Transforming Clinical Trial Eligibility Criteria to Reflect Practical Clinical Application

A Propensity-Matched Retrospective Comparative Study with Historical Control to Determine the Real-World Effectiveness of Durvalumab after Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy in Unresectable Stage III Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

This study aimed to add real-world evidence to the literature regarding the effectiveness and safety of durvalumab consolidation (DC) after concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) in the treatment of unresectable stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Using a hospital-based NSCLC patient registry and propensity score matching in a 2:1 ratio, we conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients with unresectable stage III NSCLC who completed CCRT with and without DC. The co-primary endpoints were 2-year progression-free survival and overall survival. For the safety evaluation, we evaluated the risk of any adverse events requiring systemic antibiotics or steroids. Of 386 eligible patients, 222 patients-including 74 in the DC group-were included in the analysis after propensity score matching. Compared with CCRT alone, CCRT with DC was associated with increased progression-free survival (median: 13.3 vs. 7.6 months, hazard ratio[HR]: 0.63, 95% confidence interval[CI]: 0.42-0.96) and overall survival (HR: 0.47, 95% CI: 0.27-0.82) without an increased risk of adverse events requiring systemic antibiotics or steroids. While there were differences in patient characteristics between the present real-world study and the pivotal randomized controlled trial, we demonstrated significant survival benefits and tolerable safety with DC after the completion of CCRT.

FDA analysis of ineligibility for acute myeloid leukemia clinical trials by race and ethnicity

BACKGROUND

Patients of certain racial and ethnic groups have been underrepresented in clinical trials for treatment of malignancy. One potential barrier to participation is entry requirements that lead to patients in various racial and ethnic groups not meeting eligibility criteria for studies (ie, "screen failure"). The objective of this study was to analyze the rates and reasons for trial ineligibility by race and ethnicity in trials of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) submitted to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) between 2016 and 2019.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Multicenter, global clinical trials submitted to the FDA to support AML drugs and biologics. We examined the rate of ineligibility among participants screened for studies of AML therapies submitted to the FDA from 2016 to 2019. Data were extracted from 13 trials used in approval evaluations, including race, screen status, and reason for ineligibility.

RESULTS

Overall, patients in historically underrepresented racial and ethnic groups were less likely to meet entry criteria for studies compared to White patients, with 26.7% of White patients, 29.4% of Black patients, and 35.9% of Asian patients not meeting entry criteria. Lack of relevant disease mutation was the reason for ineligibility more frequently among Black and Asian patients. The findings were limited by the small number of underrepresented patients screened for participation.

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that entry requirements for studies may put underrepresented patients at a disadvantage, leading to less eligible patients and thus lower participation in clinical trials.

Longitudinal Experience With and Impressions of COVID-19-Related Clinical Research Changes

PURPOSE

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to profound changes in clinical research, including remote consent, telehealth, off-site procedures, shipment of therapy, and remote study monitoring. We assessed longitudinal perceptions of these adjustments among clinical research professionals.

METHODS

We distributed an anonymous survey assessing experiences, perceptions, and recommendations regarding COVID-19-related clinical research adjustments to cancer clinical research office personnel in May 2020 and again in November 2020. Responses were compared using Fisher's exact and Mann-Whitney U tests.

RESULTS

A total of 90 of 102 invited research personnel (88%) responded. Fifty-three (59%) reported participating in both initial and follow-up surveys. The proportion of respondents reporting personal experience with COVID-19-related adjustments increased over time, particularly for remote initial consent (29% v 4%), remote reconsent (24% v 9%), and remote study monitoring (36% v 22%). Perceived impact of COVID-19-related adjustments on data quality (P = .02) and patient experience (P = .002) improved significantly. However, perceived effect on patient safety (P = .02) and respondent's experience (P = .09) became less favorable. Individuals with personal experience with the adjustment were more likely to recommend continuing remote consent (62% v 38%; P = .04), remote monitoring (69% v 45%; P = .05), and therapy shipment (67% v 35%; P = .01) after the COVID-19 pandemic, with nonsignificant trends for off-site diagnostics (44% v 24%; P = .13) and telehealth visits (66% v 45%; P = .08).

CONCLUSION

More than 6 months into the global pandemic, perceptions of COVID-19-related clinical research changes remain favorable. Experienced individuals are more likely to recommend that these changes continue in the future.

Automated Electronic Health Record-Based Tool for Identification of Patients With Metastatic Disease to Facilitate Clinical Trial Patient Ascertainment

PURPOSE

To facilitate identification of clinical trial participation candidates, we developed a machine learning tool that automates the determination of a patient's metastatic status, on the basis of unstructured electronic health record (EHR) data.

METHODS

This tool scans EHR documents, extracting text snippet features surrounding key words (such as metastatic, progression, and local). A regularized logistic regression model was trained and used to classify patients across five metastatic categories: highly likely and likely positive, highly likely and likely negative, and unknown. Using a real-world oncology database of patients with solid tumors with manually abstracted information as reference, we calculated sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value (NPV), and positive predictive value (PPV). We validated the performance in a real-world data set, evaluating accuracy gains upon additional user review of tool's outputs after integration into clinic workflows.

RESULTS

In the training data set (N = 66,532), the model sensitivity and specificity (% [95% CI]) were 82.4 [81.9 to 83.0] and 95.5 [95.3 to 96.7], respectively; the PPV was 89.3 [88.8 to 90.0], and the NPV was 94.0 [93.8 to 94.2]. In the validation sample (n = 200 from five distinct care sites), after user review of model outputs, values increased to 97.1 [85.1 to 99.9] for sensitivity, 98.2 [94.8 to 99.6] for specificity, 91.9 [78.1 to 98.3] for PPV, and 99.4 [96.6 to 100.0] for NPV. The model assigned 163 of 200 patients to the highly likely categories. The error prevalence was 4% before and 2% after user review.

CONCLUSION

This tool infers metastatic status from unstructured EHR data with high accuracy and high confidence in more than 75% of cases, without requiring additional manual review. By enabling efficient characterization of metastatic status, this tool could mitigate a key barrier for patient ascertainment and clinical trial participation in community clinics.

Experience, Perceptions, and Recommendations Concerning COVID-19-Related Clinical Research Adjustments

BACKGROUND

During the COVID-19 public health emergency, the FDA and NIH altered clinical trial requirements to protect participants and manage study conduct. Given their detailed knowledge of research protocols and regular contact with patients, clinicians, and sponsors, clinical research professionals offer important perspectives on these changes.

METHODS

We developed and distributed an anonymous survey assessing COVID-19-related clinical trial adjustment experiences, perceptions, and recommendations to Clinical Research Office personnel at the Harold C. Simmons Comprehensive Cancer Center. Responses were compared using the Fisher exact test.

RESULTS

A total of 94 of 109 contacted research personnel (87%) responded. Among these individuals, 58% had >5 years' professional experience in clinical research, and 56% had personal experience with a COVID-19-related change. Respondents perceived that these changes had a positive impact on patient safety; treatment efficacy; patient and staff experience; and communication with patients, investigators, and sponsors. More than 90% felt that positive changes should be continued after COVID-19. For remote consent, telehealth, therapy shipment, off-site diagnostics, and remote monitoring, individuals with personal experience with the specific change and individuals with >5 years' professional experience were numerically more likely to recommend continuing the adjustment, and these differences were significant for telehealth (P=.04) and therapy shipment (P=.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical research professionals perceive that COVID-19-related clinical trial adjustments positively impact multiple aspects of study conduct. Those with greatest experience-both specific to COVID-19-related changes and more generally-are more likely to recommend that these adjustments continue in the future.

Representation of obese participants in obesity-related cancer randomized trials

Background

Obesity is a risk factor for numerous cancer types, and may influence cancer treatment outcomes. Underrepresentation of obese patients in obesity-related cancer randomized controlled trials (RCTs) may affect generalizability of results. We aimed to assess the reporting of information about eligibility and enrollment of obese participants in obesity-related cancer RCTs.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review of RCTs of 10 obesity-related cancer types (esophagus, colon/rectum, liver, gallbladder, pancreas, postmenopausal breast, endometrium, ovary, kidney, and thyroid cancer). We selected RCTs published between 2013 and 2016 in five major journals. For each trial, we examined the article, the protocol, and the registration record. We assessed if eligibility criteria limiting the enrollment of obese participants were reported, the proportion of obese participants that were enrolled, and if a subgroup analysis according to obesity status was reported. We systematically contacted corresponding authors and asked for information about eligibility of obese participants and the proportion of obese participants.

Results

We included 76 RCTs. Colon/rectum (n = 20), postmenopausal breast (n = 11), and kidney (n = 11) cancers were the most frequent types. Based on publicly available sources, information on the eligibility of obese participants was available in 5 (7%) trials. The proportion of obese participants could be estimated in 9 (12%) trials only. We found a subgroup analysis in only one RCT. When considering unpublished information, the eligibility of obese participants was explicitly stated in 31 (41%) trials but it was unclear if the remaining 59% trials considered obese participants as eligible and what proportion of obese participants was included. Across 22 trials, the median proportion of obese participants included was 18% (Q1-Q3 11-23).

Conclusion

Information on the eligibility and enrollment of obese participants in cancer RCTs is dramatically underreported. More transparency is needed to understand the applicability of obesity-related cancer RCT results to obese patients with cancer.

How many patients are eligible for disease-modifying treatment in Alzheimer's disease? A French national observational study over 5 years

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to study the epidemiology of the prodromal and mild stages of Alzheimer's disease (AD) patients who are eligible for clinical trials with disease-modifying therapies.

SETTINGS

We analysed two large complementary databases to study the incidence and characteristics of this population on a nationwide scope in France from 2014 to 2018. The National Alzheimer Database contains data from 357 memory centres and 90 private neurologists. Data from 2014 to 2018 have been analysed.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients, 50-85 years old, diagnosed with AD who had an Mini-Mental State Exam (MMSE) score of ≥20 were included. We excluded patients with mixed and non-AD neurocognitive disorders.

PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE

Descriptive statistics of the population of interest was the primary measure.

RESULTS

In the National Alzheimer Database, 550 198 patients were assessed. Among them, 72 174 (13.1%) were diagnosed with AD and had an MMSE ≥20. Using corrections for specificity of clinical diagnosis of AD, we estimated that about 50 000 (9.1%) had a prodromal or mild AD. In the combined electronic clinical records database of 11 French expert memory centres, a diagnosis of prodromal or mild AD, certified by the use of cerebrospinal fluid AD biomarkers, could be established in 195 (1.3%) out of 14 596 patients.

CONCLUSIONS

AD was not frequently diagnosed at a prodromal or mild dementia stage in France in 2014 to 2018. Diagnosis rarely relied on a pathophysiological marker even in expert memory centres. National databases will be valuable to monitor early stage AD diagnosis efficacy in memory centres when a disease-modifying treatment becomes available.

Implementing Precision Medicine Programs and Clinical Trials in the Community-Based Oncology Practice: Barriers and Best Practices

There has been a rapid uptick in the pace of oncology precision medicine advancements over the past several decades as a result of increasingly sophisticated technology and the ability to study more patients through innovative trial designs. As more precision oncology approaches are developed, the need for precision medicine trials is increasing in the community setting, where most patients with cancer are treated. However, community-based practices, as well as some academic centers, may face unique barriers to implementing precision medicine programs and trials within their communities. Such challenges include understanding the tissue needs of molecular tests (e.g., tumor, blood), identifying which molecular tests are best used and when tissue should be tested, interpreting the test results and determining actionability, understanding the role of genetic counseling and/or follow-up testing, determining clinical trial eligibility, and assessing patient attitudes and financial concerns. The purpose of this article is to provide guidance to community-based oncology practices currently conducting clinical trials who want to expand their research program to include precision medicine trials. Here, we describe the core components of precision medicine programs and offer best practices for successful implementation of precision medicine trials in community-based practices.

Recruitment practices for U.S. minority and underserved populations in NRG oncology: Results of an online survey

Introduction

Cancer clinical trials (CCT) provide much of the evidence for clinical guidelines and standards of care. But low levels of CCT participation are well documented, especially for minorities.

Methods and materials

We conducted an online survey of 556 recruitment practices across the NRG Oncology network. Survey aims were 1) to learn how sites recruit minority/underserved populations; 2) to better understand the catchment areas of the NRG institutions; and 3) to aid in planning education programs for accrual of minority/underserved populations.

Results

The survey response rate was 34.9%. The most effective methods reported for recruiting minority/underserved participants were patient navigators (44.4%) and translators (38.9%). All institutions reported using a mechanism for eligibility screening and 71% of institutions reported using a screening/enrollment tracking system. CCT training was required at 78.1% and cultural competency training was required at 47.5% of responding institutions. Only 19.9% of sites used community partners to assist with minority recruitment and just 37.1% of respondents reported a defined catchment area. Sites reported very little race and ethnicity data.

Conclusion

This NRG Oncology online survey provides useful data for improvements in trial enrollment and training to recruit minority/underserved populations to CCT. Areas for further investigation include web-based methods for recruitment and tracking, cultural competency training, definition of catchment areas, use of patient navigators, and community partnerships. The survey results will guide recruitment training programs.

Strategies to Maximize Patient Participation in Clinical Trials

Despite considerable interest and success in oncology drug development, the minority of patients with cancer diagnoses enroll in clinical trials. Multiple obstacles account for this low enrollment rate. An improvement in patient participation in clinical trials could increase patient access to novel and potentially promising agents, provide faster trial results, and, with implementation of rational eligibility criteria, allow for a better understanding of the drug's safety and efficacy in a heterogeneous population. We present barriers and potential solutions to maximize patient participation, including a review of the ASCO and Friends of Cancer Research (FoCR) Modernizing Eligibility Criteria Project, U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulatory considerations, an industry perspective, and a patient perspective.

Thoracic Oncology Clinical Trial Eligibility Criteria and Requirements Continue to Increase in Number and Complexity

INTRODUCTION

Eligibility criteria and screening procedures are designed to optimize the scientific yield and maximize the safety of clinical trials. However, they may also heighten trial complexity, hinder enrollment, decrease generalizability, and increase costs. We analyzed the types and number of eligibility criteria and screening procedures among thoracic oncology clinical trials sponsored or endorsed by the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group.

METHODS

We identified trials and obtained protocols from the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group website. Eligibility criteria were grouped and categorized as comorbidity (classified by organ system), administrative requirements, prior treatment, and measurable disease requirements. Associations between trial characteristics and eligibility criteria were analyzed by using the Kruskal-Wallis and Wilcoxon tests.

RESULTS

A total of 74 lung cancer trials activated in 1986-2016 were identified. The total number of eligibility criteria was associated with trial principal therapy (a median of nine for surgical, 18 for radiation, and 20 for medical therapy [p = 0.02]), trial primary end point (a median of 20 for overall survival, 28 for progression-free survival, and 17 for other [p = 0.001]), number of therapies (p = 0.05), and year of activation (a median of 16 for 1986-1995, 19 for 1996-2005, and 27 for 2006-2016 [P < 0.001]). The increase in trial eligibility requirements over time was limited to medical therapy trials. Over time, there was also an increase in blood test screening procedures (p = 0.05) but not in imaging, cardiac assessment, or pulmonary function screening procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

The number of eligibility criteria and screening procedures in medical therapy lung cancer clinical trials continues to rise. Continued efforts to simplify protocol eligibility and procedures are warranted to promote trial adherence, enrollment, completion, and generalizability.

Who's Eligible Anyway? Risk Modeling for Clinical Trial Accrual

Accrual continues to be a challenge for oncology clinical trials. Interventions to enhance accrual after study activation exist, including corrective action plans for NCI-sponsored trials. Clinical trials would benefit from a proactive approach rather than a reactive approach. Accrual strategy planning early in trial development is suggested. Clin Cancer Res; 22(22); 5397-9. ©2016 AACRSee related article by Massett et al., p. 5408.