Adverse event reporting in oncology clinical trials - lost in translation?

Measuring the Time to Deterioration for Health-Related Quality of Life in Patients With Metastatic Breast Cancer Using a Web-Based Monitoring Application: Longitudinal Cohort Study

Background

Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is used to evaluate the treatment of metastatic breast cancer. In a long-term therapy setting, HRQoL can be used as an important benchmark for treatment success. With the help of digital apps, HRQoL monitoring can be extended to more remote areas and be administered on a more frequent basis.

Objective

This study aims to evaluate 3 common HRQoL questionnaires in metastasized breast cancer in terms of TTD in a digital, web-based setting. We further aim to examine the development of the HRQoL in different systemic treatment groups in each of these evaluation instruments.

Methods

A total of 192 patients with metastatic breast cancer were analyzed in this bicentric prospective online cohort study at two German university hospitals. Patients completed questionnaires on HRQoL (EuroQol Visual Analog Scale [EQ-VAS], EuroQol 5 Dimension 5 Level [EQ-5D-5L], European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire–Core 30 item [EORTC QLQ-C30]) via an online platform over a 6-month period. Treatment schedules and medical history were retrieved from medical records. Unadjusted Cox regression analysis on treatment-related factors was performed. We conducted subgroup analyses in regard to TTD events between different treatments.

Results

The EQ-VAS showed a higher rate of deterioration after 8 weeks (84/179, 46.9%) than the EQ-5D-5L (47/163, 28.8%) and EORTC QLQ-C30 (65/176, 36.9%). Unadjusted Cox regression revealed significant connections between known metastases in the liver (P=.03, HR 1.64, 95% CI 1.06-2.52) and pleura (P=.04, HR 0.42, 95% CI 0.18-0.96) in the EQ-VAS. Significant relations between EQ-VAS events and single EQ-5D-5L items and the EQ-5D-5L summary score were demonstrated. All treatment groups significantly differed from the CDK4/6 inhibition subgroup in the EQ-VAS.

Conclusions

Compared to the EQ-5D-5L and QLQ-C30, the EQ-VAS showed a higher rate of deterioration after 8 weeks. Significant connections to certain metastatic locations were only detected in the EQ-VAS. The EQ-VAS is capable of reflecting the distinctive HRQoL profiles of different systemic treatments as well as the different aspects of HRQoL presented in the EQ-5D-5L. TTD with the EQ-VAS is an adequate mean of examining longitudinal development of HRQoL among breast cancer patients.

Discordant reporting of VTE in pancreatic cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis of thromboprophylaxis versus chemotherapeutic trials

BACKGROUND

Despite the frequency of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in pancreatic cancer, it is inconsistently reported as an adverse event in clinical trials. We hypothesized that reported rates of VTE in pancreatic cancer clinical trials are influenced by the objectives of the trial, with higher rates reported in thromboprophylaxis compared with chemotherapeutic trials. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials (RCT) in pancreatic cancer to quantify differences in reported rates of VTE in thromboprophylaxis and chemotherapeutic trials.

METHODS

We systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Clinicaltrials.gov. Eligible thromboprophylaxis RCTs were required to report rates of thrombosis in non-anticoagulant pancreatic cancer cohorts. Eligible chemotherapy studies were RCTs evaluating chemotherapy regimens in advanced pancreatic cancer and reported thrombosis as adverse events. Pooled event rates of VTE and arterial thrombosis were calculated using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

The pooled VTE rate in 13 chemotherapy studies (5694 patients) was 5.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.9-9.0%) compared with 16.5% (95% CI, 11.7%-23.3%; P < .001) in 9 thromboprophylaxis studies (631 patients). The pooled symptomatic VTE rate from chemotherapy studies was 5.4% (95% CI, 3.5%-8.3%), which was significantly lower than the pooled rate from thromboprophylaxis studies of 10.5% (95% CI, 7.3%-14.9%; P = .02).

CONCLUSION

The VTE incidence reported in chemotherapy RCTs in pancreatic cancer is significantly lower than reported in thromboprophylaxis studies. This finding highlights the underrecognition of VTE in chemotherapeutic trials and emphasizes the need to standardize approaches towards monitoring and reporting of VTE in clinical trials.

Identification, collection, and reporting of harms among non-industry-sponsored randomized clinical trials of pharmacologic interventions in the critically ill population: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Prescribing pharmacologic therapies for critically ill patients requires a careful balancing of risks and benefits. Defining, monitoring, and reporting harms that occur in clinical trials conducted in critically ill populations, however, is challenging given that the natural history of most critical illnesses includes progressive multiple organ failure and death. In this study, we assessed harms reporting in clinical trials performed in critically ill populations.

METHODS

Randomized, non-industry-sponsored, human clinical trials of pharmacologic interventions in adult critically ill populations published between 2015 and 2018 in high-impact journals were included in this systematic review. Harms data, adherence to Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) harms reporting guidelines, and restrictions on harms reporting were recorded.

RESULTS

A total of 707 abstracts were screened with 40 trials ultimately being included in the analysis. Included trials represent 28,636 randomized patients with a median of 292 (IQR 100-546) patients per trial. The most common disease states were general critical care (33%) and sepsis (28%). Of 18 included CONSORT items, the median number met was 12 (IQR 9, 14). The most commonly missed items were adverse event (AE) severity grading definitions and AE attribution (relationship of AE to study drug), which were only reported in 35 and 38% of manuscripts, respectively. Half of the manuscripts (48%) provided definitions for recorded AEs. There were 5 studies investigating the effects of corticosteroids in sepsis, with the number of AEs reported per analyzed patient ranging from 0.01 to 1.89. AE definitions in studies of similar/equivalent interventions often varied substantially. Study protocols were available for 30/40 (75%) of studies, with 13 (43%) of those not providing any guidance regarding AE attribution.

CONCLUSIONS

Randomized trials of pharmacologic interventions conducted in critically ill populations and published in high impact journals often fail to adequately describe AE definitions, severity, attribution, and collection procedures. Among trials of similar interventions in comparable populations, variation in AE collection and reporting procedures is substantial. These factors may limit a clinician's ability to accurately balance the potential benefits and harms of an intervention.

TOXview: a novel graphical presentation of cancer treatment toxicity profiles

Background: Toxicity profiles play a crucial role in the choice between specific palliative chemotherapy regimens. To optimize the quality of life for cancer patients, patients should be adequately informed about potential toxicities before undergoing chemotherapy. Therefore, we constructed TOXviews, a novel graphical presentation and overview of toxicity profiles to improve information provision about adverse events. As an example, we analyzed first-line chemotherapy regimens for advanced esophagogastric cancer (AEGC). Methods: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, CENTRAL, ASCO and ESMO for prospective phase II or III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on palliative first-line systemic treatment for AEGC until February 2017. We extracted proportions of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events grade 1-2 (mild) and 3-4 (severe) adverse events from each chemotherapy arm and pooled these by using single-arm meta-analysis. Toxicity profiles per chemotherapy regimen were visualized in bidirectional bar charts with pooled proportions plus 95% confidence intervals. For comparative analysis, chemotherapy regimens were grouped in singlets, doublets and triplets. Results: We included 92 RCTs with a total of 16,963 patients. TOXviews for 3 fluoropyrimidine singlets, 5 cisplatin-containing doublets (C-doublets), 10 fluoropyrimidine non-cisplatin containing doublets (F-doublets), 4 anthracycline-containing triplets (A-triplets) and 5 taxane-containing triplets (T-triplets) were constructed. C-doublets, A-triplets and T-triplets all showed an increased incidence of grade 3-4 adverse events and clinically relevant grade 1-2 adverse events compared to F-doublets. Conclusion: TOXview provides a new graphical presentation and overview of chemotherapy toxicities. TOXviews can be used to educate physicians about the incidences of AEs of systemic therapy and improve informed decision-making.

Safety of trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) in patients with HER2-positive advanced breast cancer: Primary results from the KAMILLA study cohort 1

BACKGROUND

Many patients with metastatic human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive breast cancer (BC) are candidates for trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) treatment sometime in their disease history. KAMILLA evaluated safety of T-DM1 in patients with previously treated HER2-positive locally advanced or metastatic BC (advanced BC).

METHODS

KAMILLA (NCT01702571) is a single-arm, open-label, international, phase IIIb safety study of patients with HER2-positive advanced BC with progression after prior treatment with chemotherapy and a HER2-directed agent for MBC or within 6 months of completing adjuvant therapy. Patients received T-DM1 (3.6 mg/kg every 3 weeks) until unacceptable toxicity, withdrawal or disease progression.

RESULTS

Among 2002 treated patients, median age was 55 years (range, 26-88; 373 [18.6%] aged ≥65 years), 1321 (66.0%) received ≥2 prior metastatic treatment lines and 398 (19.9%) had baseline central nervous system metastases. Adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs occurred in 1862 (93.0%) and 427 (21.3%) patients, respectively. Grade ≥3 AEs occurred in 751 (37.5%) patients; the three most common (individual Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activity terms) were anaemia (3.0%), thrombocytopaenia (2.7%) and fatigue (2.5%). Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 6.9 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 6.0-7.6). Median overall survival (OS) was 27.2 months (95% CI, 25.5-28.7). With increasing lines of prior advanced therapy (0-1 versus 4+), median PFS and OS decreased numerically from 8.3 to 5.6 months and from 31.3 to 22.5 months, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

KAMILLA is the largest cohort of T-DM1-treated patients studied to date. Results are consistent with prior randomised studies, thereby supporting T-DM1 as safe, tolerable and efficacious treatment for patients with previously treated HER2-positive advanced BC.

Incidence of Placebo Adverse Events in Randomized Clinical Trials of Targeted and Immunotherapy Cancer Drugs in the Adjuvant Setting: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

IMPORTANCE

Several reports have associated the placebo effect with objective response and improvement of a clinical condition in oncology, but only a few studies have analyzed the adverse events (AEs) in the placebo groups of the clinical trials.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the incidence of placebo AEs reported in randomized clinical trials of modern cancer drugs in the adjuvant setting.

DATA SOURCES

Based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline, a systematic literature search of English-language publications from January 1, 2000, through April 15, 2018, was performed using MEDLINE (PubMed). The following search terms were used to retrieve all trials from the PubMed library: adjuvant, maintenance, consolidation, and placebo, in addition to specific cancer type-related keywords.

STUDY SELECTION

A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 3 design was mandatory for study inclusion. Only studies enrolling patients who had undergone macroscopically complete resections were included. No other anticancer treatments in addition to placebo were allowed in the control group. Only trials involving a targeted therapy (tyrosine kinase, BRAF, or MEK inhibitors) or immunotherapy-related drugs were included. Trials using chemotherapy, interferon, and endocrine therapy were excluded. Two authors (D.H.E. and F.D.W.) independently reviewed the studies for inclusion.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Data were extracted by investigators, and random-effects meta-analysis was performed to estimate the proportion of grade 3 to 4 placebo AEs in the included studies.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Incidence of grade 3 to 4 placebo AEs in the placebo groups.

RESULTS

Of 731 studies screened, 10 eligible trials were found including 4 tumor types (melanoma, non-small cell lung cancer, gastrointestinal stromal tumor, and renal cell carcinoma). Overall, 11 143 patients (6270 [56.3%] in the treatment group with mean [SD] age of 55.6 [4.2] years and 4873 patients [43.7%] in the placebo group with mean [SD] age of 55.9 [4.3] years) were included. The mean incidence of any-grade placebo AEs was 85.1% (95% CI, 79.2%-91.0%). The most frequent (mean [SD]) grade 3 to 4 placebo AEs in patients were hypertension (2.8% [2.2%]), fatigue (1.0% [0.9%]), and diarrhea (0.8% [0.6%]). The overall, random-effects pooled incidence of grade 3 to 4 placebo AEs was 18% (95% CI, 15%-21%), with a high level of heterogeneity (I2 = 86%). Frequency of grade 3 to 4 placebo AEs was found to be correlated in the treatment and placebo groups (ρ = 0.7; P = .03). Mean study drug discontinuation owing to placebo AEs was 3.9% (95% CI, 2.7%-5.2%).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Placebo administration was associated with a substantial incidence of grade 3 to 4 placebo AEs in modern cancer adjuvant trials. This finding should be considered by investigators, sponsors, regulatory authorities, and patient support groups.

Beyond maximum grade: modernising the assessment and reporting of adverse events in haematological malignancies

Tremendous progress in treatment and outcomes has been achieved across the whole range of haematological malignancies in the past two decades. Although cure rates for aggressive malignancies have increased, nowhere has progress been more impactful than in the management of typically incurable forms of haematological cancer. Population-based data have shown that 5-year survival for patients with chronic myelogenous and chronic lymphocytic leukaemia, indolent B-cell lymphomas, and multiple myeloma has improved markedly. This improvement is a result of substantial changes in disease management strategies in these malignancies. Several haematological malignancies are now chronic diseases that are treated with continuously administered therapies that have unique side-effects over time. In this Commission, an international panel of clinicians, clinical investigators, methodologists, regulators, and patient advocates representing a broad range of academic and clinical cancer expertise examine adverse events in haematological malignancies. The issues pertaining to assessment of adverse events examined here are relevant to a range of malignancies and have been, to date, underexplored in the context of haematology. The aim of this Commission is to improve toxicity assessment in clinical trials in haematological malignancies by critically examining the current process of adverse event assessment, highlighting the need to incorporate patient-reported outcomes, addressing issues unique to stem-cell transplantation and survivorship, appraising challenges in regulatory approval, and evaluating toxicity in real-world patients. We have identified a range of priority issues in these areas and defined potential solutions to challenges associated with adverse event assessment in the current treatment landscape of haematological malignancies.

Reporting guidelines for oncology research: helping to maximise the impact of your research

Many reports of health research omit important information needed to assess their methodological robustness and clinical relevance. Without clear and complete reporting, it is not possible to identify flaws or biases, reproduce successful interventions, or use the findings in systematic reviews or meta-analyses. The EQUATOR Network (http://www.equator-network.org/) promotes responsible reporting and the use of reporting guidelines to improve the accuracy, completeness, and transparency of health research. EQUATOR supports researchers by providing online resources and training. EQUATOR Oncology, a project funded by Cancer Research UK, aims to support cancer researchers reporting their research through the provision of online resources. In this article, our objective is to highlight reporting issues related to oncology research publications and to introduce reporting guidelines that are designed to aid high-quality reporting. We describe generic reporting guidelines for the main study types, and explain how these guidelines should and should not be used. We also describe 37 oncology-specific reporting guidelines, covering different clinical areas (e.g., haematology or urology) and sections of the report (e.g., methods or study characteristics); most of these are little-used. We also provide some background information on EQUATOR Oncology, which focuses on addressing the reporting needs of the oncology research community.

Serious adverse events of older adults in nursing home and community intervention trials

Background/Aims

Clinical trials of older adults are increasingly common, but risks of serious adverse events (SAE) may vary. We describe the incidence of SAE in two randomized trials, one community-based and one nursing home-based.

Methods

We performed a secondary data analysis from two randomized clinical trials at one academic health center and 21 nursing homes involving 200 sedentary community dwellers aged 70–89 years and 185 female nursing home residents aged 65 years or older. Interventions included structured physical activity to reduce mobility disability in the Lifestyle Interventions and Independence for Elders (LIFE) study and oral cranberry capsules to reduce bacteriuria plus pyuria in nursing home residents (CRANNY) trial. We measured SAE incidence per 100 person-years and incidence of protocol-related unanticipated SAE per 100 person-years in LIFE and CRANNY trials.

Results

Mean age and proportion of patients with dementia in LIFE and CRANNY trials were 79.3 years and 86.4 years and 0% and 78%, respectively. There were 179 total SAE in LIFE including 8 (4%) deaths, and 116 total SAE in CRANNY including 33 (28%) deaths. SAE incidence was 33.7 (95% CI 27.2, 41.8) events per 100 person-years in LIFE and 69.4 (95% CI 49.1, 98.1) events per 100 person-years in CRANNY. No protocol-related unanticipated SAE occurred in either trial.

Conclusions

The frequency and severity of SAE vary in older adults. While SAE are common in nursing home residents, protocol-related, unanticipated SAE are rare in nursing home residents and community dwellers. This finding can inform trial monitoring protocols.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT01072500 and NCT01691430.

NOLAN: a randomized, phase 2 study to estimate the effect of prophylactic naproxen or loratadine vs no prophylactic treatment on bone pain in patients with early-stage breast cancer receiving chemotherapy and pegfilgrastim

Purpose

Mild-to-moderate bone pain is a commonly reported adverse event (AE) associated with pegfilgrastim. We evaluated the effect of prophylactic naproxen or loratadine vs no prophylactic treatment on pegfilgrastim-associated bone pain.

Methods

In this open-label study (NCT01712009), women ≥ 18 years of age with newly diagnosed stage I–III breast cancer and an ECOG performance status ≤ 2 who were planning ≥ 4 cycles of adjuvant or neoadjuvant chemotherapy with pegfilgrastim support starting in cycle 1 were randomized 1:1:1 to receive naproxen, loratadine, or no treatment to prevent pegfilgrastim-associated bone pain. The primary endpoint was all-grade bone pain in cycle 1 from AE reporting. Secondary endpoints included bone pain in cycles 2–4 and across all cycles from AE reporting and patient-reported bone pain by cycle and across all cycles.

Results

Six hundred patients were enrolled. Most patients (83.0%) were white, and mean (SD) age was 54.2 (11.1) years. The percentage of patients with all-grade bone pain in cycle 1 from AE reporting in the naproxen, loratadine, and no prophylaxis groups was 40.3, 42.5, and 46.6%, respectively; differences between the treatment groups were not statistically significant. Maximum, mean, and area under the curve for patient-reported bone pain were consistently lower in the naproxen and loratadine groups than in the no prophylaxis group; some of these differences were significant. Loratadine was associated with fewer treatment-related AEs and discontinuations than naproxen.

Conclusions

Given its tolerability, its ease of administration, and its potential benefit, treatment with loratadine should be considered to help prevent bone pain in patients receiving chemotherapy and pegfilgrastim.

Clinical trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov; NCT01712009

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s00520-017-3959-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Combined immune checkpoint blockade (anti-PD-1/anti-CTLA-4): Evaluation and management of adverse drug reactions

BACKGROUND

Combined immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) provides unprecedented efficacy gains in numerous cancer indications, with PD-1 inhibitor nivolumab plus CTLA-4 inhibitor ipilimumab in advanced melanoma as first-ever approved therapies for combined ICB. However, gains in efficacy must be balanced against a higher frequency and severity of adverse drug reactions (ADR). Because delays in diagnosis and management might result in symptom worsening and further complications, clinicians shall be well trained to identify ADR promptly and monitor patients adequately. This paper reviews safety data assessed by the European Medicines Agency for the anti-PD-1/CTLA-4 combination and provides a literature overview on published case reports for rare ADR with suspected potential underreporting. Incidences and kinetics of immune-related ADR are described. Recommendations for the evaluation and management of ADR are convened by an interdisciplinary expert panel focusing on rare but clinically important side effects arising from combined ICB. Pooled safety data from 1551 patients with advanced melanoma, treated either with 3mg/kg ipilimumab plus 1mg/kg nivolumab (N=407), or nivolumab alone (N=787), or ipilimumab alone (N=357) demonstrate that immune-related ADR occur more frequently for the combination, with a shorter time-to-onset, and tend to be more severe. The majority of events is reversible after systemic use of glucocorticoids, notably methylprednisolone or equivalents; in certain cases of long-lasting and refractory immune toxicities, non-steroidal immunosuppressants may be used, once ICB is interrupted or terminated. Combined ICB has considerable toxicities, therefore close monitoring and high experience in diagnosis and treatment of ADR is necessary.