Randomized clinical trials and real life studies: Comparison of baseline characteristics of patients in oral target therapies for renal cell carcinoma

From the Randomized AMBORA Trial to Clinical Practice: Comparison of Medication Errors in Oral Antitumor Therapy

The randomized AMBORA trial showed that medication errors are frequent in patients treated with oral antitumor therapeutics and that they can be substantially reduced by an intensified clinical pharmacological/pharmaceutical care program. While randomized controlled trials are essential to generate clinical evidence, their generalizability in real-world is not always given. The AMBORA care program was implemented in clinical routine within the AMBORA Competence and Consultation Center (AMBORA Center) at the Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, allowing a thorough comparison of medication error frequencies and characteristics. Our primary analysis compared data at therapy initiation of new oral antitumor therapeutics from the AMBORA trial intervention group (n = 98) and the AMBORA Center (n = 142). Medication errors involving the oral antitumor therapeutics were twofold higher in real-world compared to the randomized controlled trial (mean 0.83 ± 0.80 per patient vs. 0.41 ± 0.53, P < 0.001). We observed more complex oral antitumor therapeutic regimens, a higher median number of medications, and a higher ECOG status in clinical routine vs. the randomized trial. A high percentage of medication errors was completely solved in both groups (85.7% vs. 88.3%, ns). Medication error characteristics within the complete medication (oral antitumor therapeutics and concomitant medication) were similar in both groups (e.g., patient-related causes, drug-drug/drug-food interactions). Taken together, medication errors were even more frequent in clinical routine than in the randomized controlled trial and a high rate was solved in clinical routine by a clinical pharmacological/pharmaceutical care program.

Time to treatment discontinuation in first-line non-small cell lung carcinoma: an overview

OBJECTIVE

Time To Discontinuation (TTD) is defined as the time from the start of treatment to the end of treatment, usually occurring due to loss of efficacy or occurrence of adverse events. It has become an important surrogate efficacy endpoint especially in real-world studies due to its correlation with endpoints such as Progression Free Survival (PFS). The aim of the study is to conduct a literature review of all studies reporting TTD in first-line therapy of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC).

METHODS

All articles that reported TTD for any first-line treatment of NSCLC as of 30 June 2022 were extracted from the PubMed search engine. From these articles, the drugs, study type, and TTD values were extracted. A descriptive analysis of the studies was made, dividing the TTD by subgroup according to the type of treatment (traditional chemotherapy, target therapy, immunotherapy) and study design (clinical trials, real world studies).

RESULTS

Fifty-five studies were considered for the analysis, of which 12 were published in 2021; 28 were clinical trials and 27 were real-world studies. Thirty of the studies considered involved conventional chemotherapy and expressed TTD values from 1.4 to 4.5 months, 5 of the studies considered involved immunotherapy with TTD values from 2.1 to 7.4 months and 18 of the studies considered target therapy, with TTD values from 4 to 31 months. The clinical trials reported TTD values from 1.4 to 16 months and the real-world studies from 2 to 31 months.

CONCLUSION

Studies reporting TTD are increasing, most notably real-world studies. Given the increasing importance of TTD as an efficacy endpoint, it becomes critical to measure and monitor it in various therapeutic settings such as NSCLC. This is the first study to review all TTD values of drugs used in first-line NSCLC.

Implementation of guidelines on prevention of coercion and violence: baseline data of the randomized controlled PreVCo study

Introduction

The PreVCo study examines whether a structured, operationalized implementation of guidelines to prevent coercion actually leads to fewer coercive measures on psychiatric wards. It is known from the literature that rates of coercive measures differ greatly between hospitals within a country. Studies on that topic also showed large Hawthorne effects. Therefore, it is important to collect valid baseline data for the comparison of similar wards and controlling for observer effects.

Methods

Fifty five psychiatric wards in Germany treating voluntary and involuntary patients were randomly allocated to an intervention or a waiting list condition in matched pairs. As part of the randomized controlled trial, they completed a baseline survey. We collected data on admissions, occupied beds, involuntarily admitted cases, main diagnoses, the number and duration of coercive measures, assaults and staffing levels. We applied the PreVCo Rating Tool for each ward. The PreVCo Rating Tool is a fidelity rating, measuring the degree of implementation of 12 guideline-linked recommendations on Likert scales with a range of 0-135 points covering the main elements of the guidelines. Aggregated data on the ward level is provided, with no patient data provided. We performed a Wilcoxon signed-rank-test to compare intervention group and waiting list control group at baseline and to assess the success of randomization.

Results

The participating wards had an average of 19.9% involuntarily admitted cases and a median 19 coercive measures per month (1 coercive measure per occupied bed, 0.5 per admission). The intervention group and waiting list group were not significantly different in these measurements. There were 6.0 assaults per month on average (0.3 assaults per occupied bed and 0.1 per admission). The PreVCo Rating Tool for guideline fidelity varied between 28 and 106 points. The percentage of involuntarily admitted cases showed a correlation with coercive measures per month and bed (Spearman's Rho = 0.56, p < 0.01).

Discussion

Our findings that coercion varies widely within a country and mainly is associated with involuntarily admitted and aggressive patients are in line with the international literature. We believe that we included a sample that covers the scope of mental health care practice in Germany well.Clinical trial registration: www.isrctn.com, identifier ISRCTN71467851.

Effectiveness and clinical benefits of new anti-diabetic drugs: A real life experience

We evaluated the clinical impact, in daily clinical practice, of sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP1RA) therapies in patients with type 2 diabetes. Data from 500 unselected consecutive patients were retrospectively analyzed. Only those with a full assessment at baseline (T0) and after 3 (T3), 6 (T6), and 12 (T12) months of treatment with SGLT2i or GLP1RA were included in the study (n = 167). At baseline, patients had a high mean body weight (BW), abdominal circumference (AC), body mass index (BMI), and HOMA index. Despite normal C-peptide values, 39 patients were being treated with insulin (up to 120 IU/day). During therapy, a progressive improvement in BW, BMI, and AC was observed with both the molecules. Fasting glucose and glycated Hb decrease was already significant at T3 in all patients, while the HOMA index selectively improved with SGLT2i therapy. Renal function parameters remained stable regardless of the drug used. Finally, SGLT2i reduced serum uric acid and improved the lipid profile, while GLP1RA reduced serum levels of liver enzymes. Both the therapeutic regimens allowed a significant reduction or complete suspension of unnecessary insulin therapies. Our real life data confirm the results obtained from randomized clinical trials and should be taken as a warning against inappropriate use of insulin in patients with preserved β-cell function.