Development of the National Cancer Institute's patient-reported outcomes version of the common terminology criteria for adverse events (PRO-CTCAE)

A Pilot Study on the Collection of Adverse Event Data from the Patient Using an Electronic Platform in a Cancer Clinical Trial Unit

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Accurate and robust adverse event (AE) data collection is crucial in cancer clinical trials to ensure participant safety. Frameworks have been developed to facilitate the collection of AE data and now the traditional workflows are facing renewal to include patient-reported data, improving completeness of AE data. We explored one of these workflows in a cancer clinical trial unit.

METHODS

The study was a single-site study conducted at a tertiary hospital located in Australia. Patients consenting to a clinical trial were eligible for inclusion in this study. Participants used an electronic platform-My Health My Way (MHMW)-to report their symptomatic data weekly for 24 weeks. A symptom list was included within the platform, along with a free text field. Data reported via the platform was compared with data recorded in the patient's medical chart. Time taken to compile data from each source was recorded, along with missing data points. Agreement between patient-reported data and data recorded in the medical notes was assessed using Kappa and Gwet's AC1; time taken to compile data and missing data points were assessed using a Wilcoxon signed rank test.

RESULTS

Low agreement was found between patient- and clinician-reported data (- 0.482 and - 0.159 by Kappa and Gwet's AC1 respectively). Only 127 (30%) of the total 428 AEs were reported by both MHMW and medical notes. Patients reported higher rates of symptoms from the symptom list, while clinicians reported higher rates of symptoms outside of the symptom list. Time taken to compile the data from MHMW was significantly less than that taken to review medical notes (2.19 min versus 5.73 min respectively; P <  0.001). There were significantly less missing data points from the MHMW data compared with the medical notes (1.4 versus 7.8; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

This study confirms previous reports that patient- and clinician-reported adverse event data show low agreement. This study also shows that clinical trial sites could significantly reduce the work performed by research staff in the collection of adverse event data by implementing an electronic, patient-reported platform.

A randomized trial of aerobic exercise in colorectal cancer: Rationale, design, recruitment, and exercise adherence results

BACKGROUND

Physical activity is associated with improved disease-free survival in colorectal cancer survivors. This report describes the purpose, design, recruitment, and exercise adherence results of the National Cancer Institute (NCI)-sponsored Exercise and Colorectal Cancer Treatment (EXACT) trial.

METHODS

The primary objective of the EXACT trial is to determine if randomization to 150 min per week of moderate-intensity aerobic exercise reduces systemic inflammation among stage I-III colorectal cancer survivors compared with a waitlist control group over 12 weeks. Participants were provided with an in-home treadmill and heart rate monitor. Characteristics associated with randomization were identified using χ2 or Fisher's exact test for categorical variables and t-tests or analysis of covariance (ANCOVA). Exercise adherence was calculated as the total minutes exercised by total minutes prescribed.

RESULTS

Between August 2019 and February 2023, 3082 colorectal cancer survivors were invited to participate, 89 were screened, and 60 were randomized to the study protocol. Younger age (P = 0.02), female sex (P = 0.002), white race (P = 0.01), proximal time since tumor resection (P = 0.02), and regional tumor stage (P < 0.001) were associated with study participation. Average exercise adherence was 92.2 % (95 % CI: 85.5, 98.8) and all study participants achieved ≥80 % exercise adherence. Endpoint data collection was completed for all participants in May 2023.

CONCLUSION

The results from the EXACT trial will characterize the changes that occur from exercise to advance our understanding of the biological mechanisms by which exercise may prevent tumor recurrence and death in colorectal cancer survivors.

Using a modified Delphi procedure to select a PRO-CTCAE-based subset for patient-reported symptomatic toxicity monitoring in rectal cancer patients

PURPOSE

Standardized patient-reported outcomes (PRO) monitoring during and after rectal cancer treatment provides insight into treatment-related toxicities patients experience and improves health-related quality-of-life as well as overall survival. We aimed to select a subset of the PRO version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE) for standardized monitoring of treatment-related symptomatic toxicities in rectal cancer.

METHODS

We used a mixed methods approach including a literature review, and semi-structured interviews with health care providers (HCPs) involved in rectal cancer care and rectal cancer patients. Results from literature and interviews were summarized and used in a modified Delphi procedure to select a PRO-CTCAE subset specific for rectal cancer.

RESULTS

Twenty-six PRO-CTCAE symptomatic toxicities were identified from literature. Fifteen HCPs from multiple disciplines (medical, radiation and surgical oncology), and a heterogeneous group of fifteen rectal cancer patients treated with chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy and/or surgery, participated in semi-structured interviews. Ten HCPs (67%) and nine patients (90%) participated in the first Delphi round. The final selected PRO-CTCAE core-subset contained 16 symptomatic toxicities: 'diarrhea', 'fecal incontinence', 'constipation','bloating of the abdomen', 'pain in the abdomen', 'vomiting', 'decreased libido', 'pain during vaginal sex', 'ability to achieve and maintain erection', 'fatigue', 'anxiety', 'feeling that nothing could cheer you up', 'urinary incontinence', 'painful urination', 'general pain', and 'hand-foot syndrome'.

CONCLUSION

Based on a comprehensive mixed methods study, a PRO-CTCAE subset for standardized treatment-related symptomatic toxicity monitoring in rectal cancer was identified. Assessment of the effectiveness and compliance of symptomatic toxicity monitoring using this subset is recommended.

Patient-reported outcomes in patients with metastatic non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer from the randomized Phase II PERLA trial comparing first-line chemotherapy plus dostarlimab or pembrolizumab

BACKGROUND

PERLA (NCT04581824) compared efficacy and safety of dostarlimab (DCT) or pembrolizumab (PCT) plus chemotherapy as first-line treatment for metastatic non-small cell lung cancer. Here, we report patient-reported outcomes (PROs; exploratory analysis) from PERLA.

METHODS

Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive DCT or PCT every 3 weeks (Q3W) for ≤ 35 cycles [C]. PROs (EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-LC13, PRO-CTCAE, FACT-GP5) were collected at baseline, Q3W until C4, Q9W until C16, Q12W until end of treatment and at 30-day safety follow-up. Change from baseline and time to deterioration (TTD) in QLQ-C30 and QLQ-LC13 were analyzed using longitudinal mixed models and Kaplan-Meier estimators, respectively.

RESULTS

The PRO (DCT/PCT) datasets included 102/99 patients for QLQ-C30, 96/90 for QLQ-LC13, 96/88 for PRO-CTCAE, and 95/87 for FACT-GP5. Completion rates were > 80 % to C4, then decreased in both arms. For QLQ-C30 and QLQ-LC13, most patients reported stable/improved responses at C13 (∼ 9 months on treatment), with similar responses between arms except more patients reported improvements in dyspnea (QLQ-C30: 36.4 % vs 13.0 %; QLQ-LC13: 40.6 % vs 25.0 %) and chest pain (QLQ-LC13: 34.4 % vs 10.0 %) with DCT vs PCT. TTD per QLQ-C30 and QLQ-LC13 were similar between arms, although TTD in dyspnea was longer with DCT vs PCT (QLQ-LC13: 4.24 vs 1.54 months; p = 0.0168). Most patients in both arms reported that adverse events occurred occasionally/rarely/never with moderate/mild severity. Overall, patients reported little/no bother from treatment side effects.

CONCLUSIONS

DCT maintained health-related quality of life similarly to PCT and was well tolerated, supporting the PERLA primary results and dostarlimab use in future regimens.

The Association Between an Electronic Health Record (EHR)-Embedded Frailty Index and Patient-Reported Outcomes Among Patients with Metastatic Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer on Immunotherapy: A Brief Report

Background: While frailty is a well-established predictor of overall mortality among patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (mNSCLC), its association with patient-reported outcomes is not well-characterized. The goal of this study was to examine the association between an electronic frailty index (eFI) score and patient-reported outcome measures along with prognostic awareness among patients with mNSCLC receiving immunotherapy. Methods: In a cross-sectional study, patients with mNSCLC who were on immunotherapy completed the European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC-QLQ-C30) and the National Cancer Institute Patient Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE). We utilized bivariate analyses to compare quality of life, symptoms, supportive services, and prognostic awareness among 3 groups defined by e-frailty status. Results: Sixty patients (mean age 62.5 years, 75% Caucasian, 60% women) participated. Most patients were pre-frail (68%), with 13% being frail and 18% non-frail. Pre-frail and frail patients had significantly lower physical function scores (mean 83.9 fit vs 74.8 pre-frail vs 60.0 frail, P = .04) and higher rates of self-reported pain (75% frail vs 41.5% pre-frail vs 18.2% fit; P = .04) compared to non-frail patients. We found no differences in palliative referral rates. Conclusion: Pre-frail and frail mNSCLC patients identified by the eFI have higher rates of pain and physical functional impairments than non-frail patients. These findings highlight the importance of emphasizing preventive interventions targeting social needs, functional limitations, and pain management, especially among pre-frail patients to reduce further decline.

A Qualitative Study of Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Symptom Monitoring After Thoracic Surgery

INTRODUCTION

Thoracic surgery is a mainstay of therapy for lung cancer and other chronic pulmonary conditions, but recovery is often complicated. Digital health systems can facilitate remote postoperative symptom management yet obstacles persist in their routine clinical adoption. This study aimed to identify patient-perceived barriers and facilitators to using an electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) monitoring platform specially designed to detect complications from thoracic surgery postdischarge.

METHODS

Patients (n = 16) who underwent thoracic surgery and participated in an ePRO parent study completed semistructured interviews, which were analyzed using thematic content analysis and iterative team-based coding. Themes were mapped onto the three domains of the Capability, Opportunity, and Motivation Model of behavior framework to inform ePRO design and implementation improvements.

RESULTS

Analysis demonstrated seven dominant themes, including barriers (1. postoperative patient physical and mental health, 2. lack of access to email and poor internet connectivity, 3. lack of clarity on ePRO use in routine clinical care, and 4. symptom item redundancy) as well as facilitators (5. ease of the ePRO assessment completion, 6. engagement with the surgical care team on ePRO use, and 7. increased awareness of symptom experience through ePRO use). Suggested ePRO improvements included offering alternatives to web-based completion, tailoring symptom assessments to individual patients, and the need for patient education on ePROs for perioperative care.

CONCLUSIONS

Addressable barriers and facilitators to implementation of ePRO symptom monitoring in the thoracic surgical patient population postdischarge have been identified. Future work will test the impact of design improvements on implementation outcomes of feasibility and acceptability.

Statistical properties of items and summary scores from the Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE®) in a diverse cancer sample

BACKGROUND/AIMS

The Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE®) was developed to capture symptomatic adverse events from the patient perspective. We aim to describe statistical properties of PRO-CTCAE items and summary scores and to provide evidence for recommendations regarding PRO-CTCAE administration and reporting.

METHODS

Using data from the PRO-CTCAE validation study (NCT02158637), prevalence, means, and standard deviations of PRO-CTCAE items, composite scores, and mean and maximum scores across attributes (frequency, severity, and/or interference) of symptomatic adverse events were calculated. For each adverse event, correlations and agreement between attributes, correlations between attributes and composite scores, and correlations between composite, mean, and maximum scores were estimated.

RESULTS

PRO-CTCAE items were completed by 899 patients with various cancer types. Most patients reported experiencing one or more adverse events, with the most prevalent being fatigue (87.7%), sad/unhappy feelings (66.0%), anxiety (63.6%), pain (63.2%), insomnia (61.8%), and dry mouth (60.0%). Attributes were moderately to strongly correlated within an adverse event (r = 0.53 to 0.77, all p < 0.001) but not fully concordant (κweighted = 0.26 to 0.60, all p < 0.001), with interference demonstrating lowest mean scores and prevalence among attributes of the same adverse event. Attributes were moderately to strongly correlated with composite scores (r = 0.67 to 0.97, all p < 0.001). Composite scores were moderately to strongly correlated with mean and maximum scores for the same adverse event (r = 0.69 to 0.94, all p < 0.001). Correlations between composite scores of different adverse events varied widely (r = 0.04 to 0.68) but were moderate to strong for conceptually related adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

Results provide evidence for PRO-CTCAE administration and reporting recommendations that the full complement of attributes be administered for each adverse event, and that attributes as well as summary scores be reported.

The efficacy of Veliparib in combination with chemotherapy in the treatment of lung cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

This meta-analysis aims to examine the effectiveness of veliparib, a poly ADP-ribose polymerase inhibitor, in combination with chemotherapy in treating bronchogenic carcinoma.

METHODS

PubMed, Cochrane, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched for eligible randomized controlled trials comparing veliparib plus chemotherapy to standard chemotherapy in adult lung cancer patients, until July 2023. The main outcomes were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS).

RESULTS

This meta-analysis included six studies encompassing 2,136 patients. Veliparib has a slight OS improvement over placebo, HR = 0.91, 95% CI [0.83 to 1.0], p = 0.05. Veliparib offers more OS benefit in the subpopulation of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) than small-cell lung cancer (SCLC), HR = 0.89, 95% CI [0.81,0.99], p = 0.03 and HR = 1.00, 95% CI [0.79, 1.28], p = 0.97, respectively. There was no significant PFS benefit between the two groups, HR = 0.92, 95% CI [0.81-1.01], p = 0.08).

CONCLUSION

Veliparib has a marginal inclination for overall survival improvement, more so in NSCLC, with an acceptable safety profile. Our results merit the pursuit of better-powered trials to support further the extent of veliparib's effectiveness in lung cancer patients.

REGISTRATION

PROSPERO (CRD42023453705).

Longitudinal assessment of health-related quality of life in Japanese patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma receiving immune check point inhibitors

Real-world data on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in advanced urothelial carcinoma (aUC) receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are limited. This study included 42 patients with aUC who received second-line or later pembrolizumab (n = 19), maintenance avelumab followed by first-line chemotherapy (n = 13), or adjuvant nivolumab after radical surgery (n = 10). Time-course changes in the domains and scales related to HRQoL were evaluated using the EORTC QLQ-C30, FACT-G, and SF-8 questionnaires during ICI therapy. Anchor-based approaches for minimally important differences were determined as 'improved', 'stable', and 'deteriorated'. We found significant improvements after the start of pembrolizumab treatment on many scales. Almost none of the scales changed significantly in the avelumab and nivolumab groups. Approximately 80% of the pembrolizumab group had deteriorated social/family well-being in FACT-G. Approximately 60% of the patients in the avelumab group had deteriorated general health and vitality in SF-8. In the nivolumab group, none of the scales deteriorated in > 50% of the patients. Deterioration of physical function in the SF-8 was associated with occurrence of treatment-related adverse events ≥ grade 2 during ICI therapy (P = 0.013). Our findings demonstrated that majority of patients with aUC who received ICI therapy had a stable HRQoL, which was consistent with evidence from clinical trials.

Delivering High-Quality Cancer Care: Charting a New Course for a System in Crisis: One Decade Later

In 2012, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine convened a committee charged with addressing the quality of cancer care in the United States and providing recommendations to policymakers and the cancer care community on strategies to improve cancer care delivery from the time of diagnosis through end-of-life. The resulting committee report, titled Delivering High-Quality Cancer Care: Charting a New Course for a System in Crisis (2013), presented a conceptual framework that included six interconnected components of care with corresponding recommendations. Over the past decade, the delivery of high-quality of cancer care has become more challenging and increasingly demanding on the workforce. In this manuscript, we review the goals and recommendations made in 2013, describe progress to date, and offer insights into future dedicated efforts and/or new strategies needed to achieve high-quality cancer care.

The Frequency of Urination Dysfunction in Patients Operated on for Rectal Cancer: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analyses

The frequency of long-term urination dysfunction after surgery for rectal cancer remains unclear, yet it is essential to establish this to improve treatment strategies. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), non-RCTs, and cohort studies were included with patients having undergone sphincter-preserving total (TME) or partial mesorectal excision (PME) for the treatment of primary rectal cancer in this review. The outcome was urination dysfunction reported at least three months postoperatively, both overall urination dysfunction and subdivided into specific symptoms. The online databases PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL were searched, bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale, and results were synthesized using one-group frequency meta-analyses. A total of 55 studies with 15,072 adults were included. The median follow-up was 29 months (range 3-180). The pooled overall urination dysfunction was 21% (95% confidence interval (CI) 12%-30%) 3-11 months postoperatively and 25% (95% CI 19%-32%) ≥12 months postoperatively. Retention and incontinence were common 3-11 months postoperatively, with pooled frequencies of 11% and 14%, respectively. Increased urinary frequency, retention, and incontinence seemed even more common ≥12 months postoperatively, with pooled frequencies of 37%, 20%, and 23%, respectively. In conclusion, one in five patients experienced urination dysfunction more than a year following an operation for rectal cancer.

Patient-reported outcomes in CodeBreaK 200: Sotorasib versus docetaxel for previously treated advanced NSCLC with KRAS G12C mutation

BACKGROUND

In the CodeBreaK 200 phase III, open-label trial, sotorasib significantly improved efficacy versus docetaxel in previously treated KRAS G12C-mutated advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) for global health status, physical functioning, dyspnea, and cough favored sotorasib over docetaxel. Here, we report sotorasib's additional impact on quality of life (QOL).

METHODS

In CodeBreaK 200, 345 patients who had progressed after prior therapy received sotorasib (960 mg orally daily) or docetaxel (75 mg/m2 intravenously every 3 weeks). Validated questionnaires captured patients' perception of their QOL and symptom burden for key secondary and exploratory PRO endpoints, including the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality-of-life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) and Quality-of-life Questionnaire Lung Cancer 13 (EORTC QLQ-LC13), question GP5 from the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy Tool General Form (FACT-G GP5), PRO-Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE), and 5-level EuroQOL-5 dimensions (EQ-5D-5L) including visual analog scale (EQ-5D VAS). Change from baseline to week 12 was assessed with generalized estimating equations for ordinal outcomes.

RESULTS

Patients receiving sotorasib were less bothered by treatment side effects than those receiving docetaxel (odds ratio [OR] 5.7) and experienced symptoms at lower severity (pain: OR 2.9; aching muscles: OR 4.4; aching joints: OR 4.2; mouth or throat sores: OR 4.3). Further, patients' symptoms interfered less with usual/daily activities (pain: OR 3.2; aching muscles: OR 3.9; aching joints: OR 10.7). QOL remained stable with sotorasib but worsened with docetaxel (change from baseline in EQ-5D VAS score: 1.5 vs -8.4 at cycle 1 day 5 and 2.2 vs -5.8 at week 12).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients receiving sotorasib reported less severe symptoms than those receiving docetaxel. In addition to improving clinical efficacy outcomes, sotorasib maintained QOL versus docetaxel, suggesting sotorasib may be a more tolerable treatment option for patients with pretreated, KRAS G12C-mutated advanced NSCLC.

Best practices and novel approaches for the preclinical development of drug-radiotherapy combinations for cancer treatment

Drug-radiation combination therapy is a practical approach to improving clinical outcomes for many tumours. Unfortunately, most clinical combination studies combine drugs with radiotherapy empirically and do not exploit mechanistic synergy in cell death and the interconnectivity of molecular pathways of tumours or rationale for selecting the dose, fractionation, and schedule, which can result in suboptimal efficacy and exacerbation of toxic effects. However, opportunities exist to generate compelling preclinical evidence for combination therapies from fit-for-purpose translational studies for simulating the intended clinical study use scenarios with standardised preclinical assays and algorithms to evaluate complex molecular interactions and analysis of synergy before clinical research. Here, we analyse and discuss the core issues in the translation of preclinical data to enhance the relevance of preclinical assays, in vitro clonogenic survival along with apoptosis, in vivo tumour regression and growth delay assays, and toxicology of organs at risk without creating barriers to innovation and provide a synopsis of emerging areas in preclinical radiobiology.

Development of a conceptual framework for an electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) system measuring symptoms and impacts of CAR T-cell therapies in patients with haematological malignancies

Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy is associated with potentially severe toxicities that create a substantial burden for patients. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) offer valuable insights into symptoms, functioning, and other complex constructs of interest. In this Review, we aimed to identify symptom and impact concepts important to patients receiving CAR T-cell therapy, construct a conceptual framework for an electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) system, and identify timepoints to capture PRO data for CAR T-cell therapies. We searched MEDLINE (OVID) and Web of Science (Clarivate) for articles in English published from Aug 30, 2017, to March 2, 2023. No restrictions on study design were applied. 178 symptoms or constructs were extracted from 44 articles reporting PRO collection in adults with haematological malignancies receiving CAR T-cell therapy. Six health-care professionals and 11 patients and caregiver partners verified construct relevance to clinical management and lived experience, respectively. 109 constructs were sorted according to the four domains of conceptual framework: symptom burden, impact of disease and treatment, tolerability, and health-related quality of life. The identification of concepts beyond symptom burden underscores the importance of PRO measurement for long-term monitoring, to align outcomes with patient concerns. The framework will facilitate PRO measure selection for systematic gathering of PROs from individuals with haematological malignancies receiving CAR T-cell therapies.

Efficacy and safety of pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) in ovarian cancer: a systematic review of current evidence

BACKGROUND

PIPAC is a recent approach for intraperitoneal chemotherapy with promising results for patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis. A systematic review was conducted to assess current evidence on the efficacy and outcomes of PIPAC in patients affected by ovarian cancer.

METHODS

The study adhered to the PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, Google Scholar and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched up to December 2023. Studies reporting data on patients with OC treated with PIPAC were included in the qualitative analysis.

RESULTS

Twenty-one studies and six clinical trials with 932 patients who underwent PIPAC treatment were identified. The reported first access failure was 4.9%. 89.8% of patients underwent one, 60.7% two and 40% received three or more PIPAC cycles. Pathological tumour response was objectivated in 13 studies. Intra-operative complications were reported in 11% of women and post-operative events in 11.5% with a 0.82% of procedure-related mortality. Quality of life scores have been consistently stable or improved during the treatment time. The percentage of OC patients who became amenable for cytoreductive surgery due to the good response after PIPAC treatment for palliative purposes is reported to be 2.3%.

CONCLUSION

The results showed that PIPAC is safe and effective for palliative purposes, with a good pathological tumour response and quality of life. Future prospective studies would be needed to explore the role of this treatment in different stages of the disease, investigating a paradigm shift towards the use of PIPAC with curative intent for women who are not eligible for primary cytoreductive surgery.

Psychometric properties of patient-reported outcomes Common Terminology Criteria for adverse events (PRO-CTCAE®) in breast cancer patients: The prospective observational multicenter VIP study

Patients' self-reporting is increasingly considered essential to measure quality-of-life and treatment-related side-effects. However, if multiple patient-reported instruments are used, redundancy may represent an overload for patients. Patient-Reported Outcomes Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE) are a tool allowing direct patients' reporting of side-effects. We tested psychometric properties of a selected list of PRO-CTCAE items, in a cohort of 303 breast cancer patients, using validated instruments for quality of life assessment as anchors. The analysis of convergent validity with HADS (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale) and EORTC BR-23 sub-scales, and the analysis of responsiveness with the PGIC (Patients Global Impression of Change) score supported that a selected list of PRO-CTCAE symptoms might represent a standardized, agile tool for both research and practice settings to reduce patient burden without missing relevant information on patient perceptions. Among patients using digital devices, those with a higher education levels required shorter time to fulfil questionnaires. In conclusion, a selected list of PRO-CTCAE items can be considered as a standardized, agile tool for capturing crucial domains of side-effects and quality of life in patients with breast cancer. The study is registered on clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04416672).

Postmarketing Surveillance of Full Spectrum Hemp Extract CBD Products: Reported Adverse Events and Serious Adverse Events

BACKGROUND

There is a growing interest in products featuring hemp extracts and a demand for more data regarding their safety. To date, there is a paucity of published data on the safety of these products.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of postmarketing surveillance data collected in the United States on full spectrum hemp extract (FSHE) products manufactured by Charlotte's Web (CW) was conducted over an 18-month period (January 2019 to July 2020). The frequency of adverse events (AEs) and serious adverse events (SAEs) was assessed by analyzing AE reports against the estimated number of consumers who purchased products and the total number of products sold.

RESULTS

During the 18-month period, approximately 646,391 consumers purchased 1,939,172 products and 431 AEs were reported by 304 individuals. The estimated percentage of consumers who reported at least one adverse event was 0.05%. The percentage of AEs per products sold was 0.02%. Most AEs (98.14%) reported were Grade 1 (i.e., asymptomatic or causing mild symptoms), as classified by the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events. Seven AEs were classified as serious, and the percentage of SAEs per products sold was 0.0004%. None of the reported SAEs were classified as a Grade 4 or Grade 5 (i.e., life threatening or fatal).

CONCLUSIONS

Approximately 0.05% of consumers who purchased the CW FSHE products from January 2019 to July 2020 reported an adverse event. The percentage of AEs and SAEs per products sold was 0.02% and 0.0004%, respectively. These data demonstrate that CW FSHE products appear to be well tolerated at recommended doses.

Dose-escalated Adaptive Radiotherapy for Bladder Cancer: Results of the Phase 2 RAIDER Randomised Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Delivering radiotherapy to the bladder is challenging as it is a mobile, deformable structure. Dose-escalated adaptive image-guided radiotherapy could improve outcomes. RAIDER aimed to demonstrate the safety of such a schedule.

METHODS

RAIDER is an international phase 2 noncomparative randomised controlled trial (ISRCTN26779187). Patients with unifocal T2-T4a urothelial bladder cancer were randomised (1:1:2) to standard whole bladder radiotherapy (WBRT), standard-dose adaptive radiotherapy (SART), or dose-escalated adaptive radiotherapy (DART). Two fractionation (f) schedules recruited independently. WBRT and SART dose was 55 Gy/20f or 64 Gy/32f, and DART dose was 60 Gy/20f or 70 Gy/32f. For SART and DART, a radiotherapy plan (small, medium, or large) was chosen daily. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with radiotherapy-related late Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events grade ≥3 toxicity; the trial was designed to rule out >20% toxicity with DART.

KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS

A total of 345 patients were randomised between October 2015 and April 2020: 41/46 WBRT, 41/46 SART, and 81/90 DART patients in the 20f/32f cohorts, respectively. The median age was 72/73 yr; 78%/85% had T2 tumours, 46%/52% had neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and 70%/71% had radiosensitising therapy. The median follow-up was 42.1/38.2 mo. Sixty-six of 77 (86%) 20f and 74 of 82 (90%) 32f participants planned for DART met the mandatory medium plan dose constraints. Radiotherapy-related grade ≥3 toxicity was reported in one of 58 patients (90% confidence interval [CI] 0.1, 7.9) with 20f DART and zero of 56 patients with 32f DART. Two-year overall survival was 77% (95% CI 69, 82) for WBRT + SART and 80% (95% CI 73, 85) for DART (hazard ratio = 0.84, 95% CI 0.59, 1.21, p = 0.4). Thirteen of 345 (3.8%) participants had salvage cystectomy.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

Grade ≥3 late toxicity was low. DART was safe and feasible to deliver, meeting preset toxicity thresholds. Disease-related outcomes are promising for dose-escalated treatments, with a low salvage cystectomy rate and overall survival similar to that seen in cystectomy cohorts.

Prospective Assessment of Quality of Life and Patient-Reported Toxicities Over the First Year After Chimeric Antigen Receptor T-Cell Therapy

Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy has transformed survival outcomes in patients with relapsed and refractory large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL), but it is associated with a variety of side effects. This study examined changes in patient-reported quality of life (QoL) and toxicities, as well as risk factors for worse QoL and toxicities, in the first year after treatment. Patients with LBCL completed questionnaires assessing QoL and toxicity severity before infusion, and 90, 180, and 360 days after infusion. Mixed models were used to examine changes in QoL and toxicities over time, and clinical moderators of change in QoL and toxicities. Patients reported improvements in physical functioning and fatigue in the year after treatment (P values <.01), but there were no changes in pain, anxiety, or depression over time. Patients with active disease at day 90 reported more physical dysfunction at all postinfusion timepoints (Ps ≤ .01) compared to patients who responded to treatment. Similarly, patients with active disease at day 90 reported worsening depression over time, such that at day 360, depressive symptoms were worse for patients with active disease than patients without active disease (P = .02). Patients treated with 4+ lines of prior therapy reported worsening pain and anxiety over time, such that at day 360, both pain and anxiety were significantly worse for patients previously treated with 4 of more lines of therapy than patients treated with fewer lines of therapy (Ps ≤ .01). Regarding toxicities, patients reported decreasing overall toxicity burden up to day 180, with subsequent worsening at day 360 (P = .02). Most patients reported at least one or two grade 2 toxicities at each timepoint. Patients demonstrated unchanging or improved QoL after treatment with CAR T-cell therapy, but active disease and greater prior lines of therapy were associated with worse QoL outcomes over time. Toxicity severity also improved during the first 6 months post-treatment, but worsened thereafter, particularly among patients with active disease after treatment.

Testing home-based exercise strategies in underserved minority cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy (THRIVE) trial: a study protocol

Background

Higher rates of physical inactivity and comorbid conditions are reported in Hispanic/Latinx and Black cancer patients receiving chemotherapy compared to their White counterparts. Despite the beneficial effect of exercise training for cancer patients, rates of participation in exercise oncology clinical trials are low among disadvantaged and racial and ethnic minority groups. Here, we will examine the effect of an exercise intervention using a novel, accessible, and cost-effective home-based exercise approach among Hispanic/Latinx and Black cancer patients receiving chemotherapy on exercise participation and cardiovascular disease risk.

Methods

The THRIVE trial is an 8-month prospective, three-arm study of 45 patients who are randomized in a 1:1:1 fashion to a supervised exercise intervention (SUP), unsupervised exercise (UNSUP), or an attention control (AC) group. Eligible patients include those with breast, colorectal, or prostate cancer, who are sedentary, overweight or obese, self-identify as Hispanic/Latinx or Black, and plan to receive chemotherapy. Patients randomized to the SUP group participate in a home-based 16-week periodized aerobic and resistance exercise program performed three days per week, supervised through video conference technology. Patients randomized to the UNSUP group participate in an unsupervised 16-week, telehealth-based, periodized aerobic and resistance exercise program performed three days per week using the same exercise prescription parameters as the SUP group. Patients randomized to the AC group receive a 16-week home-based stretching program. The primary outcome is changes in minutes of physical activity assessed by 7-day accelerometry at post-intervention. Secondary outcomes include cardiovascular risk factors, patient-reported outcomes, and physical function. Outcome measures are tested at baseline, post-intervention at month 4, and after a non-intervention follow-up period at month 8.

Discussion

The THRIVE trial is the first study to employ a novel and potentially achievable exercise intervention for a minority population receiving chemotherapy. In addition, this study utilizes an intervention approach to investigate the biological and behavioral mechanisms underlying exercise participation in these cancer patients. Results will guide and inform large randomized controlled trials to test the effect of home-based exercise on treatment outcomes and comorbid disease risk in minority patients with cancer undergoing chemotherapy.

Clinical trial registration

https://classic.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05327452, identifier (NCT#05327452).

Datopotamab-deruxtecan plus durvalumab in early-stage breast cancer: the sequential multiple assignment randomized I-SPY2.2 phase 2 trial

Sequential adaptive trial designs can help accomplish the goals of personalized medicine, optimizing outcomes and avoiding unnecessary toxicity. Here we describe the results of incorporating a promising antibody-drug conjugate, datopotamab-deruxtecan (Dato-DXd) in combination with programmed cell death-ligand 1 inhibitor, durvalumab, as the first sequence of therapy in the I-SPY2.2 phase 2 neoadjuvant sequential multiple assignment randomization trial for high-risk stage 2/3 breast cancer. The trial includes three blocks of treatment, with initial randomization to different experimental agent(s) (block A), followed by a taxane-based regimen tailored to tumor subtype (block B), followed by doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide (block C). Subtype-specific algorithms based on magnetic resonance imaging volume change and core biopsy guide treatment redirection after each block, including the option of early surgical resection in patients predicted to have a high likelihood of pathologic complete response, which is the primary endpoint assessed when resection occurs. There are two primary efficacy analyses: after block A and across all blocks for six prespecified HER2-negative subtypes (defined by hormone receptor status and/or response-predictive subtypes). In total, 106 patients were treated with Dato-DXd/durvalumab in block A. In the immune-positive subtype, Dato-DXd/durvalumab exceeded the prespecified threshold for success (graduated) after block A; and across all blocks, pathologic complete response rates were equivalent to the rate expected for the standard of care (79%), but 54% achieved that result after Dato-DXd/durvalumab alone (block A) and 92% without doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide (after blocks A + B). The treatment strategy across all blocks graduated in the hormone-negative/immune-negative subtype. No new toxicities were observed. Stomatitis was the most common side effect in block A. No patients receiving block A treatment alone had adrenal insufficiency. Dato-DXd/durvalumab is a promising therapy combination that can eliminate standard chemotherapy in many patients, particularly the immune-positive subtype.ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT01042379 .

Datopotamab-deruxtecan in early-stage breast cancer: the sequential multiple assignment randomized I-SPY2.2 phase 2 trial

Among the goals of patient-centric care are the advancement of effective personalized treatment, while minimizing toxicity. The phase 2 I-SPY2.2 trial uses a neoadjuvant sequential therapy approach in breast cancer to further these goals, testing promising new agents while optimizing individual outcomes. Here we tested datopotamab-deruxtecan (Dato-DXd) in the I-SPY2.2 trial for patients with high-risk stage 2/3 breast cancer. I-SPY2.2 uses a sequential multiple assignment randomization trial design that includes three sequential blocks of biologically targeted neoadjuvant treatment: the experimental agent(s) (block A), a taxane-based regimen tailored to the tumor subtype (block B) and doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide (block C). Patients are randomized into arms consisting of different investigational block A treatments. Algorithms based on magnetic resonance imaging and core biopsy guide treatment redirection after each block, including the option of early surgical resection in patients predicted to have a high likelihood of pathological complete response, the primary endpoint. There are two primary efficacy analyses: after block A and across all blocks for the six prespecified breast cancer subtypes (defined by clinical hormone receptor/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) status and/or the response-predictive subtypes). We report results of 103 patients treated with Dato-DXd. While Dato-DXd did not meet the prespecified threshold for success (graduation) after block A in any subtype, the treatment strategy across all blocks graduated in the hormone receptor-negative HER2-Immune-DNA repair deficiency- subtype with an estimated pathological complete response rate of 41%. No new toxicities were observed, with stomatitis and ocular events occurring at low grades. Dato-DXd was particularly active in the hormone receptor-negative/HER2-Immune-DNA repair deficiency- signature, warranting further investigation, and was safe in other subtypes in patients who followed the treatment strategy. ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT01042379 .

Twenty-five years of experience with patient-reported outcome measures in soft-tissue sarcoma patients: a systematic review

PURPOSE

As the importance of the patient's perspective on treatment outcome is becoming increasingly clear, the availability of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) has grown accordingly. There remains insufficient information regarding the quality of PROMs in patients with soft-tissue sarcomas (STSs). The objectives of this systematic review were (1) to identify all PROMs used in STS patients and (2) to critically appraise the methodological quality of these PROMs.

METHODS

Literature searches were performed in MEDLINE and Embase on April 22, 2024. PROMs were identified by including all studies that evaluate (an aspect of) health-related quality of life in STS patients by using a PROM. Second, studies that assessed measurement properties of the PROMs utilized in STS patients were included. Quality of PROMs was evaluated by performing a COSMIN analysis.

RESULTS

In 59 studies, 39 PROMs were identified, with the Toronto Extremity Salvage Score (TESS) being the most frequently utilized. Three studies evaluated methodological quality of PROMs in the STS population. Measurement properties of the TESS, Quick Disability of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (QuickDASH) and European Organization for Research and Treatment for Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC-QLQ-C30) were reported. None of the PROMs utilized in the STS population can be recommended for use based on the current evidence and COSMIN analysis.

CONCLUSION

To ensure collection of reliable outcomes, PROMs require methodological evaluation prior to utilization in the STS population. Research should prioritize on determining relevant content and subsequently selecting the most suitable PROM for assessment.

Health-related quality of life with sacituzumab govitecan in HR+/HER2- metastatic breast cancer in the phase III TROPiCS-02 trial

BACKGROUND

The TROPiCS-02 study (NCT03901339) demonstrated that sacituzumab govitecan (SG) has superior clinical outcomes over treatment of physician's choice (TPC) chemotherapy in patients with hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor 2 receptor-negative (HR+/HER2-) metastatic breast cancer (mBC). Here, we present health-related quality of life (HRQoL) patient-reported outcome (PRO) findings from this study.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Eligible adults with HR+/HER2- mBC who previously received a taxane, endocrine-based therapy, a CDK4/6 inhibitor, and 2-4 lines of chemotherapy were randomized 1:1 to receive SG or TPC until progression or unacceptable toxicity. PROs were assessed at baseline and on day 1 of each cycle, using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality-of-Life Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30), EQ-5D-5L, and PRO Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE).

RESULTS

Compared to TPC, overall least square mean change from baseline was significantly better for SG for physical functioning and dyspnea, but worse for diarrhea. Time to first clinically meaningful worsening or death was significantly longer for SG in global health status/quality of life, physical functioning, fatigue, emotional functioning, dyspnea, insomnia, and financial difficulties of the EORTC QLQ-C30 and the EQ-VAS, but longer for TPC in diarrhea. Few patients in both arms reported experiencing any worsening to level 3 or 4 treatment-related symptomatic events during treatment, as assessed by 16 PRO-CTCAE items, except for diarrhea frequency and amount of hair loss, which favored TPC.

CONCLUSIONS

SG was associated with an HRQoL benefit in most symptoms and functioning, compared with TPC. This supports the favorable profile of SG as a treatment option for patients with pretreated HR+/HER2- mBC.

Patient-reported outcome measures for medication treatment satisfaction: a systematic review of measure development and measurement properties

BACKGROUND

Medication Treatment Satisfaction (M-TS) from the patients' perspective is important for comprehensively evaluating the effect of medicines. The extent to which current patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for M-TS are valid, reliable, responsive, and interpretable remains unclear. To assess the measurement properties of existing PROMs for M-TS and to highlight research gaps.

METHODS

Using PubMed, Embase (Ovid), Cochrane library (Ovid), IPA (Ovid), PsycINFO, Patient-Reported Outcome and Quality of Life Questionnaires biomedical databases, and four Chinese databases, we performed a systematic search for studies addressing the development and validation of PROMs for M-TS. Based on the Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) guideline, pairs of reviewers independently assessed the measurement properties of the PROMs and rated the quality of evidence on the measurement properties of each PROM. (The Open Science Framework registration: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/8S5ZM ).

RESULTS

This review identified 69 PROMs for M-TS in 114 studies (four generic, 32 disease-specific, and 33 drug-specific) of which 60 were intended for adults. All provided limited or no information regarding interpretability. Most demonstrated appropriate construct validity including convergent validity (39/69) and discriminative or known-groups validity (40/69) (high to moderate quality of evidence). Only a few provided evidence of sufficient content validity (8/69), structural validity (13/69), and internal consistency (11/69). Of 38 PROMs reporting test-retest reliability, results in 24 provided evidence of satisfactory test-retest reliability (18 with high to moderate, 6 with low to very low quality of evidence). Few PROMs reported responsiveness (16/69). Two generic PROMs (Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication initial Version 1.4, TSQM-1.4; Treatment Satisfaction with Medicines Questionnaire, SATMED-Q) and one drug-specific PROM (Insulin Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire, ITSQ) demonstrated both satisfactory validity and reliability.

CONCLUSIONS

Most existing PROMs for M-TS require further exploration of measurement properties. Reporting guidelines are needed to enhance the reporting quality of the development and validation of PROMs for M-TS.

Validation of Patient-Reported Outcomes in Patients With Nonmetastatic Breast Cancer Receiving Comprehensive Nodal Irradiation in the RadComp Trial

PURPOSE

Our purpose was to evaluate the measurement properties of patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures used in the ongoing RadComp pragmatic randomized clinical trial (PRCT).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

The deidentified and blinded data set included 774 English-speaking female participants who completed their 6-month posttreatment assessment. Eleven PRO measures were evaluated, including the Trial Outcome Index from the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast (FACT-B), Satisfaction with Breast Cosmetic Outcomes, the BREAST-Q, and selected Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) measures. PROs were measured at 3 timepoints: baseline, completion of radiation therapy (RT), and 6 months post-RT. Ten variables were used as validity anchors. Pearson or Spearman correlations were calculated between PROs and convergent validity indicators. Mean PRO differences between clinically distinct categories were compared with analysis of variance methods (known-groups validity). PRO change scores were mapped to change in other variables (sensitivity to change).

RESULTS

Most correlations between PROs and validity indicators were large (≥0.5). Mean score for Satisfaction with Breast Cosmetic Outcomes was higher (better) for those with a lumpectomy compared with those with a mastectomy (P < .001). Mean scores for the FACT-B Trial Outcome Index and for PROMIS Fatigue and Ability to Participate in Social Roles and Activities were better for those with good baseline performance status compared with those with poorer baseline performance status (P < .05). At completion of RT and post-RT, mean scores for Satisfaction with Breast Cosmetic Outcomes and BREAST-Q Radiation were significantly different (P < .001) across categories for all Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy -Treatment Satisfaction - General items. There were medium-sized correlations between change scores for FACT-B Trial Outcome Index, Fatigue, Anxiety, and Ability to Participate in Social Roles and change scores in the Visual Analog Scale.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with nonmetastatic breast cancer receiving radiation in the RadComp PRCT, our findings demonstrate high reliability and validity for important PRO measures, supporting their psychometric strength and usefulness to reflect the effect of RT on health-related quality of life.

Feasibility and acceptability of a nurse-led telehealth intervention (BOLSTER) to support patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis and their caregivers: A pilot randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

Patients with advanced gynecologic (GYN) and gastrointestinal (GI) cancers frequently develop peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC), which limits prognosis and diminishes health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Palliative procedures may improve PC symptoms, yet patients and caregivers report feeling unprepared to manage ostomies, catheters, and other complex needs. Our objectives were to (1) assess the feasibility of an efficacy trial of a nurse-led telehealth intervention (BOLSTER) for patients with PC and their caregivers; and (2) assess BOLSTER's acceptability, potential to improve patients' HRQoL and self-efficacy, and potential impact on advance care planning (ACP).

METHODS

Pilot feasibility RCT. Recently hospitalized adults with advanced GYN and GI cancers, PC, and a new complex care need and their caregivers were randomized 1:1 to BOLSTER or enhanced discharge planning (EDP). We defined feasibility as a ≥ 50% approach-to-consent ratio and acceptability as ≥70% satisfaction with BOLSTER. We assessed patients' HRQoL and self-efficacy at baseline and six weeks, then compared the proportion experiencing meaningful improvements by arm. ACP documentation was identified using natural language processing.

RESULTS

We consented 77% of approached patients. In the BOLSTER arm, 91.0% of patients and 100.0% of caregivers were satisfied. Compared to EDP, more patients receiving BOLSTER experienced improvements in HRQoL (68.4% vs. 40.0%) and self-efficacy for managing symptoms (78.9% vs. 35.0%) and treatment (52.9% vs. 42.9%). The BOLSTER arm had more ACP documentation.

CONCLUSIONS

BOLSTER is a feasible and acceptable intervention with the potential to improve patients' HRQoL and promote ACP. An efficacy trial comparing BOLSTER to usual care is underway.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03367247; PI: Wright.

Clinical research in endometrial cancer: consensus recommendations from the Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup

The Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup (GCIG) Endometrial Cancer Consensus Conference on Clinical Research (ECCC) was held in Incheon, South Korea, Nov 2-3, 2023. The aims were to develop consensus statements for future trials in endometrial cancer to achieve harmonisation on design elements, select important questions, and identify unmet needs. All 33 GCIG member groups participated in the development, refinement, and finalisation of 18 statements within four topic groups, addressing adjuvant treatment in high-risk disease; treatment for metastatic and recurrent disease; trial designs for rare endometrial cancer subgroups and special circumstances; and specific methodology and adaptation for trials in low-resource settings. In addition, eight areas of unmet need were identified. This was the first GCIG Consensus Conference to include patient advocates and an expert on inclusion, diversity, equity, and access to take part in all aspects of the process and output. Four early-career investigators were also selected for participation, ensuring that they represented different GCIG member groups and regions. Unanimous consensus was obtained for 16 of the 18 statements, with 97% concordance for the remaining two. Using the described methodology from previous Ovarian Cancer Consensus Conferences, this conference did not require even one minority statement. The high acceptance rate following active involvement in the preparation, discussion, and refinement of the statements by all representatives confirmed the consensus progress within a global academic setting, and the expectation that the ECCC will lead to greater harmonisation, actualisation, inclusion, and resolution of unmet needs in clinical research for individuals living with and beyond endometrial cancer worldwide.

A randomized trial of the impact of symptom monitoring using an electronic patient-reported outcome app on health-related quality of life in postmenopausal breast cancer patients receiving adjuvant endocrine therapy

BACKGROUND

Electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePRO) monitoring is a useful communication tool for cancer patients and healthcare providers. In this study, we examined the impact of symptom monitoring using an ePRO app on quality of life (QoL) in postmenopausal breast cancer patients receiving adjuvant endocrine therapy.

METHODS

The free app "Welby My Carte ONC" was used in the study. Patients with breast cancer starting adjuvant endocrine therapy were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to ePRO monitoring (ONC) and control groups. The ONC group reported five symptoms extracted from the Patient-Reported Outcome-Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE) (insomnia, joint pain, headache, anxiety, and hot flashes) weekly for 3 months through the app. Reported symptoms were shared with medical personnel. When serious symptoms were reported, these personnel ascertained the patient's health status and provided advice over the phone. The primary endpoint was QoL measured by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast (FACT-B) at 3 months from enrollment. Differences between groups were tested using analysis of covariance.

RESULTS

The study included 125 subjects with mean age of 64 years in the ONC group (n = 61) and 63 years in the control group (n = 64). In the ONC group, the response rate to PRO-CTCAE was about 70% or higher until week 10. The item missing rate was 0. The ONC group reported more symptoms related to joint pain and insomnia. The difference in FACT-B total score between the groups was - 1.55 (95% confidence interval: - 5.91, 2.81), indicating no significant difference.

CONCLUSIONS

Symptom monitoring using ePRO early after initiation of adjuvant endocrine therapy after surgery did not improve QoL of breast cancer patients.

Investigating the safety and feasibility of osteopathic manipulative medicine in hospitalized children and adolescent young adults with cancer

CONTEXT

Children and adolescents young adults (AYAs) undergoing treatment for oncologic diagnoses are frequently hospitalized and experience unwanted therapy-induced side effects that diminish quality of life. Osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) is a medical intervention that utilizes manual techniques to diagnose and treat body structures. Few studies have investigated the implementation of OMT in the pediatric oncology outpatient setting. To date, no studies have investigated the safety and feasibility of OMT in the pediatric oncology inpatient setting.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study is to investigate the safety and feasibility of OMT in the pediatric oncology inpatient setting.

METHODS

This is a prospective, single-institution pilot study evaluating children and AYAs aged ≥2 years to ≤30 years with a diagnosis of cancer hospitalized at Riley Hospital for Children (RH) from September 2022 to July 2023. Approval was obtained from the Indiana University Institutional Review Board (IRB). Patients were evaluated daily with a history and physical examination as part of routine inpatient management. Patients who reported chemotherapy side effects commonly encountered and managed in the inpatient setting, such as pain, headache, neuropathy, constipation, or nausea, were offered OMT. Patients provided written informed consent/assent prior to receiving OMT. OMT was provided by trained osteopathic medical students under the supervision of a board-certified osteopathic physician and included techniques commonly taught in first- and second-year osteopathic medical school curricula. Safety was assessed by a validated pain (FACES) scale immediately pre/post-OMT and by adverse event grading per Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) 24 h post-OMT. All data were summarized utilizing descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

A total of 11 patients were screened for eligibility. All patients met the eligibility criteria and were enrolled in the study. The majority of patients were male (n=7, 63.6 %) with a median age of 18.2 years at time of enrollment (range, 10.2-29.8 years). Patients had a variety of hematologic malignancies including B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) (n=5, 45.5 %), T-cell ALL (n=1, 9.1 %), acute myeloid leukemia (AML) (n=2, 18.2 %), non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (n=2, 18.2 %), and Hodgkin's lymphoma (n=1, 9.1 %). All patients were actively undergoing cancer-directed therapy at the time of enrollment. There were 40 unique reasons for OMT reported and treated across 37 encounters, including musculoskeletal pain (n=23, 57.5 %), edema (n=7, 17.5 %), headache (n=5, 12.5 %), peripheral neuropathy (n=2, 5.0 %), constipation (n=2, 5.0 %), and epigastric pain not otherwise specified (n=1, 2.5 %). Validated FACES pain scores were reported in 27 encounters. Of the 10 encounters for which FACES pain scores were not reported, 8 encounters addressed lower extremity edema, 1 encounter addressed peripheral neuropathy, and 1 encounter addressed constipation. The total time of OMT was documented for 33 of the 37 encounters and averaged 9.8 min (range, 3-20 min).

CONCLUSIONS

Hospitalized children and AYAs with cancer received OMT safely with decreased pain in their reported somatic dysfunction(s). These findings support further investigation into the safety, feasibility, and efficacy of implementing OMT in the pediatric oncology inpatient setting and to a broader inpatient pediatric oncology population.

Multi-omics deep learning for radiation pneumonitis prediction in lung cancer patients underwent volumetric modulated arc therapy

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the feasibility and accuracy of radiomics, dosiomics, and deep learning (DL) in predicting Radiation Pneumonitis (RP) in lung cancer patients underwent volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) to improve radiotherapy safety and management.

METHODS

Total of 318 and 31 lung cancer patients underwent VMAT from First Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University (WMU) and Quzhou Affiliated Hospital of WMU were enrolled for training and external validation, respectively. Models based on radiomics (R), dosiomics (D), and combined radiomics and dosiomics features (R+D) were constructed and validated using three machine learning (ML) methods. DL models trained with CT (DLR), dose distribution (DLD), and combined CT and dose distribution (DL(R+D)) images were constructed. DL features were then extracted from the fully connected layers of the best-performing DL model to combine with features of the ML model with the best performance to construct models of R+DLR, D+DLD, R+D+DL(R+D)) for RP prediction.

RESULTS

The R+D model achieved a best area under curve (AUC) of 0.84, 0.73, and 0.73 in the internal validation cohorts with Support Vector Machine (SVM), XGBoost, and Logistic Regression (LR), respectively. The DL(R+D) model achieved a best AUC of 0.89 and 0.86 using ResNet-34 in training and internal validation cohorts, respectively. The R+D+DL(R+D) model achieved a best performance in the external validation cohorts with an AUC, accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of 0.81(0.62-0.99), 0.81, 0.84, and 0.67, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The integration of radiomics, dosiomics, and DL features is feasible and accurate for the RP prediction to improve the management of lung cancer patients underwent VMAT.

Healthcare professionals' willingness to utilize a mobile health application for adverse drug reaction reporting in a limited resource setting: An input for digital health, 2023

Background

Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) are a significant public health concern, particularly in limited resource settings where underreporting is prevalent due to various challenges. Mobile health applications (mHealth apps) offer a promising solution to enhance pharmacovigilance by facilitating easier and more efficient ADR reporting. However, despite the increasing availability and use of mHealth apps, there is a lack of evidence on healthcare professionals' willingness to adopt them for ADR reporting in resource-constrained environments. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the willingness of healthcare professionals in Ethiopia to utilize mobile health applications for adverse drug reaction reporting and identify associated factors.

Methods

We carried out a cross-sectional study involving 422 healthcare professionals working in institutional settings. We gathered data through a pretested questionnaire that participants completed themselves. We inputted the data using Epi Data V.4.6 and analyzed it using SPSS V.26. Our analysis involved conducting multivariable logistic regression to identify the factors influencing the likelihood of healthcare professionals using mobile applications to report adverse drug reactions.

Results

The study involved 389 healthcare professionals. Approximately 301 (77.4 %) of them expressed willingness to utilize mobile applications for reporting adverse drug reactions. The willingness to utilize mobile applications was significantly associated with the type of mobile phone (smart: AOR 3.56; 95 % CI 2.15-5.67), basic computer training (AOR 4.43; 95 % CI 2.27-8.64), mobile health-related training (AOR 1.96; 95 % CI 1.01-3.79), attitude (AOR 4.01; 95 % CI 2.19-7.35), perceived ease of use (AOR 2.91; 95 % CI 1.59-5.23), and perceived usefulness (AOR 2.10; 95 % CI 1.15-3.85).

Conclusions

Overall, there was a high proportion of healthcare professionals willing to use mobile devices for reporting drug adverse reactions. Their willingness correlated with factors such as the type of mobile phone, perceived ease of use, attitude, training, and perceived usefulness of mobile applications. With the increasing use of smartphones, motivation among healthcare professionals is rising. Basic computer and mHealth-related training are crucial for enhancing the acceptability of such applications and should be incorporated into future implementations. Taking these factors into account could offer insights into the design and implementation of mobile applications for adverse drug reactions in Ethiopia.

Implementation of Patient-Reported Outcomes in a Medical Oncology Setting (the iPROMOS Study): Type II Hybrid Implementation Study

BACKGROUND

Clinical trials have demonstrated that patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) can improve mortality and morbidity outcomes when used in clinical practice.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to prospectively investigate the implementation of PROMs in routine oncology. Outcomes measured included improved symptom detection, clinical response to symptom information, and health service outcomes.

METHODS

Two of 12 eligible clinics were randomized to implement symptom PROMs in a medical oncology outpatient department in Australia. Randomization was carried out at the clinic level. Patients in control clinics continued with usual care; those in intervention clinics completed a symptom PROM at presentation. This was a pilot study investigating symptom detection, using binary logistic models, and clinical response to PROMs investigated using multiple regression models.

RESULTS

A total of 461 patient encounters were included, consisting of 242 encounters in the control and 222 in the intervention condition. Patients in these clinics most commonly had head and neck, lung, prostate, breast, or colorectal cancer and were seen in the clinic for surveillance and oral or systemic treatments for curative, metastatic, or palliative cancer care pathways. Compared with control encounters, the proportion of symptoms detected increased in intervention encounters (odds ratio 1.05, 95% CI 0.99-1.11; P=.08). The odds of receiving supportive care, demonstrated by nonroutine allied health review, increased in the intervention compared with control encounters (odds ratio 3.54, 95% CI 1.26-9.90; P=.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of PROMs in routine care did not significantly improve symptom detection but increased the likelihood of nonroutine allied health reviews for supportive care. Larger studies are needed to investigate health service outcomes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12618000398202; https://tinyurl.com/3cxbemy4.

Leveraging Large Language Models for Precision Monitoring of Chemotherapy-Induced Toxicities: A Pilot Study with Expert Comparisons and Future Directions

INTRODUCTION

Large Language Models (LLMs), such as the GPT model family from OpenAI, have demonstrated transformative potential across various fields, especially in medicine. These models can understand and generate contextual text, adapting to new tasks without specific training. This versatility can revolutionize clinical practices by enhancing documentation, patient interaction, and decision-making processes. In oncology, LLMs offer the potential to significantly improve patient care through the continuous monitoring of chemotherapy-induced toxicities, which is a task that is often unmanageable for human resources alone. However, existing research has not sufficiently explored the accuracy of LLMs in identifying and assessing subjective toxicities based on patient descriptions. This study aims to fill this gap by evaluating the ability of LLMs to accurately classify these toxicities, facilitating personalized and continuous patient care.

METHODS

This comparative pilot study assessed the ability of an LLM to classify subjective toxicities from chemotherapy. Thirteen oncologists evaluated 30 fictitious cases created using expert knowledge and OpenAI's GPT-4. These evaluations, based on the CTCAE v.5 criteria, were compared to those of a contextualized LLM model. Metrics such as mode and mean of responses were used to gauge consensus. The accuracy of the LLM was analyzed in both general and specific toxicity categories, considering types of errors and false alarms. The study's results are intended to justify further research involving real patients.

RESULTS

The study revealed significant variability in oncologists' evaluations due to the lack of interaction with fictitious patients. The LLM model achieved an accuracy of 85.7% in general categories and 64.6% in specific categories using mean evaluations with mild errors at 96.4% and severe errors at 3.6%. False alarms occurred in 3% of cases. When comparing the LLM's performance to that of expert oncologists, individual accuracy ranged from 66.7% to 89.2% for general categories and 57.0% to 76.0% for specific categories. The 95% confidence intervals for the median accuracy of oncologists were 81.9% to 86.9% for general categories and 67.6% to 75.6% for specific categories. These benchmarks highlight the LLM's potential to achieve expert-level performance in classifying chemotherapy-induced toxicities.

DISCUSSION

The findings demonstrate that LLMs can classify subjective toxicities from chemotherapy with accuracy comparable to expert oncologists. The LLM achieved 85.7% accuracy in general categories and 64.6% in specific categories. While the model's general category performance falls within expert ranges, specific category accuracy requires improvement. The study's limitations include the use of fictitious cases, lack of patient interaction, and reliance on audio transcriptions. Nevertheless, LLMs show significant potential for enhancing patient monitoring and reducing oncologists' workload. Future research should focus on the specific training of LLMs for medical tasks, conducting studies with real patients, implementing interactive evaluations, expanding sample sizes, and ensuring robustness and generalization in diverse clinical settings.

CONCLUSIONS

This study concludes that LLMs can classify subjective toxicities from chemotherapy with accuracy comparable to expert oncologists. The LLM's performance in general toxicity categories is within the expert range, but there is room for improvement in specific categories. LLMs have the potential to enhance patient monitoring, enable early interventions, and reduce severe complications, improving care quality and efficiency. Future research should involve specific training of LLMs, validation with real patients, and the incorporation of interactive capabilities for real-time patient interactions. Ethical considerations, including data accuracy, transparency, and privacy, are crucial for the safe integration of LLMs into clinical practice.

SOHO State of the Art Updates and Next Questions | Measuring Patient-Reported Outcomes (PROs) and Treatment Tolerability in Patients With Hematologic Malignancies

There has been a rapid expansion of novel therapeutics for hematologic malignancies, including monoclonal antibodies, small molecules, and cellular therapies, which confer different treatment-related toxicities and symptomatic adverse events (AEs) than traditional cytotoxic chemotherapies. Given that patients with blood cancers are living longer with these newer treatments, with some therapies requiring indefinite or time-intensive administration, consideration of patient-reported tolerability and effects on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) are increasingly relevant. Historically, clinical trials have focused on the efficacy and safety of therapies. While related to safety and not intended to replace it, "treatment tolerability" is a distinct construct defined as the extent to which symptomatic and nonsymptomatic AEs impact a patient's ability and desire to continue with current treatment dosing, which also encompasses how patients feel and function while undergoing anticancer therapies. Assessment of tolerability requires the systematic and rigorous measurement of patient-reported outcomes (PROs). In this review, we discuss the introduction of patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs) into hematology clinical trials and how PROs inform the measurement of treatment tolerability, including symptomatic adverse events, physical and role functioning, and overall side effect burden. Selected PROMs for measurement of these core tolerability domains are outlined, with a focus on novel analytic tools that have been developed for the longitudinal analysis of tolerability data. Further, we outline ongoing studies to accelerate integration of PROs throughout the cancer care spectrum, from early-stage drug development to routine clinical care, with the goal of improving both HRQoL and survival.

Patient perspectives in adverse event reporting after vaginal apical prolapse surgery

BACKGROUND

Many clinical trials use systematic methodology to monitor adverse events and determine grade (severity), expectedness, and relatedness to treatments as determined by clinicians. However, patient perspectives are often not included in this process.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to compare clinician vs patient grading of adverse event severity in a urogynecologic surgical trial. Secondary objectives were to estimate the association of patient grading of adverse events with decision-making and quality of life outcomes and to determine if patient perspective changes over time.

STUDY DESIGN

This was a planned supplementary study (Patient Perspectives in Adverse Event Reporting [PPAR]) to a randomized trial comparing 3 surgical approaches to vaginal apical prolapse. In the parent trial, adverse events experienced by patients were collected per a standardized protocol every 6 months during which clinicians graded adverse event severity (mild, moderate, severe/life-threatening). In this substudy, we obtained additional longitudinal patient perspectives for 19 predetermined "PPAR adverse events." Patients provided their own severity grading (mild, moderate, severe/very severe/life-threatening) at initial assessment and at 12 and 36 months postoperatively. Clinicians and patients were masked to each other's reporting. The primary outcome was the interrater agreement (kappa statistic) for adverse event severity between the initial clinician and patient assessment, combining patient grades of mild and moderate. The association between adverse event severity and the Decision Regret Scale, Satisfaction with Decision Scale, the 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey, and Patient Global Impression of Improvement scores was assessed using the Spearman correlation coefficient (ρ) for continuous scales, the Mantel-Haenszel chi-square test for Patient Global Impression of Improvement, and t tests or chi-square tests comparing the assessments of patients who rated their adverse events or symptoms as severe with those who gave other ratings. To describe patient perspective changes over time, the intraobserver agreement was estimated for adverse event severity grade over time using weighted kappa coefficients.

RESULTS

Of the 360 randomly assigned patients, 219 (61%) experienced a total of 527 PPAR adverse events (91% moderate and 9% severe/life-threatening by clinician grading). Mean patient age was 67 years; 87% were White and 12% Hispanic. Among the patients reporting any PPAR event, the most common were urinary tract infection (61%), de novo urgency urinary incontinence (35%), stress urinary incontinence (22%), and fecal incontinence (13%). Overall agreement between clinician and participant grading of severity was poor (kappa=0.24 [95% confidence interval, 0.14-0.34]). Of the 414 adverse events that clinicians graded as moderate, patients graded 120 (29%) as mild and 80 (19%) as severe. Of the 39 adverse events graded as severe by clinicians, patients graded 15 (38%) as mild or moderate. Initial patient grading of the most severe reported adverse event was mildly correlated with worse Decision Regret Scale (ρ=0.2; P=.01), 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey (ρ=-0.24; P<.01), and Patient Global Impression of Improvement (P<.01) scores. There was no association between adverse event severity and Satisfaction with Decision Scale score. Patients with an initial grading of "severe" had more regret, lower quality of life, and poorer global impressions of health than those whose worst severity grade was mild (P<.05). Agreement between the patients' initial severity ratings and their ratings at 12 months (kappa=0.48 [95% confidence interval, 0.39-0.58]) and 36 months (kappa=0.45 [95% confidence interval, 0.37-0.53]) was fair.

CONCLUSION

Clinician and patient perceptions of adverse event severity are discordant. Worse severity from the patient perspective was associated with patient-centered outcomes. Including the patient perspective provides additional information for evaluating surgical procedures.

Patient- vs Physician-Initiated Response to Symptom Monitoring and Health-Related Quality of Life: The SYMPRO-Lung Cluster Randomized Trial

Importance

Online symptom monitoring through patient-reported outcomes can enhance health-related quality of life and survival. However, widespread adoption in clinical care remains limited due to various barriers including the need to reduce health care practitioners' workload.

Objective

To report the effects of patient-reported outcome (PRO) symptom monitoring on HRQOL and survival up to 1 year after initiation of any treatment in patients with lung cancer.

Design, Setting, and Participants

SYMPRO-Lung is a multicenter stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial including patients with stage I to IV lung cancer. The inclusion period was from October 24, 2019, until September 16, 2021, and data collection ended October 8, 2022. Data analysis was conducted from November 9, 2023, until March 18, 2024.

Intervention

Patients in the intervention group reported PRO symptoms weekly using the Patient Reported Outcomes version of the Common Toxicity Criteria for Adverse Events lung cancer subset. If symptoms exceeded a validated threshold, an alert was sent to the health care practitioner (active intervention subgroup) or to the patient (reactive intervention subgroup). Patients in the control group received standard care.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Health-related quality of life was measured by the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire at baseline, 15 weeks (T1), 6 months (T2), and 1 year (T3), with the summary score (SS) and physical functioning (PF) as primary end points. Linear mixed-effects modeling was used to assess mean differences over time. Effect size (ES) of 0.40 or greater was considered clinically relevant. Cox proportional hazards regression survival analyses were performed to estimate the effect of the intervention on progression-free survival and overall survival (OS). Data were analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis.

Results

A total of 515 patients (266 [51.7%] men; mean [SD] age, 65.4 [9.4] years) were included in the study (266 in the control group; 249 in the pooled intervention group). Most baseline characteristics were balanced between groups; however, the most notable exception was the distribution in cancer staging: the intervention group had a higher proportion of patients with stage IV cancer compared with the control group (139 [56%] vs 118 [44%]). The pooled intervention group had a significantly better SS (mean difference T1, 5.22; 95% CI, 2.72-7.73; P < .001; ES = 0.33; mean difference T2, 6.28; 95% CI, 3.65-8.92; P < .001; ES = 0.40; mean difference T3, 3.97; 95% CI, 1.15-6.80; P = .006; ES = 0.25) compared with the control group. Group differences improved more in PF but did not meet the ES greater than or equal to 0.40 threshold (mean difference T1, 7.00; 95% CI, 3.65-10.35; P < .001; ES = 0.27; mean difference T2, 6.79; 95% CI, 3.26-10.31; P < .001; ES = 0.26; mean difference T3, 5.01; 95% CI, 1.23-8.79; P = .009; ES = 0.19). No significant differences in HRQOL were observed between the reactive (n = 89) and active (n = 160) intervention groups. The HR for progression-free survival for the active intervention group compared with the control group was 0.78 (95% CI, 0.58-1.04); the finding was not statistically significant. The HR for overall survival for both interventions groups compared with the control group were not statistically significant.(active: HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.55-1.15; reactive: HR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.42-1.15).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this 1-year follow-up of a stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial, PRO symptom monitoring yielded improvements in long-term HRQOL in patients with lung cancer. The reactive approach proved equally effective as the active approach. A nonsignificant potential survival benefit was observed for the intervention group. These positive results provide further evidence for the usefulness of routine PRO symptom monitoring in lung cancer care.

Trial Registration

The Netherlands trial register Identifier: NL7897.

Validity of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Evaluating Nerve Damage Following Chemotherapy

Importance

Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) is a substantial adverse effect of anticancer treatments. As such, the assessment of CIPN remains critically important in both research and clinic settings.

Objective

To compare the validity of various patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) with neurophysiological and sensory functional measures as the optimal method of CIPN assessment.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cohort study evaluated participants treated with neurotoxic chemotherapy across 2 cohorts using a dual-study design. Participants commencing treatment were assessed prospectively at beginning of neurotoxic treatment, midtreatment, and at the end of treatment. Participants who completed treatment up to 5 years prior were assessed cross-sectionally and completed a single assessment time point. Participants were recruited from oncology centers in Australia from August 2015 to November 2022. Data analysis occurred from February to November 2023.

Exposures

Neurotoxic cancer treatment including taxanes, platinums, vinca-alkaloids, proteasome inhibitors, and thalidomide.

Main Outcomes and Measures

CIPN was assessed via PROMs (European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire [EORTC-CIPN20], Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy/Gynecological Cancer Group Neurotoxicity Questionnaire (FACT/GOG-Ntx), and the patient-reported outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events [PRO-CTCAE]), neurological and neurophysiological assessment (Total Neuropathy Score and sural and tibial compound nerve amplitudes), and sensory measures (Grating orientation, Von Frey monofilament, and 2-point discrimination tasks). Core measurement properties of CIPN outcome measures were evaluated. Convergent and known-groups validity was assessed cross-sectionally following treatment completion, and responsiveness was evaluated prospectively during treatment. Neurological, neurophysiological, and sensory outcome measure scores were compared between those who reported high and low levels of CIPN symptoms using linear regressions.

Results

A total of 1033 participants (median [IQR] age, 61 [50-59] years; 676 female [65.4%]) were recruited to this study, incorporating 1623 assessments. PROMs demonstrated best ability to accurately assess CIPN (convergent validity), especially the PRO-CTCAE composite score (r = 0.85; P < .001) and EORTC-CIPN20 (r = 0.79; P < .001). PROMS also demonstrated the best ability to discriminate between CIPN severity (known-groups validity) and to detect changes at onset of CIPN development (responsiveness), especially for EORTC-CIPN20 (d = 0.67; 95% CI, 0.52-0.83), FACT/GOG-Ntx (d = 0.65; 95% CI, 0.49-0.81) and the PRO-CTCAE (d = 0.83; 95% CI, 0.64-1.02). Other measures did not achieve threshold for convergent validity (α < 0.7). Neurophysiological and sensory measures did not demonstrate acceptable responsiveness. In regression models, neurological, neurophysiological, and sensory outcome measures were significantly impaired in participants who reported high levels of CIPN symptoms compared with those who reported low levels of CIPN symptoms.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cohort study of 1033 cancer patients, PROMs were the only measures to satisfy all 3 core measurement property criteria (convergent validity, known-groups validity, and responsiveness). These findings suggest that adoption of PROMs in clinical practice can equip clinicians with valuable information in assessing CIPN morbidity.

An online evidence-based dictionary of common adverse events of antidepressants: a new tool to empower patients and clinicians in their shared decision-making process

BACKGROUND

Adverse events (AEs) are commonly reported in clinical studies using the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA), an international standard for drug safety monitoring. However, the technical language of MedDRA makes it challenging for patients and clinicians to share understanding and therefore to make shared decisions about medical interventions. In this project, people with lived experience of depression and antidepressant treatment worked with clinicians and researchers to co-design an online dictionary of AEs associated with antidepressants, taking into account its ease of use and applicability to real-world settings.

METHODS

Through a pre-defined literature search, we identified MedDRA-coded AEs from randomised controlled trials of antidepressants used in the treatment of depression. In collaboration with the McPin Foundation, four co-design workshops with a lived experience advisory panel (LEAP) and one independent focus group (FG) were conducted to produce user-friendly translations of AE terms. Guiding principles for translation were co-designed with McPin/LEAP members and defined before the finalisation of Clinical Codes (CCs, or non-technical terms to represent specific AE concepts). FG results were thematically analysed using the Framework Method.

RESULTS

Starting from 522 trials identified by the search, 736 MedDRA-coded AE terms were translated into 187 CCs, which balanced key factors identified as important to the LEAP and FG (namely, breadth, specificity, generalisability, patient-understandability and acceptability). Work with the LEAP showed that a user-friendly language of AEs should aim to mitigate stigma, acknowledge the multiple levels of comprehension in 'lay' language and balance the need for semantic accuracy with user-friendliness. Guided by these principles, an online dictionary of AEs was co-designed and made freely available ( https://thesymptomglossary.com ). The digital tool was perceived by the LEAP and FG as a resource which could feasibly improve antidepressant treatment by facilitating the accurate, meaningful expression of preferences about potential harms through a shared decision-making process.

CONCLUSIONS

This dictionary was developed in English around AEs from antidepressants in depression but it can be adapted to different languages and cultural contexts, and can also become a model for other interventions and disorders (i.e., antipsychotics in schizophrenia). Co-designed digital resources may improve the patient experience by helping to deliver personalised information on potential benefits and harms in an evidence-based, preference-sensitive way.

Patient motivators of postoperative electronic patient-reported outcome symptom monitoring use in thoracic surgery patients: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) systems can be used to engage patients in remote symptom monitoring to support postoperative care. We interviewed thoracic surgery patients with ePRO experience to identify factors that influenced use of ePROs to report their symptoms post-discharge.

METHOD

This qualitative study used semi-structured telephone interviews with adults who underwent major thoracic surgery at an academic medical center in North Carolina. Individuals who enrolled in symptom monitoring, completed at least one ePRO survey, and were reachable by phone for the interview were included. The ePRO surveys assessed 10 symptoms, including validated Patient-Reported Outcome Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE) measures and thoracic surgery-specific questions. Surveys, offered via web-based and automated telephone options, were administered for four weeks post-discharge with alerts sent to clinicians for concerning symptoms. The interviews were guided by the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation model for behavior change (COM-B) and examined factors that influenced patients' completion of ePRO surveys post-discharge. Team members independently coded interviews and identified themes, informed by COM-B. We report descriptive statistics (demographics, number of surveys completed) and themes organized by COM-B components.

RESULTS

Of 28 patients invited, 25 (89%) completed interviews from July to October 2022. Participants were a median 58 years, 56% female, 80% White, and 56% had a history of malignancy. They completed 131/150 (87%) possible ePRO surveys. For capability, participants reported building ePROs into their routine and having the skills and knowledge, but lacking physical and emotional energy, to complete ePROs. For opportunity, participants identified the ease and convenience of accessing ePROs and providers' validation of ePROs. Motivators were perceived benefits of a deepening connection to their clinical team, improved symptom management for themselves and others, and self-reflection about their recovery. Factors limiting motivation included lack of clarity about the purpose of ePROs and a disconnect between symptom items and individual recovery experience.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients described being motivated to complete ePROs when reinforced by clinicians and considered ePROs as valuable to their post-discharge experience. Future work should enhance ePRO patient education, improve provider alerts and communications about ePROs, and integrate options to capture patients' complex health journeys.

Use of mycophenolate mofetil for the treatment of fibrotic hypersensitivity pneumonitis

INTRODUCTION

The optimal treatment of fibrosing hypersensitivity pneumonitis (fHP) is not well understood. The aim of the study was to obtain information about the usefulness of mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) in its treatment.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Quasi-experimental analysis of patients diagnosed with fHP and treated with MMF for one year, in a single centre. From the start of treatment, data collection was prospective.

RESULTS

73 were included and 58 completed the study. FVC% and DLCO% decreased until starting MMF (year -1 to year 0). After completion of treatment (year 1), FVC% stabilised (p=0.336) and DLCO% improved significantly (p=0.004) compared to year 0. Dyspnoea, number of patients without corticosteroids and mean corticosteroid dose also improved significantly (p<0.001 in all cases). Being male and having a history of tuberculosis were predictors of poor drug response [AUC = 0.89 (95% CI: 0.80-0.98)]. 45 adverse effects were observed in 34 patients (46.6%). In 4 cases (5.5%), the adverse effect was severe and required discontinuation of treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with fHP, MMF improves lung function and dyspnoea and reduces both the number of patients requiring oral corticosteroids and their mean dose in those who completed 1 year of treatment. The model constructed predicts which patients will respond poorly to treatment, with good discriminative ability and only a small percentage of patients will not tolerate treatment. Further prospective, randomised clinical trials are needed to define the role of this treatment in fHP.

Gastrointestinal Toxicity of Antibody Drug Conjugates (ADCs) in Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Pooled Analysis

Trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1), sacituzumab govitecan (SG), and trastuzumab deruxtecan (T-DXd) are three ADCs approved for the treatment of metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Since gastrointestinal toxicities have been commonly observed with these drugs in clinical trials, a pooled analysis evaluating gastrointestinal adverse events (AEs) in patients with MBC treated with ADCs in clinical trials was performed. PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched from inception until May 2023 for phase II and III clinical trials reporting frequency and severity of gastrointestinal AEs during treatment with ADCs. Data were retrieved for nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, constipation, and abdominal pain: overall and grade 3-4 toxicity rates according to NCI-CTCAE were collected and expressed as proportions. A pre-specified subgroup analysis according to the agent was also carried out. Fourteen studies, comprising 5608 patients, were included in the analysis. Gastrointestinal AEs were frequently registered with SG and T-DXd. A significantly higher frequency of nausea (65.6% with SG, 75% with T-DXd), vomiting (43.7% with SG, 45% with T-DXd), and diarrhea (59.7% with SG, 29% with T-DXd) was noticed with these ADCs compared to TDM-1. Furthermore, diarrhea was more frequently associated with SG (grade 3 in 7.5% of patients), while constipation and abdominal pain were less common. Gastrointestinal AEs, notably nausea and diarrhea, were frequently reported by MBC patients treated with SG and T-DXd in clinical trials. Since these ADCs are administered continuously until disease progression or occurrence of unbearable AEs, gastrointestinal toxicity may have a negative impact on patient quality of life. Therefore, appropriate management of gastrointestinal AEs is mandatory to ensure treatment efficacy and adherence.

Dermatology-related quality-of-life outcomes in patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer treated with fluorouracil and folinic acid with or without panitumumab (Pmab) maintenance after FOLFOX + Pmab induction: a prespecified secondary analysis of the phase II randomized PanaMa (AIO KRK 0212) trial

BACKGROUND

The key endpoints for the assessment of the effect of maintenance therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) are survival and quality-of-life outcomes. We aimed to compare dermatology-related quality of life (DRQOL) in patients with RAS wild-type (wt) mCRC treated with fluorouracil and folinic acid (FU/FA) + panitumumab (Pmab) versus FU/FA alone as maintenance therapy after folinic acid, fluorouracil and oxaliplatin + Pmab induction.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The phase II randomized PanaMa (AIO KRK 0212; NCT01991873) trial included 387 patients at 70 community/academic sites in Germany. For this prespecified secondary analysis, DRQOL outcomes were assessed using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitor (FACT-EGFRI), Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI), and Skindex-16 questionnaires at every second cycle of therapy until disease progression/death.

RESULTS

At least one DRQOL questionnaire was completed by a total of 310/377 (82%) patients who received induction therapy, and by 216/248 (87%) patients who were randomized and received maintenance therapy. Patients who experienced skin toxicity according to the National Cancer Institute (NCI)-Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) during induction therapy had significantly worse DRQOL according to all three measures, compared to those who did not [i.e. Skindex-16, mean difference at cycle 2 -12.87; 95% confidence interval (CI) -20.01 to -5.73; P < 0.001]. During maintenance therapy, significantly improved recovery was observed in all DRQOL measures for patients receiving FU/FA, compared to those receiving additional Pmab (i.e. Skindex-16, mean difference at cycle 6 -16.53; 95% CI -22.68 to -10.38; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In this secondary analysis of a phase II randomized clinical trial, patient-reported DRQOL outcomes correlated with skin toxicity according to NCI-CTCAE during induction therapy. Maintenance therapy with FU/FA + Pmab was associated with deteriorated DRQOL versus FU/FA alone in patients with RAS wt mCRC.

U-PRO-CRM: designing patient-centred dose-finding trials with patient-reported outcomes

BACKGROUND

Determining the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) remains the primary objective for the majority of dose-finding oncology trials. Whilst MTD determination often relies upon clinicians to identify dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) experienced by patients during the trial, research suggests that clinicians may underreport patient's adverse events. Therefore, contemporary practice may be exposed to recommending intolerable doses to patients for further investigation in subsequent trials. There is increasing interest in patients self-assessing their own symptoms using patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in dose-finding trials.

DESIGN

We present Utility-PRO-Continual Reassessment Method (U-PRO-CRM), a novel trial design which simultaneously uses clinician-rated and patient-rated DLTs (Clinician-DLTs and Patient-DLTs, respectively) to make dose (de-)escalation decisions and to recommend an MTD. U-PRO-CRM contains the published PRO-CRM as a special case and provides greater flexibility to trade-off the rate of Patient-DLTs and Clinician-DLTs to find an optimal dose. We present simulation results for U-PRO-CRM.

RESULTS

For specified trade-offs between Clinician-DLT and Patient-DLT rate, U-PRO-CRM outperforms the PRO-CRM design by identifying the true MTD more often. In the special case where U-PRO-CRM generalises to PRO-CRM, U-PRO-CRM performs as well as its published counterpart. U-PRO-CRM minimises the number of patients overdosed whilst maintaining a similar proportion of patients allocated to the true MTD.

CONCLUSIONS

By using a utility-based dose selection approach, U-PRO-CRM offers the flexibility to define a trade-off between the risk of patient-rated and clinician-rated DLTs for an optimal dose. Patient-centric dose-finding strategies, which integrate PROs, are poised to assume an ever more pivotal role in significantly advancing our understanding of treatment tolerability. This bears significant implications in shaping the future landscape of early-phase trials.

Changes in Psychological Condition during Cancer Chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

Psychological disorders are prevalent in cancer patients and their psychological condition can change during cancer chemotherapy and influence their quality of life and adherence to treatment.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This prospective observational study enrolled cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy. The enrolled patients were assessed at the start of chemotherapy, after the first course of chemotherapy, and more than 2 months later by themselves and by medical staff using four different items. The cancer patients assessed themselves using the Numerical Rating Scale for Anxiety (NRS-A), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale subscale for anxiety (HADS-A) and subscale for depression (HADS-D), and patient-reported outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE). A pharmacist or nurse assessed them using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v5.0.

RESULTS

This study enrolled 109 patients. The anxiety and depression scores were highest at the start of chemotherapy and declined thereafter. Patients with history of psychiatric disorders or taking psychotropic drugs had higher scores than those without such disorders or treatments (P < 0.05), and tended to maintain these high scores at the second and third HADS-A and -D assessments. The scores assessed by the patients themselves were higher than those assessed by the medical staff.

CONCLUSION

Psychiatric distress scores were highest when commencing chemotherapy and declined thereafter. The patients with history of psychiatric disorders or taking psychotropic drugs kept higher scores of HADS-A and -D during whole chemotherapy courses.

Adverse Event Reporting in Cancer Clinical Trials: Incorporating Patient-Reported Methods. A Systematic Scoping Review

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The history of clinical trials is fraught with unethical practices. Since 1945, robust frameworks have evolved to standardise the collection and reporting of safety data, most notably, the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) from the National Cancer Institute; used by investigators to report side effects experienced by participants. As medicine moves into the patient-centred model, interest has been growing to collect data on adverse events directly from participants (patient-reported adverse events). The aim of this systematic scoping review was to investigate the inclusion of patient-reported adverse event data within safety/tolerability analyses and explore the collection and reporting of patient-reported adverse event data.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A database search was undertaken and the Covidence platform was used to manage the review; results were analysed descriptively. Sixty-eight studies were included in the analysis. An increase in the number of studies that incorporate patient-reported adverse event data was seen by year. Seventy instruments were used for the collection of patient-reported adverse event data with recall period, mode, frequency and site of administration varying across studies; the duration of data collection ranged from 28 days to 6 years. Frequently, information on these details was omitted from publications. The number of instruments used by studies to collect patient-reported adverse event data ranged from one to seven instruments.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite growing calls for the inclusion of patient-reported adverse events, this has not yet translated into published reports. The collection and reporting of these data were variable and conducted using instruments that were not designed for purpose. To address these inconsistencies, standardisation of data collection and reporting using a purpose-built validated instrument is required.

Thermal ablation with and without adjuvant systemic therapy: a nationwide multicenter observational cohort study of solitary colorectal liver metastases

BACKGROUND

Thermal ablation is routinely used for solitary colorectal liver metastases (SCLM), but the added value of adjuvant systemic therapy in SCLM remains unclear. This study aimed to compare the long-term outcomes for SCLM treated by ablation alone (AB) versus ablation plus systemic therapy (AS).

METHODS

This multicenter retrospective study using nationwide data from fourteen institutions between October 2010 and May 2023, 369 patients with initial SCLM smaller than 5 cm, no extrahepatic metastases, and colorectal cancer R0 resection treated by thermal ablation were included. The crude analysis was used to analyze eligible cases between the two groups. The propensity score matching to control for potential confounders in each matched group. Subgroup analyses were performed to identify specific survival benefits.

RESULTS

61.2% (226/369) of eligible patients were treated with AS and 38.8% (143/369) with AB. During the median follow-up period of 8.8 years, 1-/3-/5-year DFS/OS rates did not differ between the two groups, when analyzed via propensity score matching ( P =0.52/0.08). Subgroup analysis revealed that AS was significantly associated with better OS than AB in patients with plasma CEA >5 ug/l ( P =0.036), T (III-IV) category of primary cancer ( P =0.034), or clinical risk score (1-2) ( P =0.041). In each matched group, the authors did find a significant difference in drug-related adverse events ( P <0.001) between AS group (24.1%, 28/116) and AB group (0.0%, 0/116).

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with plasma CEA >5 ug/l, T (III-IV) category of primary cancer, or clinical risk score (1-2), thermal ablation plus systemic therapy appeared to be associated with improved overall survival. Thermal ablation was equally effective in disease-free survival for treating SCLM, whether with or without adjuvant systemic therapy.

Effects of a change in recall period on reporting severe symptoms: an analysis of a pragmatic multisite trial

BACKGROUND

Optimal methods for deploying electronic patient-reported outcomes to manage symptoms in routine oncologic practice remain uncertain. The electronic symptom management (eSyM) program asks chemotherapy and surgery patients to self-report 12 common symptoms regularly. Feedback from nurses and patients led to changing the recall period from the past 7 days to the past 24 hours.

METHODS

Using questionnaires submitted during the 16 weeks surrounding the recall period change, we assessed the likelihood of reporting severe or moderate and severe symptoms across 12 common symptoms and separately for the 5 most prevalent symptoms. Interrupted time-series analyses modeled the effects of the change using generalized linear mixed-effects models. Surgery and chemotherapy cohorts were analyzed separately. Study-wide effects were estimated using a meta-analysis method.

RESULTS

In total, 1692 patients from 6 institutions submitted 7823 eSyM assessments during the 16 weeks surrounding the recall period change. Shortening the recall period was associated with lower odds of severe symptom reporting in the surgery cohort (odds ratio = 0.65, 95% confidence interval = 0.46 to 0.93; P = .02) and lower odds of moderate and severe symptom reporting in the chemotherapy cohort (odds ratio = 0.83, 95% confidence interval = 0.71 to 0.97; P = .02). Among the most prevalent symptoms, 24-hour recall was associated with a lower rate of reporting postoperative constipation but no differences in reporting rates for other symptoms.

CONCLUSION

A shorter recall period was associated with a reduction in the proportion of patients reporting moderate-severe symptoms. The optimal recall period may vary depending on whether electronic patient-reported outcomes are collected for active symptom management, as a clinical trial endpoint, or another purpose. ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT03850912.

Assessment and Management of Sleep Disturbance in Palliative Care Settings

Background: Sleep disturbances, including insomnia, sleep-disordered breathing, and circadian rhythm disorders with potential consequences including excessive daytime somnolence and worsening fatigue, are prevalent yet largely under-measured and therefore under-managed problems in people receiving palliative care. This has the potential to negatively affect the person's functioning and quality of life. Objectives: We aimed to review the current practice of assessment and management of sleep disturbances in people with life-limiting illnesses in Australian and New Zealand palliative care settings, and to define areas for improvement in assessment and management of sleep disturbances and further research. Design: A cross-sectional, online survey was conducted with palliative care health professionals (PCHPs) to explore current approaches to routine assessment of sleep disturbances and PCHPs' awareness of, and perceived access to, evidence-based resources for assessing and managing sleep disturbances in their local settings. Results: Fifty-four PCHPs responded to the survey, including allied health professionals (44%), palliative care nurses (26%), and physicians (19%). Over 70% of PCHPs endorsed routine verbal screening of sleep symptoms, and >90% recommended management with basic behavioral strategies. However, none of PCHPs used validated patient-reported outcome measures for sleep, and <10% of PCHPs demonstrated awareness or use of sleep-specific interventions (including medications). Only 40% reported they had access to sleep specialist services for patients. Conclusion: Our findings provide a useful snapshot of current approaches to managing sleep disturbances in palliative care. Gaps in current practice are highlighted, including the lack of structured, clinical assessment, referral pathways, and PCHPs' perceived lack of access to targeted interventions for sleep disturbances.