses confirmed previous findings in that FACT-M performs well in MCC patients. MID thresholds derived from this study are largely in line with previously established thresholds with some minor adjustments.

CONCLUSIONS

In the context of rare diseases, which often have limited data available for psychometric testing, a reasonably large MCC patient sample was available for this study, enhancing accuracy and precision of previously established FACT-M psychometric properties and MID thresholds with only small deviations for use in metastatic MCC patients. Results suggest that the FACT-M is suitable for Merkel cell carcinoma regardless of patients' treatment status.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study is a pre-planned post-hoc analysis conducted on data collected in Part A and Part B of the JAVELIN Merkel 200 trial. This trial was registered on 2 June 2014 with ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT02155647.

Psychometric Properties of EQ-5D-5L Scoring Algorithms for the United Kingdom in Metastatic Merkel Cell Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Currently, there are 4 EQ-5D-5L scoring algorithms available for the United Kingdom that can be used to derive a utility score.

OBJECTIVES

To perform a psychometric validation of the EQ-5D utility score in patients with metastatic Merkel cell carcinoma (mMCC) and to compare 4 EQ-5D-5L value sets currently available for the United Kingdom.

METHODS

Data collected in the phase 2 trial JAVELIN Merkel 200 were analyzed, in which 88 patients with mMCC were treated with avelumab. Utility scores were calculated using the EQ-5D-5L valuation set by Devlin et al and 3 further algorithms that are based on EQ-5D-3L valuations. Criterion validity was assessed by Pearson correlations between utility and other HRQoL scales. Responsiveness was assessed by correlating change in utility scores with change in HRQoL scales and percentage change in tumor size. Effect sizes for change from baseline in utility were calculated in subgroups of patients with improving and deteriorating health based on clinically relevant changes in various external anchors.

RESULTS

Devlin utilities were up to 0.10 points higher than utilities calculated from EQ-5D-3L valuations. Large correlations (0.45-0.72; P < .01) between utility and the EuroQol Visual Analogue Scale and FACT-G total, physical, and functional scores were found for all 4 algorithms. Large correlations between these measures were also found for change from baseline scores. In patients with health improvements, effect sizes were larger for the 3 EQ-5D-3L-based algorithms, whereas the Devlin utilities had larger effect sizes for health deteriorations, probably because of different levels of baseline utility.

CONCLUSIONS

The English National Institute for Health and Care Excellence currently recommends use of the 3L valuation sets. Our analyses show that all 4 scoring algorithms have good and similar psychometric properties in patients with mMCC.

The survivorship experience for patients with metastatic melanoma on immune checkpoint and BRAF-MEK inhibitors

PURPOSE

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) and BRAF and MEK inhibitors (BMi) have improved survival in metastatic melanoma (MM). However, the experience of long-term responders remains undescribed. This study characterised survivorship issues faced by long-term responders to ICI or BMi.

METHODS

Patients with MM, aged ≥ 18 years old, ≥ 6 months post-ICI or BMi initiation with an objective response or stable disease. A 72-question survey assessed physical and psychological effects, impact on lifestyle, access to information, satisfaction with care, and availability of supports.

RESULTS

One hundred and five of 120 (88%) patients completed the survey (ICI 69/BMI 36). For the ICI cohort, 39 (57%) were receiving ongoing treatment, 17 ceased due to toxicity and 13 due to a sustained response. For the BMi cohort, 31 (85%) were receiving ongoing treatment, 4 ceased due to toxicity and 1 due to a sustained complete response. At data cut-off on 18 December 2018, median PFS (range) was 2.5 years (1.3-8.5) for ICI and 3.1 years (0.6-7.3) for BMi. Long-term toxicities included dry/itchy skin (ICI 51, 74%/ BMi 25, 69%), arthralgias (ICI 30, 58%/ BMi 23, 64%) and fatigue (ICI 62, 90%/ BMi 33, 92%). Psychological morbidity was common, including anxiety awaiting results (ICI 50, 72%/ BMi 29, 81%), fear of melanoma recurring or progressing (ICI 56, 81%/ BMi 31, 86%) or death (ICI 44, 64%/ BMi 26, 72%).

CONCLUSION

MM survivors experience chronic treatment toxicities and frequently report psychological concerns.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

Survivors may benefit from discussions regarding long-term toxicities and tailored psychological supports.

Long-Term Survival, Quality of Life, and Psychosocial Outcomes in Advanced Melanoma Patients Treated with Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors

Immune checkpoint inhibitors have become a standard of care option for the treatment of patients with advanced melanoma. Since the approval of the first immune checkpoint (CTLA-4) inhibitor ipilimumab in 2011 and programmed death-1 (PD-1) blocking monoclonal antibodies pembrolizumab and nivolumab thereafter, an increasing proportion of patients with unresectable advanced melanoma achieved long-term overall survival. Little is known about the psychosocial wellbeing, neurocognitive function, and quality of life (QOL) of these survivors. Knowledge about the long term side-effects of these novel treatments is scarce as long-term survivorship is a novel issue in the field of immunotherapy. The purpose of this review is to summarize our current knowledge regarding the survival and safety results of pivotal clinical trials in the field of advanced melanoma and to highlight potential long-term consequences that are likely to impact psychosocial wellbeing, neurocognitive functioning, and QOL. The issues raised substantiate the need for clinical investigation of these issues with the aim of optimizing comprehensive health care for advanced melanoma survivors.

Quality of life measurement in skin cancer patients: literature review and position paper of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology Task Forces on Quality of Life and Patient Oriented Outcomes, Melanoma and Non-Melanoma Skin Cancer

The European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology (EADV) Task Forces (TFs) on Quality of Life (QoL) and Patient Oriented Outcomes, Melanoma and Non-Melanoma Skin Cancer (NMSC) present a review of the literature and position statement on health-related (HR) QoL assessment in skin cancer patients. A literature search was carried out to identify publications since 1980 that included information about the impact of SC on QoL. Generic, dermatology-specific, cancer-specific, SC-specific, facial SC-specific, NMSC-specific, basal cell carcinoma-specific and melanoma-specific QoL questionnaires have been used to assess HRQoL in SC patients. HRQoL was assessed in the context of creation and validation of the HRQoL instruments, clinical trials, comparison of QoL in SC and other cancers, other diseases or controls, HRQoL assessment after treatment, comorbidities, behaviour modification, predictors of QoL and survival, supportive care needs, coping strategies and fear of cancer recurrence. The most widely used instruments for HRQoL assessment in SC patients are the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Core Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30), the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Melanoma (FACT-M), Skin Cancer Index (SCI), Short Form 36 Item Health Survey (SF-36) and the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI). The TFs recommend the use of the cancer-specific EORTC QLQ-C30, especially in late stages of disease, and the melanoma-specific FACT-M and SC-specific SCI questionnaires. These instruments have been well validated and used in several studies. Other HRQoL instruments, also with good basic validation, are not currently recommended because the experience of their use is too limited. Dermatology-specific HRQoL instruments can be used to assess the impact of skin-related problems in SC. The TFs encourage further studies to validate HRQoL instruments for use in different stages of SC, in order to allow more detailed practical recommendations on HRQoL assessment in SC.

Patient-reported outcome measures for facial skin cancer: a systematic review and evaluation of the quality of their measurement properties

BACKGROUND

Skin cancer is the commonest malignancy worldwide, often occurring on the face. Both the condition and treatment can lead to scarring and facial disfigurement, affecting a patient's health-related quality of life (HRQoL), which can be measured using patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs).

OBJECTIVES

This systematic review identifies PROMs for facial skin cancer and appraises their methodological quality and psychometric properties using up-to-date methods.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Cochrane and CINAHL were searched systematically in accordance with PRISMA guidelines, identifying all PROMs designed for or validated in facial skin cancer. Methodological quality and evidence of psychometric properties were assessed using the COnsensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist and criteria proposed by Terwee and colleagues. A best-evidence synthesis and assessment of instrument focus on post-resection reconstruction was also performed.

RESULTS

We included 24 studies on 11 PROMs. Methodological quality and psychometric evidence was variable, with the Patient Outcome of Surgery - Head/Neck (POS-H/N), Skin Cancer Index (SCI), Skin Cancer Quality of Life Impact Tool (SCQOLIT) and Essers and colleagues demonstrating the greatest level of validation. None scored well in their relevance to post-skin cancer reconstruction of the face.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review critically appraises PROMs for facial skin cancer using internationally accepted criteria. The identified PROMs demonstrate a variation in the quality of validation performed, with a need to improve this across all PROMs in the field. Only through improving the quality of available PROMs and their focus on the post-treatment aesthetic and functional outcome will we be able to truly appreciate the concerns of our patients and improve the management of facial skin cancer.

Social media as a tool for assessing patient perspectives on quality of life in metastatic melanoma: a feasibility study

Purpose

Development of innovative drugs for melanoma is occurring rapidly. Incremental gains in overall survival amongst innovative products may be difficult to measure in clinical trials, and their use may be associated with increased toxicity profiles. Therefore, HTA agencies increasingly require information on HRQoL for the assessment of such drugs. This study explored the feasibility of social media to assess patient perspectives on HRQoL in melanoma, and whether current cancer- and melanoma-specific HRQoL questionnaires represent these perspectives.

Methods

A survey was distributed on the social media channels of Melanoma Patient Network Europe to assess melanoma patients’ perspectives regarding HRQoL. Two researchers independently conducted content analysis to identify key themes, which were subsequently compared to questions from one current cancer-specific and two melanoma-specific HRQoL questionnaires (i.e. EORTC QLQ-C30, EORTC QLQ-MEL38, FACT-M).

Results

In total, 72 patients and 17 carers completed the survey. Patients indicated that family, having a normal life, and enjoying life were the three most important aspects of HRQoL for them. Carers indicated that being capable, having manageable adverse events, and being pain-free were the three most important aspects of HRQoL for patients. Respondents seem to find some questions from HRQoL questionnaires relevant (e.g. ‘Have you felt able to carry on with things as normal?’) and others less relevant (e.g. ‘Have you had swelling near your melanoma site?’). Additionally, wording may differ between patients and HRQoL questionnaires, whereby patients generally use a more positive tone.

Conclusions

Social media may provide a valuable tool in assessing patient perspectives regarding HRQoL. However, differences seem to emerge between patient and carer perspectives. Additionally, patient perspectives did not seem to fully correlate to questions posed in cancer- (i.e. EORTC QLQ-C30) and melanoma-specific (i.e. EORTC QLQ-MEL38, FACT-M) HRQoL questionnaires examined.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12955-018-1047-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Comparative effectiveness of avelumab versus chemotherapy in Merkel cell carcinoma: innovative use of patient insights

AIM

To assess patient experience with chemotherapy and avelumab in metastatic Merkel cell carcinoma (mMCC).

METHODS

In the JAVELIN Merkel 200 trial, chemotherapy-refractory mMCC patients could participate in optional qualitative interviews at baseline documenting recollection of previous chemotherapy experience, and at weeks 13/25 documenting current experience with avelumab. Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy subscale for melanoma questionnaire (FACT-M) was administered in parallel.

RESULTS

In our sample, chemotherapy was associated with an unpleasant experience. On selected FACT-M items addressing chemotherapy-impacted concepts, most patients receiving avelumab were improved or stable; few worsened. In addition, a few patients spontaneously reported experiencing less toxicity with avelumab than experienced during previous chemotherapy.

CONCLUSION

This approach merging qualitative and quantitative data suggests that mMCC patients report a better experience with avelumab than with chemotherapy.

How to address the challenges of evaluating treatment benefits-risks in rare diseases? A convergent mixed methods approach applied within a Merkel cell carcinoma phase 2 clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Demonstrating treatment benefits within clinical trials in the context of rare diseases is often methodologically and practically challenging. Mixed methods research offers an approach to overcome these challenges by combining quantitative and qualitative data, thus providing a better understanding of the research question. A convergent mixed methods design in the context of Merkel cell carcinoma, a rare skin cancer, was used during the JAVELIN Merkel 200 trial (NCT02155647).

METHODS

Nine patients receiving avelumab in the JAVELIN Merkel 200 trial were interviewed at baseline prior to receiving study treatment, and at 13 weeks and 25 weeks after first avelumab administration. Key concepts of interest identified from the baseline interviews were physical functioning, fatigue/energy, and pain. Patient perceptions of the overall change in their cancer-related health status since starting study treatment were also recorded. During qualitative analysis, at each time-point, each concept of interest was assigned a category describing the trend in change (e.g. newly emerged, no change/stable, improved, worsened, ceased/disappeared). In parallel, patients' tumour status was determined by the clinical overall response status as per the clinical trial protocol.

RESULTS

A high concordance between patient-reported qualitative data and assessed tumour response was observed. All eight patients who clinically improved had perceived a subjective improvement in their disease since the beginning of the study; the single patient whose disease worsened had a perceived deterioration. Patient perceived benefit in physical functioning, fatigue/energy and pain was subsequent to the measured change in clinical status as assessed by tumour response. This suggests that patient-reported assessment should be examined over the long term in order to optimally capture meaningful treatment effect.

CONCLUSION

Embedding qualitative research in clinical trials to complement the quantitative data is an innovative approach to characterise meaningful treatment effect. This application of mixed methods research has the potential to overcome the hurdles associated with clinical outcomes assessment in rare diseases.

Unmet supportive care needs, health status and minimum costs in survivors of malignant melanoma

We explored the relationship between unmet care needs, health status, health utility and costs in people treated for melanoma via a cross-sectional follow-up survey (N = 455) 3 months to 5 years after complete resection of stage I-III cutaneous malignant melanoma. 51% (n = 232) had unmet care needs. This group had higher mean resource use, estimated conservatively (£28 vs. £10 per person) and worse overall health. Mean health-related utility index (AQoL6D) was 0.763 (95% CI 0.74; 0.79) in those with self-reported unmet need vs. 0.903 (0.89; 0.92) in those with no unmet need. Melanoma survivors with unmet need had worse outcomes in terms of anxiety (HADS 6.86 vs. 4.29), depression (HADS 4.29 vs. 2.01), overall quality of life (QoL: FACT-M 84.2 vs. 96.5). Higher resource use was associated with younger age (r_s  = -.29, p < .001), older school-leaving age (r_s  = .21, p < .001), reduced health utility (r_s  = -.14, p = .005), higher anxiety (r_s  = .22, p < .001), higher depression (r_s  = .16, p = .001) and lower QoL (overall r_s  = -.24, p < .001; melanoma QoL r_s  = -.20, p < .001; surgery QoL r_s  = -.19, p < .001). Lower health outcomes indicate increased service use, suggesting that interventions to address unmet need and improve health outcomes may reduce health costs. Integrated clinical and economic evaluations of interventions that target unmet need in melanoma survivors are required.

Psychometric properties of the FACT-M questionnaire in patients with Merkel cell carcinoma

Background

No validated disease-specific questionnaires exist to capture health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC). The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy – Melanoma (FACT-M) is validated in patients with melanoma, which shares many similarities with MCC. This paper reports the psychometric properties of the FACT-M in the metastatic MCC population.

Methods

Data were collected as part of a single-arm, open-label, multicenter trial involving patients with metastatic MCC who had failed at least one previous line of chemotherapy. FACT-M and EQ-5D were administered at baseline, Week 7, Week 13, and Week 25. An optional interview was administered at the same time points. MCC-specific FACT-M scores were derived following a combined quantitative and qualitative approach. Reliability and construct validity of original and additional MCC-specific FACT-M scores were assessed at baseline. Capacity to detect change in tumor size was assessed from baseline to Week 7. Minimally important differences (MIDs) were computed using distribution and anchor-based methods.

Results

Baseline assessments were available in 70 patients (mean age: 70 years; 74.3% male); 19 patients were interviewed at baseline. Additional MCC-specific scores were as follows: Physical Function score (six items), Psychological Impact score (six items), and MCC summary score (12 items). FACT-M original and additional MCC-specific scores both demonstrated acceptable psychometric properties: high reliability (Cronbach’s alpha: 0.81–0.96), good convergent validity (correlations above 0.4 observed for 88% of items of the Melanoma surgery scale, 75% of items of the Melanoma scale, and 100% of items of the other FACT-M domains). Some evidence of floor/ceiling effects and poor discriminant ability was found. Higher scores (better HRQoL) on all FACT-M domains were observed in patients with better functioning (assessed by ECOG performance score), supporting clinical validity. Despite the small sample for responsiveness analysis (n = 37), the majority of FACT-M scores showed sensitivity to changes in tumor size at Week 7 with small to moderate effect sizes. MIDs were consistent with previously reported values in the literature for FACT-M domains.

Conclusions

FACT-M is suitable to capture HRQoL in patients with metastatic MCC, thus making it a potential candidate for assessing HRQoL in MCC trials.

Trial registration

This study is a post-hoc analysis conducted on data collected in Part A of the JAVELIN Merkel 200 trial. This trial was registered on 2 June 2014 with ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT02155647.

Nonprogression with avelumab treatment associated with gains in quality of life in metastatic Merkel cell carcinoma

AIM

To assess the association between tumor response and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with metastatic Merkel cell carcinoma treated with the anti-PD-L1 avelumab.

MATERIALS & METHODS

Phase II single-arm trial (NCT02155647) data of 88 patients were analyzed. Correlations between percentage reduction in tumor size and change from baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - General (FACT-G), FACT - Melanoma (FACT-M) and EuroQol-5 Dimension scores were calculated. HRQoL and utility by tumor response (per the Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors version 1.1) was estimated.

RESULTS

Tumor shrinkage correlated positively with patients' change from baseline in the FACT-M total (0.364 [95% CI: 0.050-0.607]) and subscale scores. Differences in HRQoL and utility between nonprogressive disease and progressive disease were clinically relevant.

CONCLUSION

In patients with metastatic Merkel cell carcinoma, nonprogression during treatment with avelumab correlated with gains in HRQoL.

Clustering of prevention behaviours in patients with high-risk primary melanoma

OBJECTIVE

Because melanoma patients are at high risk of further disease, we aimed to study their melanoma prevention behaviours.

METHODS

In a large cohort of patients newly diagnosed with high-risk melanoma in Queensland, Australia, we assessed clustering of preventive behaviours using latent class analysis. We assessed associated factors with prevalence proportion ratios (PPRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) estimated by Poisson regression and also if preventive behaviour was associated with better tumour prognosis at diagnosis.

RESULTS

Among 789 primary melanoma patients (57% male; 21% with previous melanoma), we identified 4 different behaviour clusters: "no/ low prevention" (34% of cohort), "sun protection only" (25%), "skin checks only" (25%), and "sun protection and skin checks" (17%). Prevalence of clusters differed between males and females and also the component behaviours. Preventive behaviours were associated with having skin that burned and past cutaneous cancer, and for males, combined sun protective and skin checking behaviour was associated with higher education and non-smoking. In patients with no past history of cutaneous cancer, males in the "skin checks only" cluster had significantly reduced chances of a thick (poor prognosis) melanoma (PPR = 0.79, 95% CI 0.68, 0.91) and females in the "sun protection and skin checks" cluster were significantly less likely to have an ulcerated melanoma (PPR = 0.85, 95% CI 0.74, 0.98) compared with the "no/ low prevention" cluster.

CONCLUSION

These findings allow tailoring of preventive advice to melanoma patients to reduce their risk of future primary and recurrent disease.

Quality-of-life outcomes in patients with advanced melanoma: A review of the literature

For patients with metastatic melanoma, the emergence of immune checkpoint inhibitors and targeted BRAF and MEK inhibitors has markedly enhanced clinical outcomes compared with chemotherapy. However, these novel agents are also associated with unique sets of adverse events, and increased overall survival can lead to prolonged exposure to some novel agents. Therefore, clinical evaluation of these therapies has now included the analysis of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in addition to more traditional efficacy and safety outcomes as a measure of patient perception of benefit. The current review focuses on HRQoL outcomes in clinical trials of immune checkpoint inhibitors and targeted therapies in patients with advanced and metastatic melanoma to inform healthcare providers about patient perception of HRQoL as a new perspective in treatment decision making.

Protocol for the TIDAL Melanoma Study: topical imiquimod or diphenylcyclopropenone for the management of cutaneous in-transit melanoma metastases-a phase II, single centre, randomised, pilot study

INTRODUCTION

Patients with in-transit melanoma metastases present a therapeutic challenge. Complete surgical excision of localised disease is considered as the gold standard; however, surgery is not always acceptable and alternatives are required. Treatment results reported using imiquimod and diphenylcyclopropenone (DPCP) suggest that topical immunotherapies can be used to successfully treat select patients with melanoma metastases. A phase II, randomised, single centre, pilot study was designed to assess the clinical efficacy and safety of DPCP and imiquimod for the treatment of superficial, cutaneous in-transit melanoma metastases.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is an open-label, non-superiority, pilot study with no treatment cross-over. Eligible patients are randomised in a 1:1 ratio to receive topical therapy for up to 12 months with a minimum follow-up period of 12 months. The target sample size is 30 patients, with 15 allocated to each treatment arm. The primary endpoint is the number of patients experiencing a complete response of treated lesions as determined clinically using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours. This trial incorporates health-related quality of life measures and biological tissue collection for further experimental substudies. The study will also facilitate a health economic analysis.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Approval was obtained from the Human Research Ethics Committee at the participating centre, and recruitment has commenced. The results of this study will be submitted for formal publication within a peer-reviewed journal.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Prospectively registered on 16 October 2015 with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12615001088538). This study conforms to WHO Trial Registration Data Set.

Quality of Life Following Sentinel Node Biopsy for Primary Cutaneous Melanoma: Health Economic Implications

BACKGROUND

Sentinel node biopsy (SNB) is commonly performed in contemporary melanoma management, however there is a paucity of long-term quality of life (QoL) estimates required for economic evaluation of this treatment.

METHODS

A single-center, prospective, cross-sectional study of adults with American Joint Committee on Cancer stage I/II/IIIA melanoma of the limbs, trunk, or neck who had undergone wide excision and SNB, but not complete regional node dissection, was undertaken. Limb volume was measured using perometry, with lymphedema defined as a ≥10% volume increase in the ipsilateral limb compared with the contralateral limb. The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast (FACT-B) questionnaire measured QoL. Associations between patient and treatment characteristics were assessed using linear regression.

RESULTS

Among 694 patients (median time from SNB of 37 months), 14 (2%) had objectively measured lymphedema (i.e. an increase in limb volume of ≥10%). Of 687 stage I/II patients with complete QoL data, the mean weighted QoL was 0.745 (standard deviation 0.04) on a 0-1 scale (i.e. death to full health). In multivariable analysis, weighted QoL was 0.0004 higher for each year of increasing age (p = 0.001); 0.011 lower for females (p = 0.001), 0.018 lower following post-SNB limb trauma (p = 0.002); 0.252 lower for patients who perceived a large increase in limb size (p = 0.015); and 0.027 lower with self-reported difficulty in walking, running, or climbing stairs (p = 0.043).

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggest that very few patients treated at our institution had lymphedema in the long-term following SNB, with weighted QoL strongly associated with perceived rather than actual changes in limb size.

Relationship between physician-adjudicated adverse events and patient-reported health-related quality of life in a phase II clinical trial (NCT01143402) of patients with metastatic uveal melanoma

PURPOSE

Clinical trials commonly use physician-adjudicated adverse event (AE) assessment via the common terminology criteria for adverse events (CTCAE) for decision-making. Patient-reported health-related quality of life (HRQoL) data are becoming more frequent in oncology; however, the relationship between physician-adjudicated AE assessment and HRQoL is understudied.

METHODS

Data from a phase II trial (clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT01143402) where patients with metastatic uveal melanoma were randomized to receive selumetinib, an oral MEK inhibitor, or chemotherapy were analyzed. Patients reported HRQoL at baseline, after 1 month, and end of treatment (n = 118), whereas physicians adjudicated AEs via CTCAE. Mean HRQoL scores were compared between patient randomization arms, as well as between those patients who did/did not receive dose modifications.

RESULTS

Ninety-four percent had a CTCAE grade ≥1 for at least one treatment-associated AE, with 18% undergoing dose modification due to toxicity. Mean HRQoL scores did not significantly differ at each of the three time points. Patient and physician-adjudicated reports of nausea were significantly correlated at the start (r = 0.31, p < 0.01) and end of treatment (r = 0.42, p < 0.05). There were no significant correlations between need for dose modification and HRQoL scores.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the high rate of physician-adjudicated AEs and need for dose modifications with selumetinib, patient-reported HRQoL was not impacted by treatment. Since HRQoL did not differ in the subgroup of patients who received dosage reductions due to AEs, patients may be willing to tolerate select AEs without dose modification (if medically appropriate). More research is needed to determine how to best integrate HRQoL data into clinical trial conduct.

Systematic review of psychosocial outcomes for patients with advanced melanoma

BACKGROUND

New advanced melanoma therapies are associated with improved survival; however, quality of survivorship, particularly psychosocial outcomes, for patients overall and those treated with newer therapies is unclear.

OBJECTIVE

Synthesize qualitative and quantitative evidence about psychosocial outcomes for advanced (stage III/IV) melanoma patients.

METHODS

Five databases were searched (01/01/1980 to 31/01/2016). Inclusion criteria were as follows: advanced melanoma patients or sub-group analysis; assessed psychosocial outcomes; and English language.

RESULTS

Fifty-two studies met review criteria (4 qualitative, 48 quantitative). Trials comprise mostly medical not psychosocial interventions, with psychosocial outcomes assessed within broader quality of life measures. Patients receiving chemotherapy or IFN-alpha showed decreased emotional and social function and increased distress. Five trials of newer therapies appeared to show improvements in emotional and social function. Descriptive studies suggest that patients with advanced, versus localized disease, had decreased emotional and social function and increased distress. Contributors to distress were largely unexplored, and no clear framework described coping/adjustment trajectories. Patients with advanced versus localized disease had more supportive care needs, particularly amount, quality, and timing of melanoma-related information, communication with and emotional support from clinicians. Limitations included: lack of theoretical underpinnings guiding study design; inconsistent measurement approaches; small sample sizes; non-representative sampling; and cross-sectional design.

CONCLUSIONS

Quality trial evidence is needed to clarify the impact of treatment innovations for advanced melanoma on patients' psychosocial well-being. Survivorship research and subsequent translation of that knowledge into programs and services currently lags behind gains in the medical treatment of advanced melanoma, a troubling circumstance that requires immediate and focused attention.

Comparison of dabrafenib and trametinib combination therapy with vemurafenib monotherapy on health-related quality of life in patients with unresectable or metastatic cutaneous BRAF Val600-mutation-positive melanoma (COMBI-v): results of a phase 3, open-label, randomised trial

BACKGROUND

In the COMBI-v trial, patients with previously untreated BRAF Val600Glu or Val600Lys mutant unresectable or metastatic melanoma who were treated with the combination of dabrafenib and trametinib had significantly longer overall and progression-free survival than those treated with vemurafenib alone. Here, we present the effects of treatments on health-related quality of life (HRQoL), an exploratory endpoint in the COMBI-v study.

METHODS

COMBI-v was an open-label, randomised phase 3 study in which 704 patients with metastatic melanoma with a BRAF Val600 mutation were randomly assigned (1:1) by an interactive voice response system to receive either a combination of dabrafenib (150 mg twice-daily) and trametinib (2 mg once-daily) or vemurafenib monotherapy (960 mg twice-daily) orally as first-line therapy. The primary endpoint was overall survival. In this pre-specified exploratory analysis, we prospectively assessed HRQoL in the intention-to-treat population with the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer quality of life (EORTC QLQ-C30), EuroQoL-5D (EQ-5D), and Melanoma Subscale of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Melanoma (FACT-M), completed at baseline, during study treatment, at disease progression, and after progression. We used a mixed-model, repeated measures ANCOVA to assess differences in mean scores between groups with baseline score as covariate; all p-values are descriptive. The COMBI-v trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01597908, and is ongoing for the primary endpoint, but is not recruiting patients.

FINDINGS

From June 4, 2012, to Oct 7, 2013, 1645 patients at 193 centres worldwide were screened for eligibility, and 704 patients were randomly assigned to dabrafenib plus trametinib (n=352) or vemurafenib (n=352). Questionnaire completion rates for both groups were high (>95% at baseline, >80% at follow-up assessments, and >70% at disease progression) with similar HRQoL and symptom scores reported at baseline in both treatment groups for all questionnaires. Differences in mean scores between treatment groups were significant and clinically meaningful in favour of the combination compared with vemurafenib monotherapy for most domains across all three questionnaires during study treatment and at disease progression, including EORTC QLQ-C30 global health (7·92, 7·62, 6·86, 7·47, 5·16, 7·56, and 7·57 at weeks 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, and disease progression, respectively; p<0·001 for all assessments except p=0·005 at week 40), EORTC QLQ-C30 pain (-13·20, -8·05, -8·82, -12·69, -12·46, -11·41, and -10·57 at weeks 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, and disease progression, respectively; all p<0·001), EQ-5D thermometer scores (7·96, 8·05, 6·83, 11·53, 7·41, 9·08, and 10·51 at weeks 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, and disease progression, respectively; p<0·001 for all assessments except p=0·006 at week 32), and FACT-M Melanoma Subscale score (3·62, 2·93, 2·45, 3·39, 2·85, 3·00, and 3·68 at weeks 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, and disease progression, respectively; all p<0·001).

INTERPRETATION

From the patient's perspective, which integrates not only survival advantage but also disease-associated and adverse-event-associated symptoms, treatment with the combination of a BRAF inhibitor plus a MEK inhibitor (dabrafenib plus trametinib) adds a clear benefit over monotherapy with the BRAF inhibitor vemurafenib and supports the combination therapy as standard of care in this population.

Cross-cultural development of a quality-of-life measure for patients with melanoma: phase 3 testing of an EORTC Melanoma Module

Melanoma is an increasingly common skin cancer worldwide. Recent treatment advances have provided patients and healthcare professionals (HCPs) with choices where quality of life (QoL) and toxicity are important considerations. A melanoma-specific QoL questionnaire is being developed in a cross-cultural setting using a four phase process developed by the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Group. In phase 1, a literature search identified a list of pertinent QoL issues; this was shown to HCPs and patients in eight countries and rated for importance and relevance. Questions were constructed for the highest-rated issues (phase 2) and piloted in another patient sample (phase 3). Using EORTC Quality of Life Group criteria and sequential use of factor and Rasch analysis, scales were hypothesized for field testing (phase 4). Seven QoL domains (disease symptoms, treatment issues, financial issues, access/quality of information, satisfaction with care, psychosocial issues and support), comprising 73 QoL issues, were rated by 46 HCPs and 78 patients. Fifty-six issues were rephrased as questions and piloted with 132 patients. A 38-item questionnaire (QLQ-MEL38) is available for field testing in conjunction with the EORTC QLQ-C30. This study has shown that melanoma patients have important QoL issues that have been incorporated into a new cross-culturally validated instrument. Future testing of this EORTC module is planned and will be an important step forward in providing reliable QoL data to aid future decision-making in the management and clinical trials of this complex group of patients.

[Quality of life in dermatology. From measurement to practical implementation]

Health-related quality of life has not only been established as an important patient-reported outcome measure in patient care but has been defined as an evaluation criterion for therapies in the German Code of Social Law as well as in the guidelines of the American Food and Drug Administration and of the European Medicines Agency (EMA). Quality of life can be measured in a standardised manner. Validated questionnaires are available for recording specific problems of patients with, for example, skin diseases. Measuring quality of life has not yet been implemented into daily dermatological routine, although (1) studies have confirmed that the measurement of quality of life offers major benefits for the treatment of skin diseases, and (2) first experiences in implementing quality of life measurement into practice have been positive. The further implementation of systemically measuring quality of life requires advancements in automated measurement and the assumption of cost by social health insurances.