Conducting phase 1 cancer clinical trials during the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-related disease pandemic

Revitalising cancer trials post-pandemic: time for reform

The COVID-19 pandemic posed significant risk to the health of cancer patients, compromised standard cancer care and interrupted clinical cancer trials, prompting dramatic streamlining of services. From this health crisis has emerged the opportunity to carry forward an unexpected legacy of positive reforms to clinical cancer research, where conventionally convoluted approvals processes, inefficient trial design, procedures and data gathering could benefit from the lessons in rationalisation learned during the pandemic.

Learning from COVID-19 related trial adaptations to inform efficient trial design-a sequential mixed methods study

BACKGROUND

Many clinical trial procedures were often undertaken in-person prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, which has resulted in adaptations to these procedures to enable trials to continue. The aim of this study was to understand whether the adaptations made to clinical trials by UK Clinical Trials Units (CTUs) during the pandemic have the potential to improve the efficiency of trials post-pandemic.

METHODS

This was a mixed methods study, initially involving an online survey administered to all registered UK CTUs to identify studies that had made adaptations due to the pandemic. Representatives from selected studies were qualitatively interviewed to explore the adaptations made and their potential to improve the efficiency of future trials. A literature review was undertaken to locate published evidence concerning the investigated adaptations. The findings from the interviews were reviewed by a group of CTU and patient representatives within a workshop, where discussions focused on the potential of the adaptations to improve the efficiency of future trials.

RESULTS

Forty studies were identified by the survey. Fourteen studies were selected and fifteen CTU staff were interviewed about the adaptations. The workshop included 15 CTU and 3 patient representatives. Adaptations were not seen as leading to direct efficiency savings for CTUs. However, three adaptations may have the potential to directly improve efficiencies for trial sites and participants beyond the pandemic: a split remote-first eligibility assessment, recruitment outside the NHS via a charity, and remote consent. There was a lack of published evidence to support the former two adaptations, however, remote consent is widely supported in the literature. Other identified adaptations may benefit by improving flexibility for the participant. Barriers to using these adaptations include the impact on scientific validity, limitations in the role of the CTU, and participant's access to technology.

CONCLUSIONS

Three adaptations (a split remote-first eligibility assessment, recruitment outside the NHS via a charity, and remote consent) have the potential to improve clinical trials but only one (remote consent) is supported by evidence. These adaptations could be tested in future co-ordinated 'studies within a trial' (SWAT).

SARS-CoV-2 vaccines for cancer patients: a call to action

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has affected more than 96 million people worldwide, leading the World Health Organization (WHO) to declare a pandemic in March 2020. Although an optimal medical treatment of COVID-19 remains uncertain, an unprecedented global effort to develop an effective vaccine hopes to restore pre-pandemic conditions. Since cancer patients as a group have been shown to be at a higher risk of severe COVID-19, the development of safe and effective vaccines is crucial. However, cancer patients may be underrepresented in ongoing phase 3 randomised clinical trials investigating COVID-19 vaccines. Therefore, we encourage stakeholders to provide real-time data about the characteristics of recruited participants, including clearly identifiable subgroups, like cancer patients, with sample sizes large enough to determine safety and efficacy. Moreover, we envisage a prompt implementation of suitable registries for pharmacovigilance reporting, in order to monitor the effects of COVID-19 vaccines and immunisation rates in patients with cancer. That said, data extrapolation from other vaccine trials (e.g. anti-influenza virus) showed a favourable safety and efficacy profile for cancer patients. On the basis of the evidence discussed, we believe that the benefits of the vaccination outweigh the risks. Consequently, healthcare authorities should prioritise vaccinations for cancer patients, with the time-point of administration agreed on a case-by-case basis. In this regard, the American Society of Clinical Oncology and the European Society of Medical Oncology are advocating for cancer patients a high priority status, in the hope of attenuating the consequences of the pandemic in this particularly vulnerable population.

OncoAlert Round Table Discussions: The Global COVID-19 Experience

The speed and spread of the COVID-19 pandemic has been affecting the entire world for the past several months. OncoAlert is a social media network made up of more than 140 oncology stakeholders: oncologists (medical, radiation, and surgical), oncology nurses, and patient advocates who share the mission of fighting cancer by means of education and dissemination of information. As a response to the COVID-19 pandemic, OncoAlert hosted The Round Table Discussions. We have documented this effort along with further discussion about the COVID-19 pandemic and the consequences on patients living with cancer to disseminate this information to our colleagues worldwide.

Overcoming the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on oncology early phase trials and drug development in Asia-Experiences and perspectives of the Asian Oncology Early Phase 1 Consortium

Aim

The significance and prioritization of early phase oncology trial continuation during a global pandemic is unknown. This study reported the outcomes, multiple challenges, and broad recommendations associated with the impact of the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) on oncology early phase 1 trials—and on drug development in Asia—based on the experiences and perspectives of Asian oncology phase 1 centers.

Methods

Between March and April 2020 during the initial period of outbreak, the impact of COVID‐19 across oncology phase 1 sites in five Asian countries—China (Hong Kong), Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, and Singapore—was retrospectively analyzed.

Results

There was no trial termination or treatment discontinuation in all five countries. Although the most common impact was new patient enrollment being placed on hold, which was based on pharmaceutical sponsors’ decision‐making, the situation varied per site. Most sites had no restrictions in place that would limit their ability to fully comply with the requirements of conducting the early phase studies. The number of protocol deviations during the pandemic was largely dependent on domestic transportation status during the outbreak rather than the ability of the clinical trial centers.

Conclusion

Determining the risk to benefits ratio of patients with cancer who are enrolled in early phase 1 clinical trials under the unusual circumstances of a global pandemic is important. Specific guidance or guidelines on the conduct of early phase 1 clinical trials during public health emergencies that are based on the recent lessons learned is urgently required.

Health Services: A Mixed Methods Assessment of Canadian Cancer Patient Education Materials Related to the 2019 Novel Coronavirus

The 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has prompted the reorganization in the scheduling and method of care for many patients, including patients diagnosed with cancer. Cancer patients, who have an immunocompromised status, may be at a higher risk of severe symptoms from infection with COVID-19. While information is rapidly evolving regarding COVID-19, Canada, both nationally and provincially, has been conveying new information to patients online. We assessed the content and readability of COVID-19-related online Canadian patient education material (PEM) for cancer patients to determine if the content of the material was written at a grade reading level that the majority of Canadians can understand. PEMs were extracted from provincial cancer agencies and the national Canadian Cancer Society, evaluated using 10 readability scales, qualitatively analyzed to identify their themes and difficult word content. Thirty-eight PEMs from both national and provincial cancers associations were, on average, written above the recommended 7th grade level. Each of the associations' average grade levels were: BC Cancer (11.00 95% confidence interval [CI] 8.27-13.38), CancerControl Alberta (10.46 95% CI 8.29-12.62), Saskatchewan Cancer Agency (11.08 95% CI 9.37-12.80), Cancer Care Manitoba (9.55 95% CI 6.02-13.01), Cancer Care Ontario (9.35 95% CI 6.80-11.90), Cancer Care Nova Scotia (10.95 95% CI 9.86-12.04), Cancer Care Eastern Health Newfoundland and Labrador (10.14 95% CI 6.87-13.41), and the Canadian Cancer Society (10.06 95% CI 8.07-12.05). Thematic analysis identified 4 themes: public health strategy, information about COVID-19, patient instructions during COVID-19, and resources. Fifty-three percent of the complex words identified were medical jargon. This represents an opportunity to improve PEM readability, to allow for greater comprehension amongst a wider target audience.

Lessons learned from COVID-19 for clinical research operations in Italy: what have we learned and what can we apply in the future?

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has stressed the importance of health research as never before. In the specific domain of clinical research, the effort to rapidly find responses to health challenges and therapeutic hypotheses has highlighted the need for efficient, timely, ethically correct research. The guidelines published by the Agenzia Italiana del Farmaco have shown that some useful changes are feasible: simple and rapid methods have been implemented to conduct clinical research in the emergency conditions of the pandemic, maintaining high levels of quality. In this perspective, four Italian scientific associations operating in clinical research have worked together to evaluate which measures, among the ones implemented during the pandemic, have been particularly significant and potentially effective under normal conditions or in case of emergencies, and that therefore will be useful in the future as well.

Cancer Treatment and Research During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Experience of the First 6 Months

The coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has had a significant impact on patients with underlying malignancy. In this article, we summarize emerging data related to patients with cancer and COVID-19. Among patients with COVID-19, a higher proportion have an underlying diagnosis of cancer than seen in the general population. Also, patients with malignancy are likely to be more vulnerable than the general population to contracting COVID-19. Mortality is significantly higher in patients with both cancer and COVID-19 compared with the overall COVID-19-positive population. The early months of the pandemic saw a decrease in cancer screening and diagnosis, as well as postponement of standard treatments, which could lead to excess deaths from cancer in the future.

ESMO Management and treatment adapted recommendations in the COVID-19 era: Lung cancer

The COVID-19 pandemic, characterised by a fast and global spread during the first months of 2020, has prompted the development of a structured set of recommendations for cancer care management, to maintain the highest possible standards. Within this framework, it is crucial to ensure no disruption to essential oncological services and guarantee the optimal care.This is a structured proposal for the management of lung cancer, comprising three levels of priorities, namely: tier 1 (high priority), tier 2 (medium priority) and tier 3 (low priority)-defined according to the criteria of the Cancer Care Ontario, Huntsman Cancer Institute and Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale.The manuscript emphasises the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on lung cancer care and reconsiders all steps from diagnosis, staging and treatment.These recommendations should, therefore, serve as guidance for prioritising the different aspects of cancer care to mitigate the possible negative impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the management of our patients.As the situation is rapidly evolving, practical actions are required to guarantee the best patients' treatment while protecting and respecting their rights, safety and well-being. In this environment, cancer practitioners have great responsibilities: provide timely, appropriate, compassionate and justified cancer care, while protecting themselves and their patients from being infected with COVID-19. In case of shortages, resources must be distributed fairly. Consequently, the following recommendations can be applied with significant nuances, depending on the time and location for their use, considering variable constraints imposed to the health systems. An exceptional flexibility is required from cancer caregivers.

ESMO Management and treatment adapted recommendations in the COVID-19 era: Breast Cancer

The global preparedness and response to the rapid escalation to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV)-2-related disease (COVID-19) to a pandemic proportion has demanded the formulation of a reliable, useful and evidence-based mechanism for health services prioritisation, to achieve the highest quality standards of care to all patients. The prioritisation of high value cancer interventions must be embedded in the agenda for the pandemic response, ensuring that no inconsistency or discrepancy emerge in the health planning processes.The aim of this work is to organise health interventions for breast cancer management and research in a tiered framework (high, medium, low value), formulating a scheme of prioritisation per clinical cogency and intrinsic value or magnitude of benefit. The public health tools and schemes for priority setting in oncology have been used as models, aspiring to capture clinical urgency, value in healthcare, community goals and fairness, while respecting the principles of benevolence, non-maleficence, autonomy and justice.We discuss the priority health interventions across the cancer continuum, giving a perspective on the role and meaning to maintain some services (undeferrable) while temporarily abrogate some others (deferrable). Considerations for implementation and the essential link to pre-existing health services, especially primary healthcare, are addressed, outlining a framework for the development of effective and functional services, such as telemedicine.The discussion covers the theme of health systems strategising, and why oncology care, in particular breast cancer care, should be maintained in parallel to pandemic control measures, providing a pragmatic clinical model within the broader context of public healthcare schemes.