TOXview: a novel graphical presentation of cancer treatment toxicity profiles

Effect of a prediction tool and communication skills training on communication of treatment outcomes: a multicenter stepped wedge clinical trial (the SOURCE trial)

Background

For cancer patients to effectively engage in decision making, they require comprehensive and understandable information regarding treatment options and their associated outcomes. We developed an online prediction tool and supporting communication skills training to assist healthcare providers (HCPs) in this complex task. This study aims to assess the impact of this combined intervention (prediction tool and training) on the communication practices of HCPs when discussing treatment options.

Methods

We conducted a multicenter intervention trial using a pragmatic stepped wedge design (NCT04232735). Standardized Patient Assessments (simulated consultations) using cases of esophageal and gastric cancer patients, were performed before and after the combined intervention (March 2020 to July 2022). Audio recordings were analyzed using an observational coding scale, rating all utterances of treatment outcome information on the primary outcome-precision of provided outcome information-and on secondary outcomes-such as: personalization, tailoring and use of visualizations. Pre vs. post measurements were compared in order to assess the effect of the intervention.

Findings

31 HCPs of 11 different centers in the Netherlands participated. The tool and training significantly affected the precision of the overall communicated treatment outcome information (p = 0.001, median difference 6.93, IQR (-0.32 to 12.44)). In the curative setting, survival information was significantly more precise after the intervention (p = 0.029). In the palliative setting, information about side effects was more precise (p < 0.001).

Interpretation

A prediction tool and communication skills training for HCPs improves the precision of treatment information on outcomes in simulated consultations. The next step is to examine the effect of such interventions on communication in clinical practice and on patient-reported outcomes.

Funding

Financial support for this study was provided entirely by a grant from the Dutch Cancer Society (UVA 2014-7000).

Antiproliferative and palliative activity of flavonoids in colorectal cancer

Flavonoids are plant bioactive compounds of great interest in nutrition and pharmacology, due to their remarkable properties as antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, antibacterial, antifungal and antitumor drugs. More than 5000 different flavonoids exist in nature, with a huge structural diversity and a plethora of interesting pharmacological properties. In this work, five flavonoids were tested for their potential use as antitumor drugs against three CRC cell lines (HCT116, HT-29 and T84). These cell lines represent three different stages of this tumor, one of which is metastatic. Xanthohumol showed the best antitumor activity on the three cancer cell lines, even better than that of the clinical drug 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), although no synergistic effect was observed in the combination therapy with this drug. On the other hand, apigenin and luteolin displayed slightly lower antitumor activities on these cancer cell lines but showed a synergistic effect in combination with 5-FU in the case of HTC116, which is of potential clinical interest. Furthermore, a literature review highlighted that these flavonoids show very interesting palliative effects on clinical symptoms such as diarrhea, mucositis, neuropathic pain and others often associated with the chemotherapy treatment of CRC. Flavonoids could provide a double effect for the combination treatment, potentiating the antitumor effect of 5-FU, and simultaneously, preventing important side effects of 5-FU chemotherapy.

Informing Patients With Esophagogastric Cancer About Treatment Outcomes by Using a Web-Based Tool and Training: Development and Evaluation Study

Background

Due to the increasing use of shared decision-making, patients with esophagogastric cancer play an increasingly important role in the decision-making process. To be able to make well-informed decisions, patients need to be adequately informed about treatment options and their outcomes, namely survival, side effects or complications, and health-related quality of life. Web-based tools and training programs can aid physicians in this complex task. However, to date, none of these instruments are available for use in informing patients with esophagogastric cancer about treatment outcomes.

Objective

This study aims to develop and evaluate the feasibility of using a web-based prediction tool and supporting communication skills training to improve how physicians inform patients with esophagogastric cancer about treatment outcomes. By improving the provision of treatment outcome information, we aim to stimulate the use of information that is evidence-based, precise, and personalized to patient and tumor characteristics and is communicated in a way that is tailored to individual information needs.

Methods

We designed a web-based, physician-assisted prediction tool—Source—to be used during consultations by using an iterative, user-centered approach. The accompanying communication skills training was developed based on specific learning objectives, literature, and expert opinions. The Source tool was tested in several rounds—a face-to-face focus group with 6 patients and survivors, semistructured interviews with 5 patients, think-aloud sessions with 3 medical oncologists, and interviews with 6 field experts. In a final pilot study, the Source tool and training were tested as a combined intervention by 5 medical oncology fellows and 3 esophagogastric outpatients.

Results

The Source tool contains personalized prediction models and data from meta-analyses regarding survival, treatment side effects and complications, and health-related quality of life. The treatment outcomes were visualized in a patient-friendly manner by using pictographs and bar and line graphs. The communication skills training consisted of blended learning for clinicians comprising e-learning and 2 face-to-face sessions. Adjustments to improve both training and the Source tool were made according to feedback from all testing rounds.

Conclusions

The Source tool and training could play an important role in informing patients with esophagogastric cancer about treatment outcomes in an evidence-based, precise, personalized, and tailored manner. The preliminary evaluation results are promising and provide valuable input for the further development and testing of both elements. However, the remaining uncertainty about treatment outcomes in patients and established habits in doctors, in addition to the varying trust in the prediction models, might influence the effectiveness of the tool and training in daily practice. We are currently conducting a multicenter clinical trial to investigate the impact that the combined tool and training have on the provision of information in the context of treatment decision-making.

Fecal Microbiota Transplantation from Overweight or Obese Donors in Cachectic Patients with Advanced Gastroesophageal Cancer: A Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-Controlled, Phase II Study

PURPOSE

Cachexia is a multifactorial syndrome, associated with poor survival in patients with cancer, and is influenced by the gut microbiota. We investigated the effects of fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) on cachexia and treatment response in patients with advanced gastroesophageal cancer.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

In a double-blind randomized placebo-controlled trial performed in the Amsterdam University Medical Center, we assigned 24 cachectic patients with metastatic HER2-negative gastroesophageal cancer to either allogenic FMT (healthy obese donor) or autologous FMT, prior to palliative chemotherapy (capecitabine and oxaliplatin). Primary objective was to assess the effect of allogenic FMT on satiety. Secondary outcomes were other features of cachexia, along with disease control rate (DCR), overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and toxicity. Finally, exploratory analyses were performed on the effect of FMT on gut microbiota composition (metagenomic sequencing) and metabolites (untargeted metabolomics).

RESULTS

Allogenic FMT did not improve any of the cachexia outcomes. Patients in the allogenic group (n = 12) had a higher DCR at 12 weeks (P = 0.035) compared with the autologous group (n = 12), longer median OS of 365 versus 227 days [HR = 0.38; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.14-1.05; P = 0.057] and PFS of 204 versus 93 days (HR = 0.50; 95% CI, 0.21-1.20; P = 0.092). Patients in the allogenic group showed a significant shift in fecal microbiota composition after FMT (P = 0.010) indicating proper engraftment of the donor microbiota.

CONCLUSIONS

FMT from a healthy obese donor prior to first-line chemotherapy did not affect cachexia, but may have improved response and survival in patients with metastatic gastroesophageal cancer. These results provide a rational for larger FMT trials.

COMplot, A Graphical Presentation of Complication Profiles and Adverse Effects for the Curative Treatment of Gastric Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: For the curative treatment of gastric cancer, several neoadjuvant, and adjuvant treatment-regimens are available which have shown to improve overall survival. No overview is available regarding toxicity and surgery related outcomes. Our aim was to construct a novel graphical method concerning adverse events (AEs) associated with multimodality treatment and perform a meta-analysis to compare different clinically relevant cytotoxic regimens with each other.

Methods: The PubMed, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and ASCO/ESMO databases were searched up to May 2019 for randomized controlled trials investigating curative treatment regimens for gastric cancer. To construct single and bidirectional bar-charts (COMplots), grade 1–2 and grade 3–5 AEs were extracted per cytotoxic regimen. For surgery-related outcomes a pre-specified set of complications was used. Thereafter, treatment-arms comparing the same regimens were combined in a single-arm random-effects meta-analysis and pooled-proportions were calculated with 95% confidence-intervals. Comparative meta-analyses were performed based on clinical relevance and compound similarity.

Results: In total 16 RCTs (n = 4,526 patients) were included investigating pre-operative-therapy and 39 RCTs investigating adjuvant-therapy (n = 13,732 patients). Pre-operative COMplots were created for among others; 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin-oxaliplatin-docetaxel (FLOT), epirubicin-cisplatin-fluoropyrimidine (ECF), cisplatin-fluoropyrimidine (CF), and oxaliplatin-fluoropyrimidine (FOx). Pre-operative FLOT showed a minor increase in grade 1–2 and grade 3–4 AEs compared to pre-operative ECF, CF, and FOx. A pooled analysis of patients who had received pre-operative therapy compared to patients who underwent direct surgery did not reveal any significant difference in surgery related morbidity/mortality. When we compared three commonly used adjuvant regimens; S-1 had the lowest amount of grade 3–4 AEs compared to capecitabine with oxaliplatin (CAPOX) and 5-FU with radiotherapy (5-FU+RT).

Conclusion: COMplot provides a novel tool to visualize and compare treatment related AEs for gastric cancer. Based on our comparisons, pre-operative FLOT had a manageable toxicity profile compared to other pre-operative doublet or triplet regimens. We found no evidence indicating surgical outcomes might be hampered by pre-operative therapy. Adjuvant S-1 had a more favorable toxicity profile compared to CAPOX and 5-FU+RT.