Important Group Differences on the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Kidney Symptom Index Disease-Related Symptoms in Patients with Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma

A rapid review of patient-reported outcomes investigated in the context of advanced renal cell cancer or advanced hepatocellular cancer

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are key indicators of health status and functioning, coming directly from the patient. Comprehensive monitoring of PROs enables implementation of person-centred care. Currently, the PROs that patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) or hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) consider of greatest importance remains unknown.

METHODS

A rapid literature review was carried out to identify PROs commonly reported in clinical studies of patients with advanced RCC/HCC. We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL & PsycInfo for relevant peer-reviewed publications in the period from 2000 to 2021. Pre-specified selection criteria were applied to all retrieved records. Findings were integrated into a narrative synthesis.

RESULTS

Eighty-one studies met our selection criteria and were retained. Most research was on advanced RCC (n = 64, 79%); 46 studies (57%) were drug trials. Only twenty-six studies (32%) employed PROs as their primary endpoint. Most PROs concerned physical symptoms (45% RCC, 54% HCC) and emotional wellbeing (19% RCC, 16% HCC). The most common outcome measured was quality of life (65% of the total), followed by fatigue (62%) and pain (54%). Whether selection of these PROs was patient-driven was not reported.

CONCLUSIONS

A wide range of PROs were assessed. Deficits in PROs often cause patients to seek out help; however, which PROs matter the most to people with advanced RCC/HCC must be further clarified. Targeting, monitoring, and responding to the 'right' PROs can enhance provision of person-centred care in advanced RCC/HCC and augment the clinical efficacy of established and emerging targeted therapies.

Patient-reported outcomes with first-line nivolumab plus cabozantinib versus sunitinib in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma treated in CheckMate 9ER: an open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

In the CheckMate 9ER trial, patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma who received first-line nivolumab plus cabozantinib had significantly better progression-free survival compared with those given sunitinib. In this study, we aimed to describe the patient-reported outcome (PRO) results from CheckMate 9ER.

METHODS

In this open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial done in 125 cancer centres, urology centres, and hospitals across 18 countries, patients aged 18 years or older with previously untreated advanced renal cell carcinoma with a clear-cell component, a Karnofsky performance status of 70% or more, and available tumour tissue were randomly assigned (1:1) via interactive response technology to nivolumab 240 mg intravenously every 2 weeks plus oral cabozantinib 40 mg per day, or oral sunitinib 50 mg per day monotherapy for 4 weeks in 6-week cycles. The primary endpoint of progression-free survival was reported previously. PROs were analysed as prespecified exploratory endpoints at common timepoints (at baseline and every 6 weeks) until week 115. Disease-related symptoms were evaluated using the 19-item Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Kidney Symptom Index (FKSI-19), and global health status was assessed with the three-level EQ-5D (EQ-5D-3L) visual analogue scale (VAS) and UK utility index. PRO analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population. Change from baseline was assessed using mixed-model repeated measures. A time-to-deterioration analysis was done for first and confirmed deterioration events. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03141177, and is closed to recruitment.

FINDINGS

Between Sept 11, 2017, and May 14, 2019, 323 patients were randomly assigned to nivolumab plus cabozantinib and 328 to sunitinib. Median follow-up was 23·5 months (IQR 21·0-26·5). At baseline, patients in both groups reported low symptom burden (FKSI-19 disease-related symptoms version 1 mean scores at baseline were 30·24 [SD 5·19] for the nivolumab plus cabozantinib group and 30·06 [5·03] for the sunitinib group). Change from baseline in PRO scores indicated that nivolumab plus cabozantinib was associated with more favourable outcomes versus sunitinib (treatment difference 2·38 [95% CI 1·20-3·56], nominal p<0·0001, effect size 0·33 [95% CI 0·17-0·50] for FKSI-19 total score; 1·33 [0·84-1·83], nominal p<0·0001, 0·45 [0·28-0·61] for FKSI-19 disease-related symptoms version 1; 3·48 [1·58-5·39], nominal p=0·0004, 0·30 [0·14-0·47] for EQ-5D-3L VAS; and 0·04 [0·01-0·07], nominal p=0·0036, 0·25 [0·08-0·41] for EQ-5D-3L UK utility index), reaching significance at most timepoints. Nivolumab plus cabozantinib was associated with decreased risk of clinically meaningful deterioration for FKSI-19 total score compared with sunitinib (first deterioration event hazard ratio 0·70 [95% CI 0·56-0·86], nominal p=0·0007; confirmed deterioration event 0·63 [0·50-0·80], nominal p=0·0001).

INTERPRETATION

PROs were maintained or improved with nivolumab plus cabozantinib versus sunitinib. Compared with sunitinib, nivolumab plus cabozantinib significantly delayed time to deterioration of patient-reported outcome scores. These results suggest a benefit for nivolumab plus cabozantinib compared with sunitinib in the treatment of patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma.

FUNDING

Bristol Myers Squibb.

Quality of life assessment in renal cell carcinoma Phase II and III clinical trials published between 2010 and 2020: a systematic review

Aims: Quality of life (QoL) assessment is frequently not included among the end points of clinical trials (CTs) on renal cell carcinoma. Herein we aimed to describe the assessment and reporting of QoL in Phase II and Phase III CTs published between 2010 and 2020. Methods: A total of 25 CTs were included; 76% of trials included were conducted in metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients, while 20% of studies evaluated adjuvant systemic treatments. Results: In 13/25 publications, QoL was not listed among the end points, with secondary publications dedicated to QoL present in a minority of cases. Conclusions: QoL was not included among the end points of a large percentage of CTs. Implementing the inclusion of QoL represents an urgent need.

Nivolumab plus Cabozantinib versus Sunitinib for Advanced Renal-Cell Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

The efficacy and safety of nivolumab plus cabozantinib as compared with those of sunitinib in the treatment of previously untreated advanced renal-cell carcinoma are not known.

METHODS

In this phase 3, randomized, open-label trial, we randomly assigned adults with previously untreated clear-cell, advanced renal-cell carcinoma to receive either nivolumab (240 mg every 2 weeks) plus cabozantinib (40 mg once daily) or sunitinib (50 mg once daily for 4 weeks of each 6-week cycle). The primary end point was progression-free survival, as determined by blinded independent central review. Secondary end points included overall survival, objective response as determined by independent review, and safety. Health-related quality of life was an exploratory end point.

RESULTS

Overall, 651 patients were assigned to receive nivolumab plus cabozantinib (323 patients) or sunitinib (328 patients). At a median follow-up of 18.1 months for overall survival, the median progression-free survival was 16.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 12.5 to 24.9) with nivolumab plus cabozantinib and 8.3 months (95% CI, 7.0 to 9.7) with sunitinib (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.41 to 0.64; P<0.001). The probability of overall survival at 12 months was 85.7% (95% CI, 81.3 to 89.1) with nivolumab plus cabozantinib and 75.6% (95% CI, 70.5 to 80.0) with sunitinib (hazard ratio for death, 0.60; 98.89% CI, 0.40 to 0.89; P = 0.001). An objective response occurred in 55.7% of the patients receiving nivolumab plus cabozantinib and in 27.1% of those receiving sunitinib (P<0.001). Efficacy benefits with nivolumab plus cabozantinib were consistent across subgroups. Adverse events of any cause of grade 3 or higher occurred in 75.3% of the 320 patients receiving nivolumab plus cabozantinib and in 70.6% of the 320 patients receiving sunitinib. Overall, 19.7% of the patients in the combination group discontinued at least one of the trial drugs owing to adverse events, and 5.6% discontinued both. Patients reported better health-related quality of life with nivolumab plus cabozantinib than with sunitinib.

CONCLUSIONS

Nivolumab plus cabozantinib had significant benefits over sunitinib with respect to progression-free survival, overall survival, and likelihood of response in patients with previously untreated advanced renal-cell carcinoma. (Funded by Bristol Myers Squibb and others; CheckMate 9ER ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03141177.).

Health-Related Quality of Life and Patient-Reported Outcomes in Radiation Oncology Clinical Trials

OPINION STATEMENT

The importance of assessing health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) is now well recognized as an essential measure when evaluating the effectiveness of new cancer therapies. Quality of life measures provide for a multi-dimensional understanding of the impact of cancer treatment on measures ranging from functional, psychological, and social aspects of a patient's health. Patient-reported outcomes provide for an assessment of physical and functional symptoms that are directly elicited from patients. Collection of PROs and HRQoL data has been shown to not only be feasible but also provide for reliable measures that correlate with established outcomes measures better than clinician-scored toxicities. The importance of HRQoL measures has been emphasized by both patients and clinicians, as well as policy makers and regulatory bodies. Given the benefits associated with measuring HRQoL and PROs in oncology clinical trials, it is increasingly important to establish methods to effectively incorporate PROs and HRQoL measures into routine clinical practice.

Validation of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Leukemia instrument in patients with acute myeloid leukemia who are not candidates for intensive therapy

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study was to validate the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Leukemia (FACT-Leu) in patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) who are not candidates for intensive therapy.

METHODS

A sample of 317 patients with AML who were not eligible for intensive chemotherapy completed the FACT-Leu and EuroQol 5-Dimension (EQ-5D) measures (Utility Index and Visual Analogue Scale) every 28 days until the end of treatment. Internal consistency reliability was estimated with Cronbach's α. Concurrent validity was examined with correlations between FACT-Leu and EQ-5D scales, and known-groups validity was examined by determining whether FACT-Leu scales distinguished between Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status ratings (PSRs) and between maximum adverse event toxicities at the baseline. This study examined responsiveness to change by anchoring change in the FACT-Leu scales to a 0.10 change in the EQ-5D Health Utility Index.

RESULTS

Cronbach's α usually exceeded the threshold for good (≥0.80) or excellent reliability (≥0.90). Correlations between FACT-Leu and EQ-5D scales were moderate (r > 0.50) or high (r > 0.70). FACT-Leu scales distinguished between ECOG PSR groups with large effect sizes for an ECOG PSR of 0 versus an ECOG PSR of 2 (0.50 ≤ d < 0.80). In addition, Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General, Additional Concerns, FACT-Leu Total, and Trial Outcomes Index scales distinguished between patients with grade 3 or lower maximum adverse event toxicities and those with maximum adverse event toxicities higher than grade 3, but effect sizes were small (d < 0.50). Finally, FACT-Leu scale coefficients for a 0.10 change in the 5-level version of the EQ-5D HUI ranged between -0.01 and 4.30.

CONCLUSIONS

The FACT-Leu is a suitable outcome measure for AML clinical trials among patients not eligible for intensive therapy, and it may have value for clinical monitoring.