Reappraisal of eligibility criteria in cancer clinical trials

Combined Results of Two Cross-Sectional Surveys on the Participation in Clinical Trials and the e-Consent Procedure in the Landscape of Haematology

Despite the motivation of oncology patients to take part in clinical trials, only a minority of them are enrolled in clinical trials. Implementation of new practical procedures can become a barrier that withholds patients from participating in clinical trials. Treating physicians are crucial in augmenting trial accrual. The drivers that promote physicians to allocate patients for clinical trials need further assessment. We conducted two separate cross-sectional surveys, addressing patients with a haematological disease in one survey and haematologists in another survey. The patient survey was filled out by 420 patients. Significant relationships between the willingness to participate in a trial and trial knowledge (p < 0.001) and between doctor-patient relationship and participation willingness (p = 0.007) were noted. Patients above 60 years were less willing to use an electronic consent procedure vs. patients younger than 60 (p < 0.001). The physician questionnaire was completed by 42 participants of whom most (83%) were active in and (94%) motivated for clinical trials. Apart from the patient benefit and scientific interest, prestige was an equal motivator closely followed by financial remunerations. First goal was not to harm the patient. Our study confirms the high willingness of patients for trial participation and the need to rethink the structure of trial organisation. The e-consent procedure is not the method preferred by most patients above 60 years old.

Impact of a previous cancer history on the overall survival of patients with primary gastric cancer: A SEER population-based study

BACKGROUND

The impact of previous cancers on the survival of gastric cancer (GC) patients is still uncertain. To evaluate the impact of a prior cancer history on the overall survival of patients with primary GC.

METHODS

The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database provided data on patients diagnosed with GC as the first or second primary malignancy between 2010 and 2015 in this retrospective cohort study. Cox proportional hazards models, Kaplan-Meier curves and forest plots were utilized to analyze overall survival. Subgroup analysis was performed based on age, gender, race and prior cancer type.

RESULTS

Totally 39,379 were eligible for this study, including 7403 (18.8%) with a previous cancer history. A previous cancer was an independent risk factor for overall survival [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.103, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.070-1.138]. For GC patients aged 40-60 years (HR = 1.191, 95% CI: 1.084-1.308) and ≥60 years (HR = 1.093, 95% CI: 1.058-1.13) at diagnosis, a previous cancer was significantly associated with worse overall survival. GC patients with previous oral cavity and pharynx cancer (HR = 1.249, 95% CI: 1.038-1.501), respiratory system cancer (HR = 1.177, 95% CI: 1.076-1.286), female genital system cancer (HR = 1.169, 95% CI: 1.011-1.351), or lymphoma cancer (HR = 1.192, 95% CI: 1.023-1.389) had shorter overall survival than GC patients without a previous cancer.

CONCLUSION

A previous cancer adversely affected the overall survival of GC patients. Specifically, GC patients aged ≥40 years, or with oral cavity and pharynx cancer, respiratory system cancer, female genital system cancer, or lymphoma cancer had inferior overall survival. These patients should obtain more attention and get individualized treatment to improve prognosis, and clinical trial eligibility criteria could be reconsidered for particular age and cancer types.

Evaluating the impact of eligibility criteria in first-line clinical trials for follicular lymphoma: a MER/LEO cohort analysis

Cancer clinical trial eligibility criteria may create patient populations studied in trials that do not reflect the patient populations treated in the real-world setting. Follicular lymphoma (FL) is an indolent lymphoma with heterogeneous presentations across a broad range of individuals, resulting in many acceptable management strategies. We evaluated how first-line clinical trial eligibility criteria impacted the demographic makeup and outcomes of FL patients for whom systemic therapy might be considered. We compared the characteristics of 196 FL patients from a single institution to eligibility criteria from 10 first-line FL trials on ClinicalTrials.gov. Next, we tabulated eligibility criteria from 24 first-line FL protocols and evaluated their impact on 1198 FL patients with stages II-IV disease from the prospective Molecular Epidemiology Resource (MER) and Lymphoma Epidemiology of Outcomes (LEO) cohort studies. We found that 39.8% and 52.7% of FL patients might be excluded from clinical trials based on eligibility criteria derived from ClinicalTrials.gov and protocol documents, respectively. Patients excluded due to renal function, prior malignancy, and self-reported serious health conditions tended to be older. Expanding stage requirement from III-IV to II-IV and platelet requirement from ≥150 000 to ≥75 000 increased population size by 21% and 8%, respectively, in MER and by 16% and 13%, respectively, in LEO, without impacting patient demographics or outcomes. These data suggest that management of older individuals with FL may not be fully informed by recent clinical trials. Moreover, liberalizing stage and platelet criteria might expand the eligible population and allow for quicker trial accrual without impacting outcomes.

Outcomes of patients with solid tumour malignancies treated with first-line immuno-oncology agents who do not meet eligibility criteria for clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Immuno-oncology (IO)-based therapies have been approved based on randomised clinical trials, yet a significant proportion of real-world patients are not represented in these trials. We sought to compare the outcomes of trial-ineligible vs. -eligible patients with advanced solid tumours treated with first-line (1L) IO therapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Using the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma (RCC) Database Consortium and the Alberta Immunotherapy Database, patients with advanced RCC, non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) or melanoma treated with 1L PD-(L)1 inhibition-based therapy were included. Trial eligibility was retrospectively determined as per commonly used exclusion criteria. The outcomes of interest were overall survival (OS), overall response rate (ORR), treatment duration (TD) and time to next treatment (TTNT).

RESULTS

A total of 395 of 1241 (32%) patients were deemed trial-ineligible. The main reasons for ineligibility based on preselected exclusion criteria were Karnofsky performance status <70%/Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status >1 (40%, 158 of 395), brain metastases (32%, 126 of 395), haemoglobin < 9 g/dL (16%, 63 of 395) and estimated glomerular filtration rate <40 mL/min (15%, 61 of 395). Between the ineligible vs. eligible groups, the median OS, ORR, median TD and median TTNT were 10.2 vs. 39.7 months (p < 0.01), 36% vs. 47% (p < 0.01), 2.7 vs. 6.9 months (p < 0.01) and 6.0 vs. 16.8 months (p < 0.01), respectively. Subgroup analyses showed statistically significant inferior OS, TD and TTNT for trial-ineligible vs. -eligible patients across all tumour types. Adjusted hazard ratios for death in RCC, NSCLC and melanoma were 1.84 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.22-2.77), 2.21 (95% CI 1.58-3.11) and 1.82 (95% CI 1.21-2.74), respectively..

CONCLUSIONS

Thirty-two percent of real-world patients treated with contemporary 1L IO-based therapies were ineligible for clinical trials. Although one-third of the trial-ineligible patients responded to treatment, the overall trial-ineligible population had inferior outcomes than trial-eligible patients. These data may guide patient counselling and temper expectations of benefit.