Comparison of toxicity experienced by older versus younger patients enrolled in breast cancer clinical trials

Prediction of moderate and severe toxicities of chemotherapy in older patients with cancer: a propensity weighted analysis of ELCAPA cohort

BACKGROUND

Currently available predictive models for chemotherapy-related toxicity are not sufficiently discriminative in older patients with cancer and do not consider moderate toxicities. The purpose of this study was to identify factors associated with moderate and severe chemotherapy toxicities in older patients with cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients aged 70+ recruited in the prospective ELCAPA cohort were analyzed. A total of 837 patients with data on toxicities had received chemotherapy without other systemic treatment and were included between 2015 and 2022. To adjust for any imbalances in the distribution of covariates between patients receiving single-agent chemotherapy vs combination chemotherapy, we applied overlap weighting (a propensity-score-based technique). We used multinomial logistic regression.

RESULTS

Median (interquartile range) age was 81 (77-84). Forty-one percent experienced moderate toxicity, and 33% experienced severe toxicity. Hematologic toxicities accounted for 53% of severe toxicities and 66% of moderate toxicities. Age <80 years, cancer type, metastatic status, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG-PS) >1, no cognitive impairment were associated with combination chemotherapy decision. In a univariate analysis with overlap weighting, no factors were associated with moderate toxicity. Hemoglobin < 0 g/dL and a CIRS-G score >12 were associated with severe toxicity. In a multivariate analysis, only hemoglobin < 10 g/dL was independently associated with severe toxicity, adjusted OR 2.96 (95% CI, 1.20-7.29).

CONCLUSION

By addressing indication bias for combination chemotherapy decision, only anemia and not cancer type, combination chemotherapy was predicting for severe chemotherapy-related toxicity in older patients with cancer. We did not find any predictors of moderate chemotherapy-related toxicity.

Predictors and effects of toxicity experienced by older adults with cancer receiving systemic therapy in a randomized clinical trial of geriatric assessment

INTRODUCTION

Older adults represent a large segment of the oncology population, however, they remain underrepresented in clinical research. Treatment of older adults is often extrapolated using data from younger and fitter patients, which may not be appropriate. Furthermore the implications of toxicity from treatment can be greater for this population. Predicting toxicity from treatment and its effect on quality of life and functional status for older adults therefore is important.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We analyzed data from a clinical trial of geriatric assessment and management for Canadian elders with cancer (5C study). We assessed whether the baseline Cancer and Aging Research Group (CARG) toxicity score, G8 score, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance predicted grade 3-5 toxicity using logistic regression and pattern mixture models. We also assessed the impact of toxicity on quality of life and functional decline. Patients were followed for six months.

RESULTS

Three hundred sixteen patients were included. Mean age was 76 years old and 40% of patients were female. One hundred nineteen patients (38%) experienced at least one grade 3-5 toxicity. Neither the CARG toxicity score, G8, or ECOG were predictive of grade 3-5 toxicity. Patients who experienced grade 3-5 toxicity were more likely to have functional impairments over time (odds ratio 3.71, p = 0.03). However, they maintained their quality of life.

DISCUSSION

In this secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial of geriatric assessment and management we did not find any predictors of grade 3-5 toxicity. Patients who did experience toxicity were more likely to report functional decline over time. Older adults who do experience treatment related toxicity may benefit from increased supports.

CLINICAL TRIAL INFORMATION

NCT0315467.

Developing Sustainable Cancer and Aging Programs

Geriatric assessment (GA) has been shown to decrease toxicity from systemic therapy, improve completion of chemotherapy, and reduce hospitalizations in older adults with cancer. Given the aging of the cancer population, this has the potential to have a positive impact on the care of a large swath of patients seen. Despite endorsement by several international societies, including the American Society of Clinical Oncology, uptake of GA has been low. Lack of knowledge, time, and resources has been cited as reasons for this. Although challenges to developing and implementing a cancer and aging program vary depending on the health care context, GA is adaptable to every health care context from low- to high-resource settings, as well as those in which geriatric oncology is a well-established or just emerging field. We provide an approach for clinicians and administrators to develop, implement, and sustain aging and cancer programs in a doable and sustainable way.

GSTP1 c.313A > G mutation is an independent risk factor for neutropenia hematotoxicity induced by anthracycline-/paclitaxel-based chemotherapy in breast cancer patients

Background

The link between glutathione S-transferase P1 (GSTP1) c.313A > G polymorphism and chemotherapy-related adverse events remains controversial. The goal of this study was to assess how this variant affected the toxicity of anthracycline-/paclitaxel-based chemotherapy in patients with breast cancer.

Methods

This study retrospectively investigated pharmacogenetic associations of GSTP1 c.313A > G with chemotherapy-related adverse events in 142 breast cancer patients who received anthracycline and/or paclitaxel chemotherapy.

Results

There were 61 (43.0%), 81 (57.0%), 43 (30.3%), and 99 (69.7%) patients in the T0-T2, T3-T4, N0-N1, and N2-N3 stages, respectively. There were 108 (76.1%) patients in clinical stages I–III and 34 (23.9%) patients in clinical stage IV. The numbers of patients with luminal A, luminal B, HER2 + , and triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) were 10 (7.0%), 77 (54.2%), 33 (23.2%), and 22 (15.5%), respectively. The numbers of patients who carried GSTP1 c.313A > G A/A, A/G, and G/G genotypes were 94 (66.2%), 45 (31.7%), and 3 (2.1%), respectively. There were no statistically significant differences in the proportion of certain toxicities in patients with A/G, G/G, and A/G + G/G genotypes, except for neutropenia, in which the proportion of patients with A/G + G/G (χ² = 6.586, P = 0.035) genotypes was significantly higher than that with the AA genotype. The logistic regression analysis indicated that GSTP1 c.313A > G mutation (A/G + G/G vs. A/A genotype) (adjusted OR 4.273, 95% CI 1.141–16.000, P = 0.031) was an independent variable associated with neutropenia.

Conclusions

The findings of this study indicate that the GSTP1 c.313A > G mutation is an independent risk factor for neutropenia hematotoxicity in breast cancer patients induced by anthracycline-/paclitaxel-based chemotherapy.

Opportunities for Participation in Randomized Controlled Trials for Patients with Multiple Myeloma: Trial Access Depends on Restrictive Eligibility Criteria and Patient Expectations

Simple Summary

Over the past decade, randomized controlled trials as an established instrument of evidence-based medicine have contributed fundamentally to the development and approval of new substances. However, it has been frequently shown that less than 5% of adult cancer patients enroll in clinical trials. Barriers to trial participation have been extensively studied, but the rate of trial participation has not changed substantially. In this retrospective analysis, we found that 53% of newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients met the eligibility criteria, while only 38% of relapsed refractory patients were eligible. Moreover, our data show for the first time that eligible patients tend to become more reluctant to participate over the course of the disease, with 42% of newly diagnosed patients consenting, and only 7% of relapsed/refractory patients consenting. Thus, our results may assist with trial design improvements and address patient expectations and priorities in order to increase enrollment.

Abstract

Randomized controlled trials (RCT) are the driver of therapeutic innovations. However, it has been frequently shown that less than 5% of adult cancer patients enroll in clinical trials, although 70% of patients are considered as being willing to participate. Barriers to trial participation have been extensively studied. Although there is evidence that trial participation correlates with improved survival and reduced mortality, the rate of participation has not changed substantially. We provide retrospective data from a single-center analysis of 411 patients with multiple myeloma (MM) who were treated at the University Hospital Duesseldorf in Germany between January 2014 and December 2016. Each patient was analyzed for the real-world possibility of participating in a clinical study, based on the inclusion and exclusion (I/E) criteria and the recruiting period of open studies. The overall rate of study participation was 19%. A total of 53% of NDMM patients were eligible for first-line studies (GMMG-HD6, LenaMain). Of these, 80% consented to enrolment (42% of all). In contrast, only 38% of the RRMM population was eligible (GMMG-Relapse, Castor, Tourmaline, Admyre). Of these, only 22% (7% of all) consented. This was confirmed by virtual analysis, showing that only 29% of all RRMM patients would have been eligible for six internationally recruiting trials leading to later drug approval. The majority of cases were rendered ineligible by only one I/E criterion. The most common criteria were study-specific (prior therapies or refractory disease to a specific drug), kidney disease, and previous malignancy, followed by internal, neurologic, and infectious disease. In summary, this single-center analysis showed that I/E criteria permit study participation for most NNDM patients, with a dramatic decrease in the RRMM population. This is aggravated by the fact that the willingness for study participation also significantly declines in RRMM. Thus, addressing patient expectations and priorities seems to be the most promising approach to increasing patient enrollment in clinical trials.

Clinical Trial Diversity: An Opportunity for Improved Insight into the Determinants of Variability in Drug Response

Although the number of countries participating in pivotal trials submitted to enable drug registration has nearly doubled over the past 25 years, there has not been a substantial increase in the diversity of clinical trial populations. In parallel, our understanding of factors that influence medicine response and variability has continued to evolve. The notion of intrinsic and extrinsic sources of variability has been embedded into different regulatory guidelines, including the recent guideline on the importance of enhancing the diversity of clinical trial populations.

In addition to presenting the clinical and scientific reasons for ensuring that clinical trial populations represent the demographics of patient populations, this overview outlines the efforts of regulatory agencies, patient advocacy groups and clinical researchers to attain this goal through strategies to meet representation in recruitment targets and broaden eligibility criteria. Despite these efforts, challenges to participation in clinical trials remain, and certain groups continue to be underrepresented in development programmes. These challenges are amplified when the representativeness of specific groups may vary across countries and regions in a global clinical programme.

Whilst enhanced trial diversity is a critical step towards ensuring that results will be representative of patient populations, a concerted effort is required to characterise further the factors influencing interindividual and regional differences in response for global populations. Quantitative clinical pharmacology principles should be applied to allow extrapolation of data across groups or regions as well as provide insight into the effect of patient‐specific characteristics on a medicine's dose rationale and efficacy and safety profiles.

Enrollment of older metastatic breast cancer patients in first-line clinical trials: 9-year experience of the large-scale real-life multicenter French ESME cohort

PURPOSE

Older cancer patients are underrepresented in clinical trials. We aimed to evaluate the enrollment of older women aged 70 years old (yo) or over with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) in clinical trials.

METHODS

We used the national Epidemio-Strategy and Medical Economics MBC Data Platform, a French multi-center real-life database. We selected MBC women over 70yo, without central nervous system metastases, with at least one line of systemic treatment, between January 1st, 2008 and December 31st, 2016, and had no other cancer in the 5 years before MBC. The primary objective was to evaluate the proportion of patients enrolled in clinical trials according to their age. Secondary objective was to identify variables associated with enrollment in older ones.

RESULTS

5552 women were aged ≥ 70 (median 74yo; IQR 72-77). 14,611 were less than 70. Of the older ones, 239 (4%) were enrolled in a clinical trial during first line of treatment, compared with 1529 (10.5%) for younger ones. Multivariable analysis of variables predicting for enrollment during first line of treatment in older patients were younger age (OR 0.50 [95%CI 0.33-0.76] for the 80-85yo class; OR 0.17 [95%CI 0.06-0.39] for the 85yo and more class), good ECOG Performance Status (PS 0-1) (OR 0.15 [95%CI 0.08-0.27] for the PS 2-4 class), HER2 + disease (OR 1.78 [95%CI 1.27-2.48]), type of treatment (chemotherapy/targeted therapy/immunotherapy OR 5.01 [95%CI 3.13-8.18]), and period (OR 1.65 [95%CI 1.22-2.26] for 2012-2016, compared to 2008-2011).

CONCLUSION

In this large database, few older MBC patients were enrolled in a trial compared with younger ones.

Disparities in patient enrollment on glioblastoma clinical trials

Aim:

To determine if enrollment on glioblastoma (GBM) interventional clinical trials (ICTs) in the USA is representative of the population.

Materials & methods:

We queried ClinicalTrials.gov for all ICTs in GBM from 1994 to 2019. Demographics were obtained from ClinicalTrials.gov or the trial publication and compared with population data from Central Brain Tumor Registry of the United States.

Results:

In total, 10617 GBM patients were enrolled in 118 adult ICTs: median age was 54.0 (10.05 years younger than Central Brain Tumor Registry of the United States). Age was most discrepant in recurrent tumors, nonrandomized trials and consortium studies. Median age improved from 52.0 to 59.5 over 25 years. Women represented 37.5% of subjects.

Conclusion:

GBM ICTs under-represent older patients but representation of women reflects the population. ICTs need to be designed to better represent the population.

Utility of a chemotherapy toxicity prediction tool for older patients in a community setting

Background

Expert groups have recommended incorporation of a geriatric assessment into clinical practice for older patients starting oncologic therapy. However, that practice is not standard primarily because of resource limitations. In the present study, we evaluated the effect on treatment decisions by oncologists in the community oncology setting of a brief geriatric assessment tool that estimates risk of toxicity.

Methods

This prospective longitudinal study in 5 community oncology practices in British Columbia involved patients 70 years of age and older starting a new cytotoxic chemotherapy regimen. Clinical personnel completed a brief validated geriatric assessment tool-the Cancer and Aging Research Group chemotherapy toxicity tool (carg-tt)-that estimates the risk of grade 3 or greater toxicity in older patients. Physicians were asked if the carg-tt changed their treatment plan or prompted extra supports. Patients were followed to assess the incidence of toxicity during treatment.

Results

The study enrolled 199 patients between July 2016 and February 2018. Mean age was 77 years. Treatment was palliative in 61.4% of the group. Compared with physician judgment, the carg-tt predicted higher rates of toxicity. In 5 patients, treatment was changed based on the carg-tt. In 38.5% of the patients, data from the tool prompted extra supports. Within the first 3 cycles of treatment, 21.3% of patients had experienced grade 3 or greater toxicity.

Conclusions

This study demonstrates that use of a brief geriatric assessment tool is possible in a broad community oncology practice. The tool modified the oncologist's supportive care plan for a significant number of older patients undertaking cytotoxic chemotherapy.

Toxicity of Cancer Therapies in Older Patients

PURPOSE OF THE REVIEW

In clinical practice, older patients are often undertreated due to underrepresentation in clinical trials and fear of toxicity. Our objective was therefore to review toxicities that are specific to older cancer patients, to review risk factors in order to help physicians guide their decisions, and to review interventions that can be implemented in routine clinical practice to prevent toxicity induced by cancer therapies.

RECENT FINDINGS

On the whole, reviews report similar number and frequency as well as similar grade 3 or 4 adverse events between subjects older and younger than 65 years. Yet patients included in clinical trials are often not representative of real-life patients and are often fit older cancer patients. Moreover, tolerance to the additive impact of multiple adverse effects is different between older and younger patients. And specific symptoms such as stomatitis may cause a series of consequences such as dehydration, denutrition, renal insufficiency, and adverse events of renally excreted drugs. Older patients are at high risk of toxicity due to many factors but mainly due to the prevalence of frailty in this population that has been estimated to be around 40% increasing the risk of chemotherapy intolerance. As a consequence, interventions must be implemented according to altered domains of comprehensive geriatric assessment in order to improve anticancer tolerance. These interventions are reviewed here.

The Role of Clinical Trial Participation in Cancer Research: Barriers, Evidence, and Strategies

Fewer than one in 20 adult patients with cancer enroll in cancer clinical trials. Although barriers to trial participation have been the subject of frequent study, the rate of trial participation has not changed substantially over time. Barriers to trial participation are structural, clinical, and attitudinal, and they differ according to demographic and socioeconomic factors. In this article, we characterize the nature of cancer clinical trial barriers, and we consider global and local strategies for reducing barriers. We also consider the specific case of adolescents with cancer and show that the low rate of trial enrollment in this age group strongly correlates with limited improvements in cancer population outcomes compared with other age groups. Our analysis suggests that a clinical trial system that enrolls patients at a higher rate produces treatment advances at a faster rate and corresponding improvements in cancer population outcomes. Viewed in this light, the issue of clinical trial enrollment is foundational, lying at the heart of the cancer clinical trial endeavor. Fewer barriers to trial participation would enable trials to be completed more quickly and would improve the generalizability of trial results. Moreover, increased accrual to trials is important for patients, because trials provide patients the opportunity to receive the newest treatments. In an era of increasing emphasis on a treatment decision-making process that incorporates the patient perspective, the opportunity for patients to choose trial participation for their care is vital.

Complete and Sustained Response with a Doublet Chemotherapy Protocol in an 81-Year-Old Patient with Metastatic Breast Cancer

Metastatic breast cancer (MBC) entails an overall 5-year survival of approximately 25%. The choice of therapy is influenced by expression of the HER2 gene and hormone receptors, by a disease-free interval, and by age. The use of paclitaxel combined with gemcitabine (doublet protocol) has shown efficacy as first-line treatment for MBC in either initial or maintenance therapy when compared to monotherapy with paclitaxel. There is evidence showing that the doublet protocol is a good alternative to maintenance therapy in women under 50 years old. Nevertheless, there is a lack of information concerning individuals above that age. We report the case of an 81-year-old patient presenting with recurrence of MBC, with lung and skin metastases both positive for hormone receptor and negative for HER2. We implemented a therapy based on the combination of gemcitabine and paclitaxel for 12 cycles, when complete response was achieved. Currently, 16 months after this achievement, the patient is receiving maintenance treatment under the doublet protocol, presenting acceptable parameters of toxicity since the beginning of treatment, which shows satisfactory tolerability and management of chemotherapy in an elderly patient. We suggest that the maintenance treatment protocol with a doublet might be an alternative with a satisfactory response in patients with MBC.

The Role of Clinical Trial Participation in Cancer Research: Barriers, Evidence, and Strategies

Fewer than one in 20 adult patients with cancer enroll in cancer clinical trials. Although barriers to trial participation have been the subject of frequent study, the rate of trial participation has not changed substantially over time. Barriers to trial participation are structural, clinical, and attitudinal, and they differ according to demographic and socioeconomic factors. In this article, we characterize the nature of cancer clinical trial barriers, and we consider global and local strategies for reducing barriers. We also consider the specific case of adolescents with cancer and show that the low rate of trial enrollment in this age group strongly correlates with limited improvements in cancer population outcomes compared with other age groups. Our analysis suggests that a clinical trial system that enrolls patients at a higher rate produces treatment advances at a faster rate and corresponding improvements in cancer population outcomes. Viewed in this light, the issue of clinical trial enrollment is foundational, lying at the heart of the cancer clinical trial endeavor. Fewer barriers to trial participation would enable trials to be completed more quickly and would improve the generalizability of trial results. Moreover, increased accrual to trials is important for patients, because trials provide patients the opportunity to receive the newest treatments. In an era of increasing emphasis on a treatment decision-making process that incorporates the patient perspective, the opportunity for patients to choose trial participation for their care is vital.