Die Dauer von Ethikvoten in Deutschland - am Beispiel einer nicht-interventionellen Beobachtungsstudie mit 44 teilnehmenden Zentren (PROSa)

The health-related quality of life of sarcoma patients treated with neoadjuvant versus adjuvant radiotherapy - Results of a multi-center observational study

AIM

The sequence of radiotherapy and resection in patients with soft tissue sarcomas is usually discussed on an individual basis. Better understanding of potential differences of health-related quality of life (QoL) between patients undergoing adjuvant (ART) versus neoadjuvant radiotherapy (NART) is therefore helpful for clinical decision making.

METHODS

Adult sarcoma patients from 39 hospitals completed the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Core Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30). Differences in global QoL, physical functioning, role functioning, fatigue, pain, and insomnia between ART versus NART were investigated with multivariate regression, adjusting for age, gender, chemotherapy, grading, stage, tumor location, recurrence/distant metastasis, sarcoma type, time since last treatment, and treatment status using validated thresholds.

RESULTS

A total of 1110 patients participated. Of them, 340 had received radiotherapy (NART: n = 95, 28%; ART: n = 245, 72%). Global QoL was 59.3 on average after NART and 60.5 after ART (Badj = 1.0, p = 0.74). Physical functioning was 65.9 compared to 70.5 (Badj = 4.2; p = 0.16), role function 48.8 vs. 56.7 (Badj = 7.0, p = 0.08), fatigue 47.5 vs. 45.4 (Badj = -1.2; p = 0.71), pain 40.2 vs. 34.1 (Badj = -6.8; p = 0.08), and insomnia 33.7 vs. 41.6 (Badj = 5.5, p = 0.16). Among patients with NART, clinically relevant QoL impairments were less frequent 2 years after treatment compared to < 2 years thereafter (n = 6 vs. n = 4 on average).

CONCLUSION

There is little evidence for QoL differences in most domains and overall QoL between the two irradiation groups. However, patients after NART might experience worse role functioning and pain but fewer problems with insomnia compared to patients after ART.

Health related Quality of Life over time in German sarcoma patients. An analysis of associated factors - results of the PROSa study

Introduction

Sarcomas are rare cancers and very heterogeneous in their location, histological subtype, and treatment. Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) of sarcoma patients has rarely been investigated in longitudinal studies.

Methods

Here, we assessed adult sarcoma patients and survivors between September 2017 and February 2020, and followed-up for one year in 39 study centers in Germany. Follow-up time points were 6 (t1) and 12 months (t2) after inclusion. We used a standardized, validated questionnaire (the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Core Instrument (EORTC QLQ-C30) and explored predictors of HRQoL in two populations (all patients (Analysis 1), patients in ongoing complete remission (Analysis 2)) using generalized linear mixed models.

Results

In total we included up to 1111 patients at baseline (915 at t1, and 847 at t2), thereof 387 participants were in complete remission at baseline (334 at t1, and 200 at t2). When analyzing all patients, HRQoL differed with regard to tumor locations: patients with sarcoma in lower extremities reported lower HRQoL values than patients with sarcomas in the upper extremities. Treatment which included radiotherapy and/or systemic therapy was associated with lower HRQoL. For patients in complete remission, smoking was associated with worse HRQoL-outcomes. In both analyses, bone sarcomas were associated with the worst HRQoL values. Being female, in the age group 55-<65 years, having lower socioeconomic status, and comorbidities were all associated with a lower HRQoL, in both analyses.

Discussion

HRQoL increased partially over time since treatment and with sporting activities. HRQoL improved with time since treatment, although not in all domains, and was associated with lifestyle and socioeconomic factors. Bone sarcomas were the most affected subgroup. Methods to preserve and improve HRQoL should be developed for sarcoma patients.

Distress in soft-tissue sarcoma and GIST patients -Results of a German multicentre observational study (PROSa)

OBJECTIVE

Soft tissue sarcomas (STS) and gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GIST) are a group of rare malignant tumours with a high and heterogenous disease burden. As evidence is lacking, we aimed to determine the prevalence of increased emotional distress and to identify associated factors in these patients.

METHODS

The PROSa-study (Burden and medical care of sarcoma) was conducted between 2017 and 2020 in 39 study centres. Cross-sectional data from adult STS and GIST patients were analysed. Distress was measured with the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-4). The relation of socioeconomic and clinical factors with distress was explored in adjusted logistic regression models.

RESULTS

Among 897 patients, prevalence of elevated anxiety and depression was 17% resp. 19%. Unemployed patients (odds ratio (OR) 6.6 (95% confidence interval (CI) 2.9-15.0)) and those with a disability pension (OR 3.1 (95% CI 1.9-5.0)) were more likely to experience distress (vs. employed patients). Patients with a disability pass (vs. none) had higher odds of increased distress (OR 1.8 (95% CI 1.2-2.7)). Lowest distress was observed in patients 2-<5 years and ≥5 years after diagnosis (comparison: <6 months) (OR 0.4 (95% CI 0.2-0.6) and 0.3 (95% CI 0.2-0.6)). Patients with thoracic STS (vs. lower limbs) had twice the odds to experience distress (OR 2.0 (95% CI 1.1-3.6)). Distress was seen almost twice as often in patients with progressive disease (vs. complete remission) (OR 1.7 (95% CI 1.1-2.8)).

CONCLUSION

Prevalence of elevated distress in STS and GIST patients is high. Unemployed patients, those with a disability pension and newly diagnosed patients are more often distressed than other patients. Clinicians and psycho-oncologists should be aware of these factors and consider the social aspects of the disease. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Data protection-compliant broad consent for secondary use of health care data and human biosamples for (bio)medical research: Towards a new German national standard

BACKGROUND

The secondary use of deidentified but not anonymized patient data is a promising approach for enabling precision medicine and learning health care systems. In most national jurisdictions (e.g., in Europe), this type of secondary use requires patient consent. While various ethical, legal, and technical analyses have stressed the opportunities and challenges for different types of consent over the past decade, no country has yet established a national consent standard accepted by the relevant authorities.

METHODS

A working group of the national Medical Informatics Initiative in Germany conducted a requirements analysis and developed a GDPR-compliant broad consent standard. The development included consensus procedures within the Medical Informatics Initiative, a documented consultation process with all relevant stakeholder groups and authorities, and the ultimate submission for approval via the national data protection authorities.

RESULTS

This paper presents the broad consent text together with a guidance document on mandatory safeguards for broad consent implementation. The mandatory safeguards comprise i) independent review of individual research projects, ii) organizational measures to protect patients from involuntary disclosure of protected information, and iii) comprehensive information for patients and public transparency. This paper further describes the key issues discussed with the relevant authorities, especially the position on additional or alternative consent approaches such as dynamic consent.

DISCUSSION

Both the resulting broad consent text and the national consensus process are relevant for similar activities internationally. A key challenge of aligning consent documents with the various stakeholders was explaining and justifying the decision to use broad consent and the decision against using alternative models such as dynamic consent. Public transparency for all secondary use projects and their results emerged as a key factor in this justification. While currently largely limited to academic medicine in Germany, the first steps for extending this broad consent approach to wider areas of application, including smaller institutions and medical practices, are currently under consideration.

Quality of life of GIST patients with and without current tyrosine kinase inhibitor treatment: Cross-sectional results of a German multicentre observational study (PROSa)

OBJECTIVE

We investigated the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GIST).

METHODS

In the multicentre PROSa study, the HRQoL of adult GIST patients was assessed between 2017 and 2019 using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer HRQoL questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30). We performed group comparisons and multivariate linear regressions.

RESULTS

Among 130 patients from 13 centres, the mean global HRQoL was 63.3 out of 100 points. Higher sores indicate better HRQoL. The highest restrictions were in emotional, social, role functioning, insomnia, fatigue, and pain. In multivariate linear regression, we found no significant differences between patients receiving tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) treatment and those without TKI treatment as well as between patients treated with curative or with palliative intent. Patients who received multiple lines of TKI treatment had the most restrictions, notably in physical (unstandardized regression coefficient [B] = -15.7), role (B = -25.7), social (B = -18.4), and cognitive functioning (B = -19.7); fatigue (B = 15.93); general health (B = -14.23); and EORTC-sum score (B = -13.82) compared to all other patients.

CONCLUSION

The highest HRQoL restrictions were in GIST patients receiving multiple lines of TKI therapy. Underlying causes need further investigation.

[Position paper of the German Network for Health Services Research (DNVF) on application-related data collection according to Social Code Book V]

Within the framework of the early benefit assessment, the Federal Joint Committee (G-BA) has been authorised since 2019 by the law for more safety in the supply of pharmaceuticals GSAV to request additional application-related data capture for certain pharmaceutical drugs. This results in certain challenges, especially in the area of conflict between methodological requirements and practical feasibility. The position paper provides an overview and takes up the general regulations defined by the Federal Ministry of Health (BMG) as well as the process defined by the G-BA. Subsequently, possible solutions are discussed and recommendations for implementation are given from the perspective of health care research.

The Health-Related Quality of Life of Sarcoma Patients and Survivors in Germany-Cross-Sectional Results of a Nationwide Observational Study (PROSa)

Simple Summary

Sarcomas are a rare cancer with many different subtypes. They can occur anywhere in the body and are treated in a multi-disciplinary manner. Large studies on the quality of life of sarcoma patients are rare, so little is known about how patients are doing compared to the general population and which groups of sarcoma patients are particularly affected by quality of life limitations. We assessed the quality of life of 1113 sarcoma patients from Germany. The majority were particularly restricted in their emotional functioning, physical functioning, and the exercise of everyday demands (role function). Many of them experienced pain (56%) and fatigue (51%). We found that patients with leg or bone sarcomas were especially affected by quality of life limitations. We also found that patients who received a retirement pension were less affected by quality of life restrictions than patients who had not retired.

Abstract

Sarcomas are rare cancers with high heterogeneity in terms of type, location, and treatment. The health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of sarcoma patients has rarely been investigated and is the subject of this analysis. Adult sarcoma patients and survivors were assessed between September 2017 and February 2019 in 39 study centers in Germany using standardized, validated questionnaires (European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30)). Associated factors were analyzed exploratively using multivariable linear regressions. Among 1113 patients, clinically important limitations and symptoms were most pronounced in emotional (63%, 95% CI 60–66%), physical (60%, 95% CI 57–62%), role functioning (51%, 95% CI 48–54%), and pain (56%, 95% CI 53–59%) and fatigue (51%, 95% CI 48–54%). HRQoL differed between tumor locations with lower extremities performing the worst and sarcoma types with bone sarcoma types being most affected. Additionally, female gender, higher age, lower socioeconomic status, recurrent disease, not being in retirement, comorbidities, and being in treatment were associated with lower HRQoL. Sarcoma patients are severely restricted in their HRQoL, especially in functioning scales. The heterogeneity of sarcomas with regard to type and location is reflected in HRQoL outcomes. During treatment and follow-up, close attention has to be paid to the reintegration of the patients into daily life as well as to their physical abilities and emotional distress.

Chances and Challenges of Registry-Based Pharmacovigilance in Multiple Sclerosis: Lessons Learnt from the Implementation of the Multicenter REGIMS Registry

The long-term and potential rare side effects of new immunomodulating drugs for the treatment of multiple sclerosis (MS) are often not well known. Spontaneous case report systems of adverse drug effects are a valuable source in pharmacovigilance, but have several limitations. Primary data collections within registries allow a comprehensive analysis of potential side effects, but face several challenges. This article will outline the chances and challenges of registry-based adverse event reporting, using the example of the German immunotherapeutic registry REGIMS. REGIMS is an observational, clinical multicenter registry that aims to assess the incidence, type, and consequences of side effects of MS immunotherapies. Patients treated with an approved MS medication are recruited by their physicians during routine visits in hospitals, outpatient clinics, and MS-specialized practices. REGIMS incorporates an electronic physician-based documentation in each center and a paper-based patient documentation, both at baseline and regular follow-up visits. By the end of 2019, 43 REGIMS centers were actively recruiting patients and performing follow-up documentations. The majority of the first 1000 REGIMS patients were female (69.3%), had relapse-remitting MS (89.8%), and were treated with a second-line therapy. During the implementation of REGIMS, several logistic and procedural challenges had to be overcome, which are outlined in this paper. Pharmacovigilance registries such as REGIMS provide high-quality primary data from a specific patient population in a real-world care setting and enable pharmacovigilance research that cannot be carried out using secondary data. Despite the logistic and procedural challenges in establishing a multicenter pharmacovigilance registry in Germany, the advantages outweigh the drawbacks.

[Consulting Ethics Committees about a Multicenter Observational Study in Germany - A Report on Effort and Costs]

AIM OF THE STUDY

Ethics committees (ECs) have an indispensable monitoring and regulatory function in research on human beings. In multicenter observational studies, approvals of several local ECs are often required. The aim of this analysis was to provide an overview of the resources used and the process for consulting ECs about a multicenter observational study in Germany.

METHODS

For this purpose, a cross-sectional analysis was carried out. Resources and activities within the consultation process were documented by the central study management for the period April 2018-April 2019. The study for which the consultation was obtained involved 106 certified colorectal cancer centers in 15 federal states in Germany.

RESULTS

We submitted applications to ECs in 14 medical associations and 7 university hospitals. In total, 6,305 euros consultation fees were charged by the ECs, with the fees varying between 50 and 1,400 euros. For the application documents, at least 2,986 sheets of DIN A4 paper were printed and sent by post to the EC. Partly, several copies of the application documents were required. The central study management spent about 210 working hours. The median of the processing time was 32 days (range: 5-177 days).

CONCLUSION

In order to significantly reduce the financial, material and personnel costs for scientists and ECs, a standardized and nationwide procedure for consulting ECs about multicenter studies should be pursued in the future. In the interests of economic and ecological sustainability, online procedures should be considered.