Harnessing technology to improve clinical trials: study of real-time informatics to collect data, toxicities, image response assessments, and patient-reported outcomes in a phase II clinical trial

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.

CURATE.AI COR-Tx platform as a digital therapy and digital diagnostic for cognitive function in patients with brain tumour postradiotherapy treatment: protocol for a prospective mixed-methods feasibility clinical trial

INTRODUCTION

Conventional interventional modalities for preserving or improving cognitive function in patients with brain tumour undergoing radiotherapy usually involve pharmacological and/or cognitive rehabilitation therapy administered at fixed doses or intensities, often resulting in suboptimal or no response, due to the dynamically evolving patient state over the course of disease. The personalisation of interventions may result in more effective results for this population. We have developed the CURATE.AI COR-Tx platform, which combines a previously validated, artificial intelligence-derived personalised dosing technology with digital cognitive training.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a prospective, single-centre, single-arm, mixed-methods feasibility clinical trial with the primary objective of testing the feasibility of the CURATE.AI COR-Tx platform intervention as both a digital intervention and digital diagnostic for cognitive function. Fifteen patient participants diagnosed with a brain tumour requiring radiotherapy will be recruited. Participants will undergo a remote, home-based 10-week personalised digital intervention using the CURATE.AI COR-Tx platform three times a week. Cognitive function will be assessed via a combined non-digital cognitive evaluation and a digital diagnostic session at five time points: preradiotherapy, preintervention and postintervention and 16-weeks and 32-weeks postintervention. Feasibility outcomes relating to acceptability, demand, implementation, practicality and limited efficacy testing as well as usability and user experience will be assessed at the end of the intervention through semistructured patient interviews and a study team focus group discussion at study completion. All outcomes will be analysed quantitatively and qualitatively.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study has been approved by the National Healthcare Group (NHG) DSRB (DSRB2020/00249). We will report our findings at scientific conferences and/or in peer-reviewed journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04848935.

Patient-reported outcomes in immunotherapy for head and neck cancer

BACKGROUND

Data about patient-reported outcomes (PROs) among patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors are sparse. Our exploratory study evaluated PROs in patients with HNSCC starting treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitor monotherapy or combination therapy with cetuximab.

METHODS

Patients were recruited prior to receipt of their first checkpoint inhibitor therapy infusion. Participants completed measures of checkpoint inhibitor toxicities and quality of life (QOL) at on-treatment clinic visits.

RESULTS

Among patients treated with checkpoint inhibitor monotherapy (n = 48) or combination therapy (n = 38) toxicity increased over time (p < 0.05), while overall QOL improved from baseline to 12 weeks, with stable or declining QOL thereafter (p < 0.05). There were no group differences in change in toxicity index or QOL. Toxicity index scores were significantly higher in the combination group at 18-20 weeks and 6 months post-initiation of immune checkpoint inhibitor (p < 0.05). There were no significant group differences at baseline, the 6-8 week (p = 0.13) or 3-month (p = 0.09) evaluations. The combination group reported better emotional well-being at baseline than the monotherapy group (p = 0.04), There were no other group differences QOL at baseline or later timepoints.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite increasing patient-reported toxicity, checkpoint inhibitor monotherapy and combination therapy were associated with similar transient improvements, then worsening, of QOL in patients with HNSCC.

Optimal assessment of quality of life for patients with prostate cancer

The burden of cancer and oncologic treatment is reflected not only through morbidity and mortality, but also through impacts on patient quality of life (QoL). However, QoL has not been historically measured or addressed with the same rigorous methodology as traditional disease-related outcomes such as overall survival and progression, as these are driven by objective measurements and events. Prostate cancer (PCa) is one of the most prevalent non-cutaneous cancers in men around the world. Both the cancer and its treatment significantly impact patients' physical, emotional, sexual, social, and overall QoL. Ensuring assessment and integration of QoL in research and clinical care enables improvement in treatment outcomes that matter most to patients while also facilitating alignment of healthcare priorities with reimbursements. Great strides toward this end have been made over the last decade, but significant room for improvement remains. To ensure high quality, reliable data collection, QoL assessment tools must be psychometrically validated, standardized, widely implemented across trials, and regularly assessed to allow internal and external validity, longitudinal comparative effectiveness research, and quality control. Additional consideration should be taken for instruments used to measure the aspects of QoL specific to minority, caregiver, and elderly populations. Open clinical questions include how providers should weight changes in different QoL subscales and how clinically meaningful difference thresholds should be defined. Review of ongoing clinical trials encouragingly reveals an increased focus on measuring and improving QoL for men with PCa which will inform the way we utilize QoL assessments. However, additional efforts herein described are needed to fully optimize these processes. In summary, this review will explain the rationale for QoL assessments in PCa populations, discuss requirements for effective implementation, describe considerations for vulnerable and under-evaluated populations, and summarize ongoing clinical trials assessing patient QoL.

Predictors of participants' retention-socioeconomic factors or nonadherence: insights from a urological clinical prospective study

BACKGROUND

To investigate various patient-level variables, specifically socioeconomic status, as risk factors for withdrawal in a recently completed clinical study. We specifically investigated a non-interventional prospective study assessing the role of novel imaging as a biomarker for cancer upgradation in prostate cancer for this objective.

METHODS

In this retrospective analysis, we assessed the association between various patient-level factors including clinic-demographic factors, socioeconomic status, and the number of non-adherences with the participants' retention or withdrawal from the study. For socioeconomic status (SES), we used the zip code-based Economic Innovation Group Distressed Community Index (DCI) which classifies into five even distress tiers: prosperous, comfortable, mid-tier, at-risk, or distressed. Low SES was defined as those with a DCI Distress tier of at-risk or distressed. We compared values between the two retention and withdrawal groups using t-test, chi-square test, and logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

Of 273 men screened, 123 men were enrolled. Among them, 86.2% (106/123) retained through the study whereas 13.8% (17/123) withdrew from the study. The mean (SD) age was 64 (6.4) years. Overall, 31.7% (39/123) were Hispanics and 24.3% (30/123) were African Americans. The median (IQR) DCI score was 34 (10.3, 68.1) and 30.8% (38/123) of patients belonged to low SES. The median DCI score in participants who retained in the study was statistically similar to those who withdrew from the study (p=0.4). Neither the DCI tiers (p=0.7) nor the low SES (p=0.9) were associated with participants' retention or withdrawal of the study. In terms of non-adherence, all participants in the withdrawn group had at least one non-adherent event compared to 48.1% in the retained group (p<0.001). Repetitive non-adherence was significantly higher in participants who withdrew from the study vs those who retained in the study [88.2% vs 16.9%, p <0.001]. On multivariate logistic regression analysis, the number of non-adherences (OR=12.5, p<0.001) and not DCI (OR=0.99, p=0.7) appeared to be an independent predictor for participants' retention or withdrawal from the study.

CONCLUSIONS

Expanding diverse inclusion and limiting withdrawal with real-time non-adherence monitoring will lead to more efficient clinical research and greater generalizability of results.

Leveraging electronic health record query to streamline adverse event reporting and protocol compliance

Electronic medical records are increasingly being leveraged to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of clinical trials. Reporting safety data and adhering to follow-up schedules are two challenges faced by study centers conducting a large number of clinical trials led by a single principal investigator. The Lenox Hill Electrophysiology Research Department collaborated with Northwell Health's informatics department to develop a live query accessing both inpatient and outpatient data. To demonstrate the efficacy of this approach we compared the compliance rate of adverse event reporting and patient follow-up visits between a clinical trial run using this approach and a clinical trial conducted prior to use. We compared the number of out of window visits, missed visits, missed assessments, subject drop out and number of late reported adverse events between both studies. The trial run using the described query method had a marked reduction in these categories. Leveraging available informatics resources have allowed for improved efficiency, accurate adverse even reporting and improved follow-up scheduling.

Digital technologies in cancer care: a review from the clinician's perspective

Physicians are increasingly utilizing digital health technologies (DHT) such as smartphone applications, network-enabled wearable devices, web-based communication platforms, videoconferencing, chatbots, artificial intelligence and virtual reality to improve access to, and quality of, care. DHT aid in cancer screening, patient education, shared decision-making, promotion of positive health habits, symptom monitoring and intervention, patient-provider communication, provision of psychological support and delivery of effective survivorship care. This narrative review outlines how physicians may utilize digital health to improve or augment their delivery of cancer care. For the full potential of DHT to be realized, experts must develop appropriate solutions to issues surrounding the regulation, liability, quality, security, equity and reimbursement of DHT.

Oncology patients' experiences in experimental medicine cancer trials: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVES

The study aimed to explore patients' experiences of experimental cancer medicine (ECM) clinical trials.

DESIGN

The study's design was qualitative. Two focus groups with patients were undertaken followed by semistructured interviews, to explore patients' experiences of ECM clinical trials. Interviews and focus groups were audiorecorded and transcribed verbatim. Data were analysed using thematic analysis.

SETTING

A regional cancer centre (tertiary care) in North-West England.

PARTICIPANTS

Twelve patients (aged 52-79) participated in one of the two focus groups and 22 patients (aged 42-83) participated in interviews.

PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE

Patients' experiences of an ECM trial.

RESULTS

Four main themes were identified from the analysis: decision making, information needs, the experience of trial participation and impact of trial participation. Subthemes are presented in the manuscript.

CONCLUSION

To make fully informed decisions about trial participation, patients required the simplification of trial information and wanted more information about side effects, their response to trial treatment and the overall trial progress throughout the trial. Patients highlighted the need for improvement for the support provided to their family and friends.

Online monitoring of patient self-reported adverse events in early phase clinical trials: Views from patients, clinicians, and trial staff

BACKGROUND/AIMS

New classes of cancer drugs bring a range of unknown and undesirable adverse events. Adverse event monitoring is essential in phase I trials to assess toxicity and safety. In phase II, the focus is also on efficacy but robust data on adverse events continue to inform the safety and the adverse event profile. Standard, clinician-led monitoring has been shown to underestimate patients' symptoms. Hence, patient-reported adverse event monitoring has been argued to complement and improve the information on adverse events in early phase clinical trials. With advances in information technology, real-time patient self-reported adverse events in trials are feasible. This study explored the experiences and procedures for reporting adverse events in early phase trials among patients, clinical staff, and trial staff, and their views on using an electronic patient-reported outcome adverse event system in this setting.

METHODS

Qualitative interviews were conducted with patients, purposively sampled across ages, gender, and different phases of trials, and with clinical and trial-related staff involved in early phase trials (e.g. consultants, research nurses, hospital-based trial assistants/data managers, trial unit management staff). Interviews explored patient experiences and views on current adverse event reporting processes and electronic patient-reported outcome adverse event reporting. Framework analysis techniques were used to analyse the data.

RESULTS

Interviewees were from two hospital trusts with early phase portfolios in England and a trial unit, and included sixteen patients, five consultants, four research nurses, five hospital-based trial staff, and two trial unit staff. Interviews identified three key themes (patient experiences, data flow, and views on electronic patient-reported outcome adverse event reporting). Stakeholders emphasised the intensity of trials for patients and the importance of extensive information provision within the uncertainty of early phase trial drugs. Regular face-to-face appointments for patients supplemented by telephone contact aimed to capture any adverse events. Delayed or under-reporting of mild- or low-severity symptoms was evident among patients. Hospital-based staff highlighted the challenges of current data collection including intense timescales, monitoring by trial sponsors, and high workload. Positive views on electronic patient-reported outcome adverse events highlighted that this could provide a more comprehensive and accurate view on the side effects of new drugs. Clinical staff emphasised patient safety and the need for clear responsibilities for monitoring. The need for careful decision-making about data flow and symptom attribution was highlighted; with trial unit staff emphasising the need for clinician review.

CONCLUSION

Technology advances mean it is timely to explore the benefits and challenges of electronic patient-reported outcome adverse event reporting. This is a complex area warranting further consideration within the trial community. We have developed an online patient self-reporting tool and a small pilot with early phase trial patients is underway.

Stakeholders' knowledge, attitudes and practices to pharmacovigilance and adverse drug reaction reporting in clinical trials: a mixed methods study

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to explore the knowledge, attitudes and practices of health professionals working in clinical trials, to pharmacovigilance and adverse drug reaction (ADR) reporting.

METHODS

A mixed methods study comprising an online questionnaire disseminated from September to November 2018, three semi-structured interviews and four focus groups. The qualitative components were conducted with a random sample of questionnaire participants who had provided their contact details (n = 24). The qualitative interviews were conducted at a location convenient to the participant's place of work between October and December 2018.

RESULTS

One hundred forty-eight participants completed the questionnaire. Study coordinators/project managers represented the largest group of participants ( 28.6%, n = 38). Poor knowledge or understanding of ADR reporting was the most frequently cited barrier to ADR reporting (75%, n = 93). The most common enabler to reporting was having a clear understanding of an ADR definition (85.7%, n = 108). Focus group and interview participants described having limited staff as a barrier to reporting an ADR. They welcomed the prospect of pharmacovigilance training and indicated that face-to-face training would be preferred to provision of online training.

CONCLUSION

This study highlights key factors that influence the reporting of ADRs in clinical trials. Although the findings are specifically related to the clinical trial environment in Ireland, they may provide a useful platform for optimising the future conduct of trials. This research suggests that ADR reporting may be improved through provision of enhanced pharmacovigilance training to clinical trial staff.

Multidisciplinary Software Design for the Routine Monitoring and Assessment of Pain in Palliative Care Services: The Development of PainCheck

PURPOSE

The use of health information technology (HIT) to support patient and health professional communication is emerging as a core component of modern cancer care. Approaches to HIT development for cancer care are often underreported, despite their implementation in complex, multidisciplinary environments, typically supporting patients with multifaceted needs. We describe the development and evaluation of an e-health tool for pain management in patients with advanced cancer, arising from collaboration between health researchers and a commercial software development company.

METHODS

We adopted a research-led development process, involving patients with advanced cancer and their health professionals, focusing on use within real clinical settings. A software development approach (disciplined agile delivery) was combined with health science research methods (ie, diary studies, face-to-face interviews, questionnaires, prototyping, think aloud, process reviews, and pilots). Three software iterations were managed through three disciplined agile delivery phases to develop PainCheck and prepare it for use in a clinical trial.

RESULTS

Findings from development phases (inception, elaboration, and construction) informed the design and implementation of PainCheck. During the transition phase, where PainCheck was evaluated in a randomized clinical trial, there was variation in the extent of engagement by patients and health professionals. Prior personal experience and confidence with HIT led to a gatekeeping effect among health professionals, who were reluctant to introduce PainCheck to patients. Patients who did use PainCheck seemed to benefit, and no usability issues were reported.

CONCLUSION

Health science research methods seemed to help in the development of PainCheck, although a more rigorous application of implementation science methodologies might help to elucidate further the barriers and facilitators to adoption and inform an evidence-based plan for future implementation.

Clinical evaluation of germline polymorphisms associated with capecitabine toxicity in breast cancer: TBCRC-015

PURPOSE

Capecitabine is important in breast cancer treatment but causes diarrhea and hand-foot syndrome (HFS), affecting adherence and quality of life. We sought to identify pharmacogenomic predictors of capecitabine toxicity using a novel monitoring tool.

METHODS

Patients with metastatic breast cancer were prospectively treated with capecitabine (2000 mg/m²/day, 14 days on/7 off). Patients completed in-person toxicity questionnaires (day 1/cycle) and automated phone-in assessments (days 8, 15). Correlation of genotypes with early and overall toxicity was the primary endpoint.

RESULTS

Two hundred and fifty-nine patients were enrolled (14 institutions). Diarrhea and HFS occurred in 52% (17% grade 3) and 69% (9% grade 3), respectively. Only 29% of patients completed four cycles without dose reduction/interruption. In 39%, the highest toxicity grade was captured via phone. Three single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) associated with diarrhea-DPYD*5 (odds ratio [OR] 4.9; P = 0.0005), a MTHFR missense SNP (OR 3.3; P = 0.02), and a SNP upstream of MTRR (OR 3.0; P = 0.03). GWAS elucidated a novel HFS SNP (OR 3.0; P = 0.0007) near TNFSF4 (OX40L), a gene implicated in autoimmunity including autoimmune skin diseases never before implicated in HFS. Genotype-gene expression analyses of skin tissues identified rs11158568 (associated with HFS via GWAS) with expression of CHURC1, a transcriptional activator controlling fibroblast growth factor (beta = - 0.74; P = 1.46 × 10^-23), representing a previously unidentified mechanism for HFS.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first cancer pharmacogenomic study to use phone-in self-reporting, permitting augmented toxicity characterization. Three germline toxicity SNPs were replicated, and several novel SNPs/genes having strong functional relevance were discovered. If further validated, these markers could permit personalized capecitabine dosing.

Clinical Integration of Digital Solutions in Health Care: An Overview of the Current Landscape of Digital Technologies in Cancer Care

Digital health constitutes a merger of both software and hardware technology with health care delivery and management, and encompasses a number of domains, from wearable devices to artificial intelligence, each associated with widely disparate interaction and data collection models. In this review, we focus on the landscape of the current integration of digital health technology in cancer care by subdividing digital health technologies into the following sections: connected devices, digital patient information collection, telehealth, and digital assistants. In these sections, we give an overview of the potential clinical impact of such technologies as they pertain to key domains, including patient education, patient outcomes, quality of life, and health care value. We performed a search of PubMed ( www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed ) and www.ClinicalTrials.gov for numerous terms related to digital health technologies, including digital health, connected devices, smart devices, wearables, activity trackers, connected sensors, remote monitoring, electronic surveys, electronic patient-reported outcomes, telehealth, telemedicine, artificial intelligence, chatbot, and digital assistants. The terms health care and cancer were appended to the previously mentioned terms to filter results for cancer-specific applications. From these results, studies were included that exemplified use of the various domains of digital health technologies in oncologic care. Digital health encompasses the integration of a vast array of technologies with health care, each associated with varied methods of data collection and information flow. Integration of these technologies into clinical practice has seen applications throughout the spectrum of care, including cancer screening, on-treatment patient management, acute post-treatment follow-up, and survivorship. Implementation of these systems may serve to reduce costs and workflow inefficiencies, as well as to improve overall health care value, patient outcomes, and quality of life.

Home-Based e-Health Platform for Multidimensional Telemonitoring of Symptoms, Body Weight, Sleep, and Circadian Activity: Relevance for Chronomodulated Administration of Irinotecan, Fluorouracil-Leucovorin, and Oxaliplatin at Home-Results From a Pilot Study

PURPOSE

To assess the impact of chronomodulated irinotecan fluorouracil-leucovorin and oxaliplatin (chronoIFLO4) delivered at home on the daily life of patients with cancer in real time using a home-based e-Health multifunction and multiuser platform. This involved multidimensional telemonitoring of circadian rest-activity rhythm (CircAct), sleep, patient-reported outcome measures, and body weight changes (BWCs).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients received chronoIFLO4 fortnightly at home. Patients completed the 19-item MD Anderson Symptom Inventory on an interactive electronic screen, weighed themselves on a dedicated scale, and continuously wore a wrist accelerometer for CircAct and sleep monitoring. Daily data were securely teletransmitted to a specific server accessible by the hospital team. The clinically relevant CircAct parameter dichotomy index I < O and sleep efficiency (SE) were calculated. The dynamic patterns over time of patient-reported outcome measures, BWC, I < O, and SE informed the oncology team on tolerance in real time.

RESULTS

The platform was installed in the home of 11 patients (48 to 72 years of age; 45% men; 27% with performance status = 0), who were instructed on its use on site. They received 26 cycles and provided 5,891 data points of 8,736 expected (67.4%). The most severe MD Anderson Symptom Inventory scores were: interference with work (mean: 5.1 of 10) or general activity (4.9), fatigue (4.9), distress (4.2), and appetite loss (3.6). Mean BWC was -0.9%, and mean SE remained > 82%. CircAct disruption (I < O ≤ 97.5%) was observed in four (15%) cycles before chronoIFLO4 start and in five (19%) cycles at day 14.

CONCLUSION

The patient-centered multidimensional telemonitoring solution implemented here was well accepted by patients receiving multidrug chemotherapy at home. Moreover, it demonstrated that chronoIFLO4 was a safe therapeutic option. Such integrated technology allows the design of innovative management approaches, ultimately improving patients' experience with chemotherapy, wellbeing, and outcomes.

Linguistic Validation of the US National Cancer Institute's Patient-Reported Outcomes Version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events in Korean

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to translate and linguistically validate a Korean-language version of the US National Cancer Institute's Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE).

METHODS

All 124 PRO-CTCAE items were translated into Korean (PRO-CTCAE-Korean) using International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research best practices and linguistically validated in a diverse sample of patients undergoing cancer treatment (n = 120) to determine whether the Korean translation captured the original concepts. During the cognitive interviews, participants first completed approximately 60 PRO-CTCAE-Korean questions and were then interviewed to evaluate the conceptual equivalence of the translation to the original PRO-CTCAE English-language source. Interview probes addressed comprehension, clarity, and ease of judgement. Three rounds of interviews were conducted. Items that met the a priori threshold of 10% or more of respondents with comprehension difficulties were considered for rephrasing and retesting.

RESULTS

A majority of PRO-CTCAE-Korean items were well comprehended in round 1; 14 items posed comprehension difficulties for at least 10% of respondents in round 1. Four symptom terms (mouth and throat sores, feeling like nothing could cheer you up, frequent urination, and pain, swelling, redness at drug injection or intravenous insertion site) were revised and retested in rounds 2 and 3. For the other 10 symptom terms, no suitable alternative phrasing was identified, and the terms were retested in rounds 2 and 3. After rounds 2 and 3, no item presented difficulties in 20% or more of participants.

CONCLUSION

PRO-CTCAE-Korean has been linguistically validated for use in Korean-speaking populations. Quantitative evaluation of this new measure to establish its measurement properties and responsiveness in Korean speakers undergoing cancer treatment is in progress.

Self-evaluation of duration of adjuvant chemotherapy side effects in breast cancer patients: A prospective study

Background

We recently reported that self‐evaluation of the incidence and severity of treatment‐related side effects (TSEs) using a National Cancer Institute (NCI) Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v4.0‐based questionnaire was feasible and more informative than doctor reports in patients undergoing standard adjuvant chemotherapy for operable breast cancer. Here, we compare self‐ and doctor‐evaluated day of onset and duration of TSEs in the same population.

Patients and methods

Six hundred and four patients were enrolled at 11 sites in Italy. CTCAE v4.0 definitions of grade of severity of nausea, vomiting, constipation, anorexia, dysgeusia, diarrhea, fatigue, pain, paresthesia, and dyspnea were translated into Italian and rephrased. Questionnaires were administered after the first and third chemotherapy cycles. At each time‐point, information on TSEs was extracted from the medical charts and compared to patient questionnaires.

Results

A total of 594 and 573 paired patient and doctor questionnaires were collected after cycles one and three, respectively. TSE duration was significantly longer when reported by patients compared to doctors for six and seven of ten items after cycles one and three, respectively. Due to the combined effect of doctor underreporting of TSE incidence and duration, the mean percentages of cycle days with TSEs were significantly higher for all ten items when based on patient reports. Day of onset could not be evaluated because of insufficient numbers of complete records.

Conclusions

Self‐reporting TSE duration is feasible using a CTCAE‐derived questionnaire. As doctors tend to underestimate TSE incidence and duration, patient‐reported outcomes should be incorporated into clinical practice, perhaps using eHealth technologies, to harness their potential to better estimate total TSE burden.

Phase II Study of a Non-Platinum-Containing Doublet of Paclitaxel and Pemetrexed with Bevacizumab as Initial Therapy for Patients with Advanced Lung Adenocarcinomas

INTRODUCTION

Many patients with lung cancers cannot receive platinum-containing regimens owing to comorbid medical conditions. We designed the PPB (paclitaxel, pemetrexed, and bevacizumab) regimen to maintain or improve outcomes while averting the unique toxicities of platinum-based chemotherapies.

METHODS

We enrolled patients with untreated, advanced lung adenocarcinomas with measurable disease and no contraindications to bevacizumab. Participants received paclitaxel, 90 mg/m(2), pemetrexed, 500 mg/m(2), and bevacizumab, 10 mg/kg, every 14 days for 6 months and continued to receive pemetrexed and bevacizumab every 14 days until progression or unacceptable toxicity.

RESULTS

Of the 44 patients treated, 50% were women; the median age was 61 years and 89% had a Karnofsky performance status of at least 80%. We genotyped 38 patients with the following results: Kirsten rat sarcoma viral oncogene homolog gene (KRAS), 16; anaplastic lymphoma receptor tyrosine kinase gene (ALK), three; B-Raf proto-oncogene, serine/threonine kinase gene (BRAF) V600E, two; erb-b2 receptor tyrosine kinase 2 gene (HER2)/phosphatidylinositol-4,5-bisphosphate 3-kinase catalytic subunit alpha gene (PIK3CA), one; epidermal growth factor receptor gene (EGFR) exon 20 insertion, one; and driver 15, none. A total of 23 patients achieved a PR (52%, 95% confidence interval: 37-68), including seven of 16 with KRAS-mutant tumors. The overall survival rate at 2 years was 43% with a median of 17 months (95% confidence interval: 10-29). Grade 3/4 treatment-related toxicities included elevated alanine transaminase level (16%), fatigue (16%), leukopenia (9%), anemia (7%), elevated aspartate transaminase level (7%), edema (5%), and pleural effusions (5%). Two patients died of respiratory failure without disease progression.

CONCLUSIONS

The PPB regimen produced a high response rate in patients with lung adenocarcinomas regardless of mutational status. Survival and toxicities were comparable to those in the phase II reports testing platinum-containing doublets with bevacizumab. These results justify use of the PPB regimen in fit patients in whom three-drug regimens including bevacizumab are appropriate.

Longitudinal adverse event assessment in oncology clinical trials: the Toxicity over Time (ToxT) analysis of Alliance trials NCCTG N9741 and 979254

Background

Traditional methods of reporting adverse events (AEs) in clinical trials are inadequate for modern oncology therapies with chronic administration. Conventional analysis and display of maximum grade AEs do not capture toxicity profiles that evolve over time or longer lasting, lower grade toxicity as does this longitudinal Toxicity over Time (ToxT) approach.

Methods

Graphical and analytical routines were compiled into an automated and standardized format to comprehensively analyze AEs. Plots visualizing summary statistics or individual patient data over discreet time points were combined with statistical methodology including longitudinal techniques (repeated measures models that describe the changes in AEs over each time period; time-to-event analyses of first, worst, or high grade; and area under the curve (AUC) analyses summarizing AE profiles over the entire study). The analytic capability of ToxT was demonstrated using two completed North Central Cancer Treatment Group (NCCTG)/Alliance clinical trials in cancer therapy (N9741, NCT00003594) and symptom control (979254).

Findings

Bar charts and stream plots showed higher incidences of dry mouth occurring late in 979254 for venlafaxine compared to placebo (week 1 [baseline]: 13% vs 22%, p=0.20; week 5: 49% vs 2%, p<0.0001) and increased nausea early for IROX vs FOLFOX in N9741 (cycle 1: mean grade 1.1 versus 0.6, p<0.0001). Event charts visually depicted earlier occurrences of higher diarrhea grades for IROX patients and the AUC analysis indicated a higher magnitude of diarrhea experience over time in IROX compared to FOLFOX (4.2 versus 2.9, p<0.0001).

Interpretation

The ToxT analytic approach incorporates the dimension of time and offers a more comprehensive depiction of toxicity than current methods. With new, continuously administered targeted agents and maintenance regimens, these improved longitudinal analyses are directly relevant to patients and are imperative in oncology clinical trials.

Funding

US National Cancer Institute Alliance NCORP Research Base Grant (UG1CA 189823) and Mayo Comprehensive Cancer center Grant–Biostatistics (P30CA 15083).

Caring for caregivers and patients: Research and clinical priorities for informal cancer caregiving

Informal/family caregivers are a fundamental source of care for cancer patients in the United States, yet the population of caregivers and their tasks, psychosocial needs, and health outcomes are not well understood. Changes in the nature of cancer care and its delivery, along with the growing population of survivors and their caregivers, warrant increased attention to the roles and demands of caregiving. This article reviews current evidence presented at a 2-day meeting examining the state of the science of informal cancer caregiving that was convened by the National Cancer Institute and the National Institute of Nursing Research. The meeting sought to define who is an informal cancer caregiver, summarize the state of the science in informal cancer caregiving, and describe both the kinds of interventions developed to address caregiving challenges and the various outcomes used to evaluate their impact. This article offers recommendations for moving science forward in 4 areas: 1) improving the estimation of the prevalence and burden of informal cancer caregiving; 2) advancing the development of interventions designed to improve outcomes for cancer patients, caregivers, and patient-caregiver dyads; 3) generating and testing strategies for integrating caregivers into formal health care settings; and 4) promoting the use of technology to support informal cancer caregivers. Cancer 2016;122:1987-95. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

Use of mobile device technology to continuously collect patient-reported symptoms during radiation therapy for head and neck cancer: A prospective feasibility study

Purpose

Accurate assessment of toxicity allows for timely delivery of supportive measures during radiation therapy for head and neck cancer. The current paradigm requires weekly evaluation of patients by a provider. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the feasibility of monitoring patient reported symptoms via mobile devices.

Methods and materials

We developed a mobile application for patients to report symptoms in 5 domains using validated questions. Patients were asked to report symptoms using a mobile device once daily during treatment or more often as needed. Clinicians reviewed patient-reported symptoms during weekly symptom management visits and patients completed surveys regarding perceptions of the utility of the mobile application. The primary outcome measure was patient compliance with mobile device reporting. Compliance is defined as number of days with a symptom report divided by number of days on study.

Results

There were 921 symptom reports collected from 22 patients during treatment. Median reporting compliance was 71% (interquartile range, 45%-80%). Median number of reports submitted per patient was 34 (interquartile range, 21-53). Median number of reports submitted by patients per week was similar throughout radiation therapy and there was significant reporting during nonclinic hours. Patients reported high satisfaction with the use of mobile devices to report symptoms.

Conclusions

A substantial percentage of patients used mobile devices to continuously report symptoms throughout a course of radiation therapy for head and neck cancer. Future studies should evaluate the impact of mobile device symptom reporting on improving patient outcomes.

Comparative Effects of CT Imaging Measurement on RECIST End Points and Tumor Growth Kinetics Modeling

Quantitative assessments of tumor burden and modeling of longitudinal growth could improve phase II oncology trials. To identify obstacles to wider use of quantitative measures we obtained recorded linear tumor measurements from three published lung cancer trials. Model-based parameters of tumor burden change were estimated and compared with similarly sized samples from separate trials. Time-to-tumor growth (TTG) was computed from measurements recorded on case report forms and a second radiologist blinded to the form data. Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST)-based progression-free survival (PFS) measures were perfectly concordant between the original forms data and the blinded radiologist re-evaluation (intraclass correlation coefficient = 1), but these routine interrater differences in the identification and measurement of target lesions were associated with an average 18-week delay (range, -20 to 55 weeks) in TTG (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.32). To exploit computational metrics for improving statistical power in small clinical trials will require increased precision of tumor burden assessments.

Comparison of CT volumetric measurement with RECIST response in patients with lung cancer

PURPOSE

To examine the correlations between uni-dimensional RECIST and volumetric measurements in patients with lung adenocarcinoma and to assess their association with overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this study of patients receiving chemotherapy for lung cancer in the setting of a clinical trial, response was prospectively evaluated using RECIST 1.0. Retrospectively, volumetric measurements were recorded and response was assessed by two different volumetric methods at each followup CT scan using a semi-automated segmentation algorithm. We subsequently evaluated the correlation between the uni-dimensional RECIST measurements and the volumetric measurements and performed landmark analyses for OS and PFS at the completion of the first and second follow-ups. Kaplan-Meier curves together with log-rank tests were used to evaluate the association between the different response criteria and patient outcome.

RESULTS

Forty-two patients had CT scans at baseline, after the first follow up scan and second followup scan, and then every 8 weeks. The uni-dimensional RECIST measurements and volumetric measurements were strongly correlated, with a Spearman correlation coefficient (ρ) of 0.853 at baseline, ρ=0.861 at the first followup, ρ=0.843 at the 2nd followup, and ρ=0.887 overall between-subject. On first follow-up CT, partial responders and non responders as assessed by an "ellipsoid" volumetric criteria showed a significant difference in OS (p=0.008, 1-year OS of 70% for partial responders and 46% for non responders). There was no difference between the groups when assessed by RECIST criteria on first follow-up CT (p=0.841, 1-year OS rate of 64% for partial responders and 64% for non responders).

CONCLUSION

Volumetric response on first follow-up CT may better predict OS than RECIST response.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT

Assessment of tumor size and response is of utmost importance in clinical trials. Volumetric measurements may help to better predict OS than uni-dimensional RECIST criteria.

Feasibility and clinical impact of sharing patient-reported symptom toxicities and performance status with clinical investigators during a phase 2 cancer treatment trial

BACKGROUND

Clinicians can miss up to half of patients' symptomatic toxicities in cancer clinical trials and routine practice. Although patient-reported outcome questionnaires have been developed to capture this information, it is unclear whether clinicians will make use of patient-reported outcomes to inform their own toxicity documentation, or to prompt symptom management activities.

METHODS

44 lung cancer patients that participated in a phase 2 treatment trial self-reported 13 symptomatic toxicities derived from the National Cancer Institute's Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events and Karnofsky Performance Status via tablet computers in waiting areas immediately preceding scheduled visits. During visits, clinicians viewed patients' self-reported toxicity and performance status ratings on a computer interface and could agree or disagree/reassign grades ("shared" reporting). Agreement of clinicians with patient-reported grades was tabulated, and compared using weighted kappa statistics. Clinical actions in response to patient-reported severe (grade 3/4) toxicities were measured (e.g. treatment discontinuation, dose reduction, supportive medications). For comparison, 45 non-trial patients with lung cancer being treated in the same clinic by the same physicians were simultaneously enrolled in a parallel cohort study in which patients also self-reported toxicity grades but reports were not shared with clinicians ("non-shared" reporting).

RESULTS

Toxicities and performance status were reported by patients and reviewed by clinicians at (780/782) 99.7% of study visits in the phase 2 trial which used "shared" reporting. Clinicians agreed with patients 93% of the time with kappas 0.82-0.92. Clinical actions were taken in response to 67% of severe patient-reported toxicities. In the "non-shared" reporting comparison group, clinicians agreed with patients 56% of the time with kappas 0.04-0.48 (significantly worse than shared reporting for all symptoms), and clinical actions were taken in response to 44% of severe patient-reported toxicities.

CONCLUSION

Clinicians will frequently agree with patient-reported symptoms and performance status, and will use this information to guide documentation and symptom management. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00807573).

Participation of elderly adults in randomized controlled trials addressing antibiotic treatment of pneumonia

OBJECTIVES

To examine how relevant current evidence on antibiotic treatment of pneumonia is for elderly adults.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

SETTING

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs; N = 43) comparing different antibiotics and prospective observational studies (N = 182) published since 2005.

PARTICIPANTS

Adults with community-acquired (CAP), healthcare-associated (HCAP), hospital-acquired (HAP), or ventilator-associated (VAP) pneumonia.

MEASUREMENTS

Exclusion criteria that could preferentially limit participation of elderly adults were examined, subgroup or other adjusted analyses were searched for according to age, and treatment effects in participants younger than 65 in RCTs were compared with those in participants aged 65 and older. Mean participant ages in RCTs and observational studies were compared. Risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for differences between older and younger adults were pooled using a fixed effect metaanalysis.

RESULTS

No RCT reported exclusion based on an upper age limit; 100% of community CAP trials, 90% of hospitalized CAP trials, and 76% of HAP and VAP trials excluded individuals based on comorbidities. None of the RCTs reported a subgroup analysis for mortality according to age. The RR for the pooled difference in treatment failure rates between participants younger than 65 and those aged 65 and older was 1.25 (95% CI = 0.94-1.65, 12 RCTs) and between participants younger than 75 and aged 75 and older was 1.43 (95% CI = 0.98-2.09, 7 RCTs). RCT participants were significantly younger (54.0 ± 9.6) than those in observational studies of CAP (66.2 ± 8.1, P < .001). Age differences were not significant for HCAP, HAP, and VAP.

CONCLUSION

Elderly adults are often excluded from RCTs of bacterial pneumonia. No data were found on the comparative efficacy of antibiotic treatment in elderly adults and the general population.

Interview: Progress and promise in the therapy of lung cancers

Dr Mark Kris* speaks to Marco De Ambrogi, Commissioning Editor: Dr Mark Kris is currently serving as William and Joy Ruane Chair in Thoracic Oncology at the Memorial Sloan-Kettering (MSK) Cancer Center (NY, USA), where he has been on the staff since 1983. He also is a Professor of Medicine at the Weill Cornell Medical College (NY, USA). After serving as Chief of the Thoracic Oncology Service at MSK Cancer Center since 1990, Dr Kris has recently been named Lead Physician for the MSK–IBM Watson Collaboration. He specializes in thoracic malignancies including lung cancer, thymoma and cancers of an unknown primary site. His research interests include targeted therapies for lung cancer, multimodality therapy, the development of new anticancer drugs and symptom management with a focus on preventing emesis, the most dreaded side effect of cancer and cancer treatment. Dr Kris received his medical degree from Cornell University Medical College, completed residencies at the New York Hospital Cornell Medical Center/MSK Cancer Center program, and performed his fellowship at MSK Cancer Center. An American Society of Clinical Oncology member since 1983, Dr Kris has served on and led numerous committees. He received an American Society of Clinical Oncology Statesman Award in 2010 in recognition of his service to the society.

Detection of lung cancer relapse using self-reported symptoms transmitted via an internet web-application: pilot study of the sentinel follow-up

PURPOSE

We aimed to investigate whether patient self-evaluated symptoms transmitted via Internet can be used between planned visits to provide an early indication of disease relapse in lung cancer.

METHODS

Between 2/2013 and 8/2013, 42 patients with lung cancer having access to Internet were prospectively recruited to weekly fill a form of 11 self-assessed symptoms called "sentinel follow-up". Data were sent to the oncologist in real-time between planned visits. An alert email was sent to oncologist when self-scored symptoms matched some predefined criteria. Follow-up visit and imaging were then organized after a phone call for confirming suspect symptoms. Weekly and monthly compliances, easiness with which patients used the web-application and the accuracy of the sentinel follow-up for relapse detection were assessed and compared to a routine visit and imaging follow-up.

RESULTS

Median follow-up duration was 18 weeks (8-32). Weekly and monthly average compliances were 79 and 94 %, respectively. Sixty percents of patients declared to be less anxious during the few days before planned visit and imaging with the sentinel follow-up than without. Sensitivity, specificity, positive, and negative predictive values provided by the sentinel (planned imaging) follow-up were 100 %(84 %), 89 %(96 %), 81 %(91 %), and 100 %(93 %), respectively and well correlated with relapse (pχ (2) < 0.001). On average, relapses were detectable 5 weeks earlier with sentinel than planned visit.

CONCLUSION

An individualized cancer follow-up that schedule visit and imaging according to the patient status based on weekly self-reported symptoms transmitted via Internet is feasible with high compliance. It may even provide earlier detection of lung cancer relapse and care.

Current status of antiangiogenic therapies for glioblastomas

INTRODUCTION

Glioblastoma (GBM), the most common primary malignant brain tumor in adults, lacks effective long-term treatment. The tumor is dependent on neovascularization for survival, making angiogenesis an attractive target for therapeutic intervention. The exact mechanism underlying the effects of antiangiogenic agents on GBM remains debatable, although it likely involves vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), and other proangiogenic growth factors. Early studies in the recurrent GBM setting were promising and prompted two multinational randomized phase three trials (AVAglio and RTOG 0825) investigating the effect of bevacizumab, an anti-VEGF monoclonal antibody, in newly diagnosed GBM.

AREAS COVERED

In this article, the authors discuss the basic mechanisms of angiogenesis and antiangiogenic resistance. The authors additionally summarize the current state of clinical research and how it will impact both future research and the development antiangiogenic therapies.

EXPERT OPINION

The ultimate utility of antiangiogenic therapy in the management of GBM remains unclear. In an effort to improve outcomes, there remains an urgent need to better understand the biology underlying angiogenesis and tumor survival, as well as mechanisms of antiangiogeneic resistance. Ultimately, combinatorial approaches using antiangiogenic agents, targeted molecular therapy, immunotherapy or cytotoxics may be needed to improve treatment outcomes.

Ovarian cancer clinical trial endpoints: Society of Gynecologic Oncology white paper

OBJECTIVE

To explore the value of multiple clinical endpoints in the unique setting of ovarian cancer.

METHODS

A clinical trial workgroup was established by the Society of Gynecologic Oncology to develop a consensus statement via multiple conference calls, meetings and white paper drafts.

RESULTS

Clinical trial endpoints have profound effects on late phase clinical trial design, result interpretation, drug development, and regulatory approval of therapeutics. Selection of the optimal clinical trial endpoint is particularly provocative in ovarian cancer where long overall survival (OS) is observed. The lack of new regulatory approvals and the lack of harmony between regulatory bodies globally for ovarian cancer therapeutics are of concern. The advantages and disadvantages of the numerous endpoints available are herein discussed within the unique context of ovarian cancer where both crossover and post-progression therapies potentially uncouple surrogacy between progression-free survival (PFS) and OS, the two most widely supported and utilized endpoints. The roles of patient reported outcomes (PRO) and health related quality of life (HRQoL) are discussed, but even these widely supported parameters are affected by the unique characteristics of ovarian cancer where a significant percentage of patients may be asymptomatic. Original data regarding the endpoint preferences of ovarian cancer advocates is presented.

CONCLUSIONS

Endpoint selection in ovarian cancer clinical trials should reflect the impact on disease burden and unique characteristics of the treatment cohort while reflecting true patient benefit. Both OS and PFS have led to regulatory approvals and are clinically important. OS remains the most objective and accepted endpoint because it is least vulnerable to bias; however, the feasibility of OS in ovarian cancer is compromised by the requirement for large trial size, prolonged time-line for final analysis, and potential for unintended loss of treatment effect from active post-progression therapies. A large magnitude of effect in PFS improvement should establish benefit, and further communication with regulatory authorities to clarify acceptable endpoints should be undertaken.

Detecting lung cancer relapse using self-evaluation forms weekly filled at home: the sentinel follow-up

PURPOSE

We aimed to assess if patients' ratings of symptoms can be used to provide an early indication of disease recurrence or progression in lung cancer. We proposed a simple self-evaluation form made of six clinical parameters weekly scored by patients at home as a follow-up--here named sentinel--to improve relapse detection. Its performances were compared to those of a routine imaging follow-up.

METHODS

Patients with lung cancer were prospectively recruited to weekly fill a form at home for self-assessing weight, fatigue, pain, appetite, cough, and breathlessness during at least 4 months. Each patient reported weight and assessed the severity of each symptom by grading it from 0 (no symptom) to 3 (major symptom). A score was retrospectively designed for discriminating patients with relapse from those without. Accuracy of relapse detection was then compared to values of the routine planned imaging.

RESULTS

Forty-three patients were included in our center and recruited for 16 weeks or more follow-up during which at least one tumor imaging assessment was performed (CT scan or PET-CT). Forty-one completed the form weekly. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of sentinel were high (86, 93, 86 % and 93 vs 79, 96, 92, and 90 % for routine imaging--p = ns) and well correlated with relapse (pχ2 > 0.001). Moreover, relapses were detectable with sentinel on average 6 weeks earlier than the planned imaging.

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that a personalized cancer follow-up based on a weekly self-evaluation of six symptoms is feasible and may be accurate for earlier detection of lung cancer relapse, allowing integration in electronic devices for real-time patient outcome follow-up.