Reaching beyond maximum grade: progress and future directions for modernising the assessment and reporting of adverse events in haematological malignancies

Managing infectious challenges in the age of molecular-targeted therapies for adult hematological malignancies

Over the last decade, the therapeutic landscape for hematological malignancies (HMs) has witnessed a remarkable surge in the development of novel biological and small-molecule-targeted immunomodulatory agents. These therapies have drastically improved survival, but some come at the cost of increased risk of bacterial, viral, and/or fungal infections and on-target off-tumor immunological side effects. To mitigate such risks, physicians must be well informed about infectious complications and necessary preventive measures, such as screening, vaccinations, and antimicrobial prophylaxis. Furthermore, physicians should be vigilant about the noninfectious side effects of these agents that can mimic infections and understand their potential drug-drug interactions with antimicrobials. Strengthening and harmonizing the current surveillance and reporting system for drug-associated infections in real-world settings is essential to better ascertain the potential infections associated with these agents. In this review, we aimed to summarize the infection risks associated with novel agents used for specific HMs and outline recommended strategies for monitoring and prophylaxis.

The Adverse Event Landscape of Stem Cell Transplant: Evidence for aGVHD Driving Early Transplant Associated Toxicities

Although unrelated-donor (URD) hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) is associated with many toxicities, a detailed analysis of adverse events, as defined by the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), has not previously been curated. This represents a major unmet need, especially as it relates to assessing the safety of novel agents. We analyzed a detailed AE database from the "ABA2" randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial of abatacept for acute graft-versus-host disease (aGVHD) prevention, for which the FDA mandated a detailed AE assessment through Day +180, and weekly neutrophil and platelet counts through Day +100. These were analyzed for their relationship to key transplant outcomes, with a major focus on the impact of aGVHD on the development/severity of AEs. A total of 2102 AEs and 1816 neutrophil/platelet counts were analyzed from 142 8/8-HLA-matched URD HCT recipients on ABA2 (placebo cohort, n = 69, abatacept cohort, n = 73). This analysis resulted in 2 major observations. (1) Among graft source, conditioning intensity, age, and Grade 2 to 4 aGVHD, only aGVHD impacted Grade 3 to 5 AE acquisition after the first month post-transplant. (2) The development of Grade 3 to 4 aGVHD was associated with thrombocytopenia. We have created a detailed resource for the transplant community by which to contextualize clinical toxicities after transplant. It has identified aGVHD as a major driver of post-HCT Grade 3 to 5 AEs, and underscored a link between aGVHD and thrombocytopenia. This establishes a critical safety framework upon which the impact of novel post-transplant aGVHD therapeutics should be evaluated. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov (#NCT01743131).

[Special issue PRO] Considering endpoints for comparative tolerability of cancer treatments using patient report given the estimand framework

Regulatory agencies are advancing the use of systematic approaches to collect patient experience data, including patient-reported outcomes (PROs), in cancer clinical trials to inform regulatory decision-making. Due in part to clinician under-reporting of symptomatic adverse events, there is a growing recognition that evaluation of cancer treatment tolerability should include the patient experience, both in terms of the overall side effect impact and symptomatic adverse events. Methodologies around implementation, analysis, and interpretation of "patient" reported tolerability are under development, and current approaches are largely descriptive. There is robust guidance for use of PROs as efficacy endpoints to compare cancer treatments, but it is unclear to what extent this can be relied-upon to develop tolerability endpoints. An important consideration when developing endpoints to compare tolerability between treatments is the linkage of trial design, objectives, and statistical analysis. Despite interest in and frequent collection of PRO data in oncology trials, heterogeneity in analyses and unclear PRO objectives mean that design, objectives, and analysis may not be aligned, posing substantial challenges for the interpretation of results. The recent ICH E9 (R1) estimand framework represents an opportunity to help address these challenges. Efforts to apply the estimand framework in the context of PROs have primarily focused on efficacy outcomes. In this paper, we discuss considerations for comparing the patient-reported tolerability of different treatments in an oncology trial context.

Consensus position statement on advancing the standardised reporting of infection events in immunocompromised patients

Patients can be immunocompromised from a diverse range of disease and treatment factors, including malignancies, autoimmune disorders and their treatments, and organ and stem-cell transplantation. Infections are a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in immunocompromised patients, and the disease treatment landscape is continually evolving. Despite being a critical but preventable and curable adverse event, the reporting of infection events in randomised trials lacks sufficient detail while inconsistency of categorisation and definition of infections in observational and registry studies limits comparability and future pooling of data. A core reporting dataset consisting of category, site, severity, organism, and endpoints was developed as a minimum standard for reporting of infection events in immunocompromised patients across study types. Further additional information is recommended depending on study type. The standardised reporting of infectious events and attributable complications in immunocompromised patients will improve diagnostic, treatment, and prevention approaches and facilitate future research in this patient group.

Precision oncology medicines and the need for real world evidence acceptance in health technology assessment: Importance of patient involvement in sustainable healthcare

Precision oncology has made remarkable strides in improving clinical outcomes, offering hope to patients with historically difficult-to-treat, as well as rare or neglected cancers. However, despite rapid advancement, precision oncology has reached a critical juncture, where patient access to these life-saving medicines may be hampered by strict requirements by Health Technology Assessment (HTA) bodies for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) for assessing new medicines against appropriate comparator. The very nature of precision oncology-matching a tumour's unique molecular alterations to targeted therapies predicted to elicit response-can make the use of RCTs very difficult, as only a very small number of patients might qualify for a given therapy within a traditional clinical trial setting. Real-world evidence (RWE) has been accepted for regulatory decision-making but has yet to reach widespread acceptance by HTA bodies. As the oncology treatment landscape has evolved towards favouring the concept of precision oncology, there is a growing need for flexibility in the way HTA bodies evaluate new medicines. We must acknowledge that current assessment methodologies can limit access to life-changing medicines for many patients who have no alternative options and that a growing number of precision oncology medicines with proven clinical benefits in rare tumours cannot be reasonably evaluated using traditional methodologies. The objectives of this paper are to advocate a change in mindset regarding best practices in drug assessment models and to propose alternative approaches when considering indications for which RWE is the most compelling data source available.

Measuring chronic myeloid leukaemia TKI-related toxic effects in the real world: a systematic review and critical assessment of content validity of patient-reported outcome measures

Insight into real-world treatment-related toxic effects reported by patients has the potential to improve care, benchmark trials, and fill knowledge gaps, especially in patients with chronic myeloid leukaemia, which is treated in the majority of patients continually with tyrosine-kinase inhibitors (TKIs). The aim of our systematic review was to investigate the content validity of instruments that elicit TKI-related toxic effects reported by patients with chronic myeloid leukaemia in the real world. We searched PubMed and Embase from Jan 1, 2017 to Oct 21, 2022. Studies on instruments used in or developed for patients with chronic myeloid leukaemia that assess a patient's symptoms were eligible. Content validity was assessed according to the Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN): none of the six identified instruments were rated as sufficient. Five instruments (European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Core Quality of Life Questionnaire for chronic myeloid leukaemia with 24 items [EORTC QLQ-CML24], EORTC symptom set, Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Leukaemia [FACT-LEU], haematological malignancies patient-reported outcomes [HM-PRO], and MD Anderson Symptom Inventory for chronic myeloid leukaemia [MDASI-CML]) were rated as inconsistent due to not being evaluated by professionals post-development, having very few patients with chronic myeloid leukaemia involved, or missing key symptoms. Moderate-quality to very low-quality evidence underpinned these ratings. The two EORTC instruments were the only ones not to miss key toxic effects (eg, muscle cramps). However, their relevance was rated as inconsistent: the QLQ-CML24 includes questions on health-related quality-of-life, whereas the symptom set includes items sourced from solid cancer treatments. This Review shows the need for an instrument with sufficient content validity to measure toxic effects from TKI treatment in patients with chronic myeloid leukaemia. Until then, stakeholders can make an informed choice from currently used instruments with our assessment.

Racial differences in longitudinal toxicities of anticancer agents in early phase cancer clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Racial differences have been reported in toxicity outcomes for anticancer drug treatments. However, these observations were often from studies with small sample sizes, and many only reported the maximum grade of toxicity and no longitudinal information. This current analysis aims to investigate racial differences in longitudinal toxicities using a large-scale clinical trials database.

METHODS

Early-phase clinical trials sponsored by the Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program at the National Cancer Institute, USA, that evaluated cytotoxic drugs and molecularly targeted agents between March 2000 and December 2012 were studied. Race was categorized as White, Black or African-American, and Asian. Each toxicity's grade prevalence, mean grade at each cycle, and time to develop grade 2 or higher toxicity was evaluated.

RESULTS

In total, 25,442 patients from 697 trials were included in this study. The number of patients categorized as White, Black, and Asian designations was 22,756 (89%), 1874 (7%), and 812 (3%), respectively. Notable findings include the rate of any grade of diarrhea in Black people was 26% and 21% lower than that of White and Asian people. The median time to the first grade 2 or higher event was 6 cycles in White people, 8 in Black people, and 6 in Asian people. The rate of any grade hyperglycemia was significantly higher in Asian people.

CONCLUSIONS

Although we identified several racial differences in longitudinal toxicities, most were of generally lower grade. Further study is needed to clarify the cause of racial differences in treatment-associated toxicities.

Reducing Adolescent and Young Adult Cancer Outcome Disparities Through Optimized Care Delivery: A Blueprint from the Children's Oncology Group

Achieving equitable, high-quality cancer care delivery across socioeconomically and biologically diverse populations requires multilevel interventions, including those at the patient, provider, institution, and policy levels that influence cost, quality, and access to care. For adolescent and young adults (AYAs), who experience suboptimal health outcomes compared with younger and older people with cancer, cancer care delivery is influenced by additional contextual factors unique to the patients' developmental stage, psychosocial and economic status, and cancer subtype. In this review, we highlight the most pressing research needs in AYA cancer care delivery and opportunities to improve outcomes for this population.

The role of SF3B1 and NOTCH1 in the pathogenesis of leukemia

The discovery of new genes/pathways improves our knowledge of cancer pathogenesis and presents novel potential therapeutic options. For instance, splicing factor 3b subunit 1 (SF3B1) and NOTCH1 genetic alterations have been identified at a high frequency in hematological malignancies, such as leukemia, and may be related to the prognosis of involved patients because they change the nature of malignancies in different ways like mediating therapeutic resistance; therefore, studying these gene/pathways is essential. This review aims to discuss SF3B1 and NOTCH1 roles in the pathogenesis of various types of leukemia and the therapeutic potential of targeting these genes or their mutations to provide a foundation for leukemia treatment.

Access to and affordability of CAR T-cell therapy in multiple myeloma: an EBMT position paper

Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy is a promising immunotherapeutic approach in the treatment of multiple myeloma, and the recent approval of the first two CAR T-cell products could result in improved outcomes. However, it remains a complex and expensive technology, which poses challenges to health-care systems and society in general, especially in times of crises. This potentially accelerates pre-existing inequalities as access to CAR T-cell therapy varies, both between countries, depending on the level of economic development, and within countries, due to structural disparities in access to quality health care-a parameter strongly correlated with socioeconomic status, ethnicity, and lifestyle. Here, we identify two important issues: affordability and access to CAR T-cell treatment. This consensus statement from clinical investigators, clinicians, nurses, and patients from the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT) proposes solutions as part of an innovative collaborative strategy to make CAR T-cell therapy accessible to all patients with multiple myeloma.