Physician Coaching by Professionally Trained Peers for Burnout and Well-Being: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Physician burnout is problematic despite existing interventions. More evidence-based approaches are needed.

Objective

To explore the effect of individualized coaching by professionally trained peers on burnout and well-being in physicians.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This randomized clinical trial involved Mass General Physician Organization physicians who volunteered for coaching from August 5 through December 1, 2021. The data analysis was performed from February through October 2022.

Interventions

Participants were randomized to 6 coaching sessions facilitated by a peer coach over 3 months or a control condition using standard institutional resources for burnout and wellness.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was burnout as measured by the Stanford Professional Fulfillment Index. Secondary outcomes included professional fulfillment, effect of work on personal relationships, quality of life, work engagement, and self-valuation. Analysis was performed on a modified intention-to-treat basis.

Results

Of 138 physicians enrolled, 67 were randomly allocated to the coaching intervention and 71 to the control group. Most participants were aged 31 to 60 years (128 [93.0%]), women (109 [79.0%]), married (108 [78.3%]), and in their early to mid career (mean [SD], 12.0 [9.7] years in practice); 39 (28.3%) were Asian, 3 (<0.1%) were Black, 9 (<0.1%) were Hispanic, 93 were (67.4%) White, and 6 (<0.1%) were of other race or ethnicity. In the intervention group, 52 participants underwent coaching and were included in the analysis. Statistically significant improvements in burnout, interpersonal disengagement, professional fulfillment, and work engagement were observed after 3 months of coaching compared with no intervention. Mean scores for interpersonal disengagement decreased by 30.1% in the intervention group and increased by 4.1% in the control group (absolute difference, -0.94 poimys [95% CI, -1.48 to -0.41 points; P = .001), while mean scores for overall burnout decreased by 21.6% in the intervention group and increased by 2.5% in the control group (absolute difference, -0.79 points; 95% CI, -1.27 to -0.32 points; P = .001). Professional fulfillment increased by 10.7% in the intervention group compared with no change in the control group (absolute difference, 0.59 points; 95% CI, 0.01-1.16 points; P = .046). Work engagement increased by 6.3% in the intervention group and decreased by 2.2% in the control group (absolute difference, 0.33 points; 95% CI, 0.02-0.65 points; P = .04). Self-valuation increased in both groups, but not significantly.

Conclusions and Relevance

The findings of this hospital-sponsored program show that individualized coaching by professionally trained peers is an effective strategy for reducing physician burnout and interpersonal disengagement while improving their professional fulfillment and work engagement.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05036993.

Experiences of bias in a multidisciplinary hospital medicine group

ABSTRACT

Clinicians report experiencing bias at work. Although previous studies have characterized these experiences among trainees and clinical faculty, ours is the first to describe experiences of bias within a multidisciplinary hospital medicine group. In our study, 82.5% of surveyed nurse practitioners (NPs), physician assistants (PAs), and physicians reported experiencing gender, racial, or other forms of bias in the workplace. In addition to women reporting higher rates of gender bias and Asian/Black/Latinx/multiracial/other race respondents reporting higher rates of racial bias, half of participants reported experiencing other forms of bias related to gender expression, perceived sexual orientation, body habitus, age, accent, country of origin, or perceived socioeconomic status. Respondents infrequently addressed bias with the person expressing it. Our study expands on the existing literature about experiences of bias by studying a large, multidisciplinary, academic hospital medicine group. With the increasing inclusion of NPs and PAs in hospital medicine, understanding their experiences will enable development of tailored interventions to reduce harm from experiences of bias.

Study protocol for NeuroCARE: a randomised controlled trial of a psychological intervention for caregivers of patients with primary malignant brain tumours

INTRODUCTION

Caregivers of patients with primary malignant brain tumours experience substantial psychological distress while caring for someone with a progressive, life-limiting neurological illness. However, there are few interventions aimed at addressing the psychosocial needs of this population. We developed and are testing a population-specific, evidence-based, telehealth intervention (NeuroCARE) to reduce anxiety symptoms and improve psychosocial functioning in this caregiver population.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This study is a non-blinded, randomised controlled trial of a psychological intervention for caregivers of patients with primary malignant brain tumours receiving care at the Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center or Dana-Farber Cancer Institute. We will enrol 120 caregivers who screen positive for heightened anxiety. Participants will be randomised 1:1 to the NeuroCARE intervention or a usual care control condition. Caregivers assigned to NeuroCARE will complete six individual telehealth sessions with a trained behavioural health specialist over 12 weeks. Caregivers randomised to the control condition will receive usual care, including possible referral to social work or other appropriate resources. Participants will complete self-report questionnaires at baseline and 11 weeks and 16 weeks postrandomisation. The primary outcome is anxiety symptoms at 11 weeks among NeuroCARE participants, compared with usual care. Secondary outcomes include caregiver-reported depressive symptoms, quality of life, caregiver burden, caregiving self-efficacy, perceived coping skills and post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms. We also will explore potential mediators of the NeuroCARE effect on caregiver anxiety symptoms.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study is funded by a Career Development Award from Conquer Cancer, the American Society of Clinical Oncology Foundation (award number 2019CDA-7743456038) and approved by the Dana-Farber/Harvard Cancer Center Institutional Review Board (Protocol #19-250 V.10.1). The study will be reported in accordance with the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials statement for non-pharmacological trials. Results will be presented at scientific meetings and in peer-reviewed journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04109209.

Mortality by Age, Gender, and Race and Ethnicity in People Experiencing Homelessness in Boston, Massachusetts

Importance

People experiencing homelessness (PEH) face disproportionately high mortality rates compared with the general population, but few studies have examined mortality in this population by age, gender, and race and ethnicity.

Objective

To evaluate all-cause and cause-specific mortality in a large cohort of PEH by age, gender, and race and ethnicity.

Design, Setting, and Participants

An observational cohort study was conducted from January 1, 2003, to December 31, 2018. All analyses were performed between March 16, 2021, and May 12, 2022. A cohort of adults (age ≥18 years) seen at the Boston Health Care for the Homeless Program (BHCHP), a large federally funded Health Care for the Homeless organization in Boston, Massachusetts, from January 1, 2003, to December 31, 2017, was linked to Massachusetts death occurrence files spanning January 1, 2003, to December 31, 2018.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Age-, gender-, and race and ethnicity-stratified all-cause and cause-specific mortality rates were examined and compared with rates in the urban Northeast US population using mortality rate ratios (RRs).

Results

Among the 60 092 adults included in the cohort with a median follow-up of 8.6 (IQR, 5.1-12.5) years, 7130 deaths occurred. The mean (SD) age at death was 53.7 (13.1) years; 77.5% of decedents were men, 21.0% Black, 10.0% Hispanic/Latinx, and 61.5% White. The all-cause mortality rate was 1639.7 deaths per 100 000 person-years among men and 830 deaths per 100 000 person-years among women. The all-cause mortality rate was highest among White men aged 65 to 79 years (4245.4 deaths per 100 000 person-years). Drug overdose was a leading cause of death across age, gender, and race and ethnicity groups, while suicide uniquely affected young PEH and HIV infection and homicide uniquely affected Black and Hispanic/Latinx PEH.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this large cohort study of PEH, all-cause and cause-specific mortality varied by age, gender, and race and ethnicity. Tailored interventions focusing on those at elevated risk for certain causes of death are essential for reducing mortality disparities across homeless-experienced groups.

Health-related quality of life analyses in nonfunctioning pituitary macroadenoma patients identifies at-risk populations

PURPOSE

The quality of life (QoL) impact of multidisciplinary treatment for patients with nonfunctioning pituitary macroadenomas (NFPMA) is unclear. We sought to investigate associations between patient factors, clinical data, and patient-reported QoL in patients with NFPMA.

METHODS

Patients with treated NFPMA and > 1 year of follow up after transsphenoidal surgery (TSS) and with no evidence of progressive disease were evaluated utilizing the following patient-reported outcome measures: RAND-36-Item Health Survey, Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory, Cognitive Failures Questionnaire.

RESULTS

229 eligible patients completed QoL questionnaires a median of 7.7 years after initial transsphenoidal surgery (TSS). 25% of participants received radiation therapy (RT) a median of 2.0 years (0.1-22.5) after initial TSS. Patients who received RT were younger (median age 46 v 58, p < 0.0001), had larger tumors (28 mm v 22 mm, p < 0.0001), were more likely to have visual symptoms (65% v 34%, p = 0.0002), and were more likely to have hypopituitarism (93% v 62%, p < 0.0001). Patients with hypopituitarism reported worse energy and fatigue and cognitive function (p < 0.03). Patients who received RT reported significantly worse general health, physical health, physical fatigue and cognitive functioning (p < 0.05). The largest QoL differences were in patients who experienced a financial stressor, independent of treatment type.

CONCLUSION

Hypopituitarism, radiation therapy after TSS, and financial stressors are associated with more impaired QoL in patients with NFPMA. Awareness of these factors can better guide use and timing of radiation therapy in addition to identifying patients who can benefit from multidisciplinary surveillance.

Concurrent immune checkpoint inhibition and selective immunosuppressive therapy in patients with immune-related enterocolitis

PURPOSE

Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy is often suspended because of immune-related enterocolitis (irEC). We examined the effect of resumption of ICIs with or without concurrent selective immunosuppressive therapy (SIT) on rates of symptom recurrence and survival outcomes.

METHODS

This retrospective, multicenter study examined patients who were treated with ICI and developed irEC requiring SIT (infliximab or vedolizumab) for initial symptom control or to facilitate steroid tapering between May 2015 and June 2020. After symptom resolution, patients were restarted either on ICI alone or on concurrent ICI and SIT at the discretion of the treating physicians. The associations between irEC recurrence and treatment group were assessed via univariate analyses and multivariate logistic regression. Cox proportional hazards model was used for survival analysis.

RESULTS

Of the 138 included patients who required SIT for initial irEC symptom control, 61 (44.2%) patients resumed ICI without concurrent SIT (control group) and 77 (55.8%) patients resumed ICI therapy with concurrent SIT: 33 with infliximab and 44 with vedolizumab. After symptom resolution, patients in the control group were more commonly restarted on a different ICI regimen (65.6%) compared with those receiving SIT (31.2%) (p<0.001). The total number of ICI doses administered after irEC resolution and ICI resumption was similar in both groups (four to five doses). Recurrence of severe colitis or diarrhea after ICI resumption was seen in 34.4% of controls compared with 20.8% of patients receiving concurrent SIT. Concurrent SIT was associated with reduced risk of severe irEC recurrence after ICI resumption in a multivariate logistic regression model (OR 0.34; 95% CI 0.13 to 0.92; p=0.034). There was no difference in survival outcomes between patients in the control group and patients concurrently treated with SIT.

CONCLUSION

After resolution of irEC symptoms, reinitiation of ICI with concurrent SIT is safe, reduces severe irEC recurrence, and has no negative impact on survival outcomes.

Mortality Trends Among Adults Experiencing Homelessness in Boston, Massachusetts From 2003 to 2018

This cohort study involves assessing causes of death among people experiencing homelessness in Boston from 2003 to 2018.

A multicenter, randomized phase II study of total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) with FOLFIRINOX (FFX) and SBRT, with or without losartan (L) and nivolumab (N) in borderline resectable (BR) and locally advanced (LA) pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC)

719

Background: Outcomes in BR and LA PDAC remain historically poor, in part due to low rates of R0 resection. A prior phase II study demonstrated that losartan (L) as a TGF-beta inhibitor combined with FOLFIRINOX (FFX) and radiation in LA PDAC led to a 61% R0 resection rate. Additionally, prior phase II studies suggest potential synergy with SBRT and nivolumab (N) in PDAC. We conducted a multi-center, randomized phase II trial to evaluate the effect of L and L+N in combination with TNT using FFX and SBRT. Methods: Patients with BR or LA PDAC by NCCN criteria, pathologically confirmed, ACE/ARB naïve, were randomized to TNT with FFX and SBRT (Arm 1), TNT + L (Arm 2), and TNT+L+N (Arm 3), stratified by BR/LA. Patients already on an ACE or ARB were enrolled on an exploratory arm of TNT+N (Arm 4) and will be reported separately. TNT consisted of FFX x 8 followed by SBRT (6.6 Gy x 5). L was given at 50 mg qd throughout TNT and for 6 mo after surgery. N was given at 240 mg flat dosing q2 wks concurrent with SBRT and for 12 doses postoperatively. All patients were recommended for surgical exploration after TNT. The study was designed to compare the R0 resection rate on each of Arms 2 and 3 independently versus Arm 1 at a one-sided 0.10 level. Secondary endpoints were PFS, OS, and pCR rates and analyzed using two-sided tests with Arm 1 as the control arm. Intent-to-treat analysis was based on eligible patients who started therapy on protocol. Results: Patients with BR or LA PDAC by NCCN criteria, pathologically confirmed, ACE/ARB naïve, were randomized to TNT with FFX and SBRT (Arm 1), TNT + L (Arm 2), and TNT+L+N (Arm 3), stratified by BR/LA. Patients already on an ACE or ARB were enrolled on an exploratory arm of TNT+N (Arm 4) and will be reported separately. TNT consisted of FFX x 8 followed by SBRT (6.6 Gy x 5). L was given at 50 mg qd throughout TNT and for 6 mo after surgery. N was given at 240 mg flat dosing q2 wks concurrent with SBRT and for 12 doses postoperatively. All patients were recommended for surgical exploration after TNT. The study was designed to compare the R0 resection rate on each of Arms 2 and 3 independently versus Arm 1 at a one-sided 0.10 level. Secondary endpoints were PFS, OS, and pCR rates and analyzed using two-sided tests with Arm 1 as the control arm. Intent-to-treat analysis was based on eligible patients who started therapy on protocol. Conclusions: We did not observe effects of L and L+N on the R0 resection rate, PFS, OS, and pCR rate when added to TNT with FFX and SBRT for BR or LA PDAC. The lack of differences may reflect heterogeneity in surgical opinion as the decision for proceeding to surgery following TNT tends to be highly variable in a population with historically low resection rates. Clinical trial information: NCT03563248 .

Effect of a MUC5AC Antibody (NPC-1C) Administered With Second-Line Gemcitabine and Nab-Paclitaxel on the Survival of Patients With Advanced Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: A Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Treatment options are limited for patients with advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) beyond first-line 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin (FOLFIRINOX), with such individuals commonly being treated with gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether NPC-1C, an antibody directed against MUC5AC, might increase the efficacy of second-line gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel in patients with advanced PDAC.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This multicenter, randomized phase II clinical trial enrolled patients with advanced PDAC between April 2014 and March 2017 whose disease had progressed on first-line FOLFIRINOX. Eligible patients had tumors with at least 20 MUC5AC staining by centralized immunohistochemistry review. Statistical analysis was performed from April to May 2022.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were randomly assigned to receive gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2) and nab-paclitaxel (125 mg/m2) administered intravenously on days 1, 8, and 15 of every 4-week cycle, with or without intravenous NPC-1C 1.5 mg/kg every 2 weeks.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary end point was overall survival (OS). Secondary end points were progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and safety. Pretreatment clinical variables were explored with Cox proportional hazards analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 78 patients (median [range] age, 62 [36-78] years; 32 [41%] women; 9 [12%] Black; 66 [85%] White) received second-line treatment with gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (n = 40) or gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel and NPC-1C (n = 38). Median OS was 6.6 months (95% CI, 4.7-8.4 months) with gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel vs 5.0 months (95% CI, 3.3-6.5 months; P = .22) with gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel and NPC-1C. Median PFS was 2.7 months (95% CI, 1.9-4.1 months) with gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel vs 3.4 months (95% CI, 1.9-5.3 months; P = .80) with gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel and NPC-1C. The ORR was 3.1% (95% CI, 0.4%-19.7%) in the gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel and NPC-1C group and 2.9% (95% CI, 0.4%-18.7%) in the gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel group. No differences in toxicity were observed between groups, except that grade 3 or greater anemia occurred more frequently in patients treated with gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel and NPC-1C than gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (39% [15 of 38] vs 10% [4 of 40]; P = .003). The frequency of chemotherapy dose reductions was similar in both groups (65% vs 74%; P = .47). Lower performance status, hypoalbuminemia, PDAC diagnosis less than or equal to 18 months before trial enrollment, lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio less than 2.8, and CA19-9 greater than 2000 IU/mL were independently associated with poorer survival.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this randomized clinical trial of advanced PDAC, NPC-1C did not enhance the efficacy of gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel. These data provide a benchmark for future trials investigating second-line treatment of PDAC.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01834235.

Abstract A019: A multicenter randomized phase II study of gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel versus gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel with a MUC5AC antibody (NPC-1C) in advanced pancreatic cancer previously treated with FOLFIRINOX (NCT01834235)

Background: Treatment options for advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) beyond first-line 5-fluorouracil, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin (FOLFIRINOX) are limited, and patients are commonly treated with gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel. The aim of this study was to determine whether the addition of a MUC5AC antibody, NPC-1C, could improve the efficacy of second-line gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel in advanced PDAC. Methods: This study was a multicenter, open label, randomized phase II clinical trial (NCT01834235) for patients with metastatic or locally advanced PDAC who had disease progression on first-line FOLFIRINOX or a FOLFIRINOX-like regimen. Eligible patients had tumors with &gt;20% MUC5AC expression as assessed by centralized immunohistochemistry review. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1 ratio) to receive gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 and nab-paclitaxel 125 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, and 15 every 4-week cycle with or without IV NPC-1C 1.5 mg/kg every two weeks. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints were progression free survival (PFS), confirmed overall response rate (ORR) by RECIST v1.1, disease control rate (DCR) (partial response or stable disease ≥ 16 weeks), and safety. Clinical variables associated with survival were explored using Cox proportional hazards stepwise regression analysis. Results: Of the 80 randomized patients, 40 received gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (GA) and 38 received gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel/NPC-1C (GA+N) between April 2014 to March 2017. The median follow-up time was 5.8 months. Enrolled patients had a median age of 62 years (range, 36-78), 32 patients (41%) were female, and 4 patients (5%) had locally advanced disease. The trial was stopped early for futility following a pre-planned interim analysis, and patients were followed. The median OS in the GA arm was 6.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 4.7-8.4) and 5.0 months (95% CI: 3.3-6.5; log-rank p=0.22) in the GA+N arm. The median PFS was 2.7 months (95% CI: 1.9-4.1) for GA and 3.4 months (95% CI: 1.9-5.3; log-rank p=0.80) for GA+N. The ORR (n=66) was 3% (95% CI: 0.4%-19%) for GA and 3% (95% CI: 0.4%-20%) for GA+N. The DCR was 23.5% (95% CI: 12.1%-40.8%) for GA and 28.1% (95% CI: 15.1%-46.2%) for GA+N (Fisher exact, p=0.78). There were minimal differences in toxicity between arms, except grade ≥ 3 anemia was more common in patients treated with GA+N vs. GA (39% vs 10%, Fisher exact, p=0.003). Chemotherapy dose reductions occurred in 69% of all patients at least one time (65% GA vs. 74% GA+N, Fisher exact, p=0.47). Decreased performance status, two or more metastatic sites, lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio &lt; 2.8, and CA19-9 &gt; 2000 IU/mL were independently correlated with worse outcomes in the full study population. Conclusions: NPC-1C did not enhance the efficacy of gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel. These data provide a benchmark for survival outcomes, dose modification patterns, and prognostic factors of patients treated with second-line gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel.

Citation Format: Brandon M. Huffman, Atrayee Basu Mallick, Nora K. Horick, Andrea Wang-Gillam, Peter J. Hosein, Michael Morse, Muhammad Shaalan Beg, Janet E. Murphy, Benjamin L. Schlechter, Hanna Sanoff, Brian M. Wolpin, Philip Arlen, Jill Lacy, James M. Cleary. A multicenter randomized phase II study of gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel versus gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel with a MUC5AC antibody (NPC-1C) in advanced pancreatic cancer previously treated with FOLFIRINOX (NCT01834235) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR Special Conference on Pancreatic Cancer; 2022 Sep 13-16; Boston, MA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(22 Suppl):Abstract nr A019.

Changes in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy: General (FACT-G) to predict treatment response and survival outcomes in patients with metastatic gastrointestinal (GI) cancer

6570

Background: The FACT-G contains 27 questions within 4 subscale domains [Physical Well-Being, Social/Family Well-Being, Emotional Well-Being, Functional Well-Being] related to health-related quality of life (QOL) in the past 7 days, with higher scoring indicating better QOL. In this prospective cohort study, we assessed longitudinal FACT-G data with treatment response and survival outcomes among patients with metastatic GI cancer. Methods: From 5/2019-11/2021, we enrolled patients at Massachusetts General Hospital with metastatic GI cancer to study before their treatment start. We collected the FACT-G survey at baseline (start of treatment) and 1-month later. We then used regression models to assess associations of 1-month changes in FACT-G with treatment response and survival outcomes (progression-free survival [PFS] and overall survival [OS]). For treatment response, clinical benefit was defined as decreased or stable tumor burden versus progressive disease at the time of first scan. All models were adjusted for baseline values of each respective variable. Results: We enrolled 203 of 262 patients approached (77.5% enrollment); 160 had 1-month follow-up data (median age = 63.0 years [range: 28.0-84.0 years], 66.3% male, 45.6% pancreaticobiliary cancer). For treatment response, 66.3% experienced a clinical benefit and 33.8% had progressive disease at the time of first scan (mean time to first scan = 2.7 months). Increases in FACT-G Total were predictors for treatment response (OR = 1.05, p = 0.0028), and improved PFS (HR = 0.98, p = 0.026) and OS (HR = 0.98, p = 0.038). Increases in FACT-G Emotional were associated with clinical benefit at the time of first scan (OR = 1.18, p = 0.0024), improved PFS (HR = 0.94, p = 0.023), and improved OS (HR = 0.93, p = 0.012). Improvement in FACT-G Physical were predictors for clinical benefit at time of first scan (OR = 1.08, p = 0.038) and better PFS (HR = 0.96, p = 0.038), while increases in FACT-G Functional were associated with improved PFS (HR = 0.96, p = 0.034) and OS (HR = 0.96, p = 0.019). Finally, changes in FACT-G Social were only associated with treatment response (OR = 1.16, p = 0.011). Conclusions: We found that 1-month increases in FACT-G can predict for treatment response and improved survival outcomes in patients with metastatic GI cancers. Notably, the FACT-G Total and FACT-G Emotional subscore predicted for all three outcomes of interest, while the FACT-G Social only predicted for clinical benefit at first scan. These data support previous findings indicating the possible use of early changes in patient-reported outcomes as a biomarker for early treatment response while emphasizing the growing need to integrate more patient-centric interventions into clinical care for cancer patients. Clinical trial information: NCT04776837.

A phase II study of daratumumab with weekly carfilzomib, pomalidomide, and dexamethasone in relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma

8012

Background: Daratumumab (dara), carfilzomib (K), pomalidomide (P), and dexamethasone (d) are established in relapsed multiple myeloma (MM) with activity in 3-drug combinations including: dara Kd; dara Pd; and KPd. The paradigm in relapsed/refractory disease is moving towards more intensive and well-tolerated combinations to achieve deeper and more durable responses while ensuring tolerability. Quadruplet regimens are now becoming standard in newly diagnosed MM, and we explored a 4-drug regimen in relapsed disease. Preliminary results of a phase 2 study of dara KPd with a twice/week schedule of K showed an ORR of 86% in pts with a median of 1 prior line (Jasielec et al., ASH 2020). Here we report an ongoing study of dara with weekly KPd (dara wKPd) to improve the accessibility of this regimen. Methods: This phase 2 study (NCT04176718) will enroll up to 43 pts with relapsed/refractory MM who have received at least 1 prior therapy, including both lenalidomide and a proteasome inhibitor. Prior therapy with dara, K, or P was permitted except for K and P given together as last line of therapy. Dara wKPd was given on a 28-day schedule. Dara was given according to the dara Pd schedule. An initial cohort received dara 16 mg/kg iv (with first dose split over two days); the trial was amended to dara 1800 mg sc. K 56 mg/m2 iv was given weekly on days 1, 8, 15; for C1D1, dose was 20 mg/m2. P 4 mg was given po on days 1-21. Dex 40 mg was given weekly with the dose split over two days. Treatment was until progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoints are overall response and the safety profile of dara wKPd. Secondary endpoints include PFS. Results: At time of data cutoff, 24 pts were enrolled; median age was 65 (range 42-73), and median number of prior regimens was 2 (range 1-3). All pts were refractory to their last line of therapy and had prior lenalidomide and bortezomib. Additional prior therapies included: pomalidomide (54%), carfilzomib (13%), ixazomib (46%), cyclophosphamide (4%), auto SCT (29%). High risk FISH was present (out of 24 pts): del 17p (13%); t(14;16) (8%); gain of 1q (46%). Median follow up was 8.4 months. 2 pts came off study due to neutropenia leading to delay in treatment. Grade 3-4 hematologic AEs included neutropenia (46%) and thrombocytopenia (25%). There was 1 episode of febrile neutropenia. Common non hematologic AEs (all; grade 3-4) included fatigue (42%; 0%); dyspnea (38%; 4%); increase in ALT/AST (29%; 8%); insomnia (21%; 0%); neuropathy (17%; 0%). 22 pts were evaluable for response, with an overall response rate of 95% (PR 23%, VPGR 68%, CR 5%). Median PFS at 12 months was 86.2% (95% CI, 70%-100%). Conclusions: Dara wKPd shows some of the highest response rates (95%) reported to date in relapsed/refractory MM. This likely reflects the incorporation of 4 active drugs in 1 regimen and builds on the efficacy of dara-based triplet regimens, with manageable toxicity and convenience of weekly K. Clinical trial information: NCT04176718.

Fractionated Proton Radiation Therapy and Hearing Preservation for Vestibular Schwannoma: Preliminary Analysis of a Prospective Phase 2 Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Local management for vestibular schwannoma (VS) is associated with excellent local control with focus on preserving long-term serviceable hearing. Fractionated proton radiation therapy (FPRT) may be associated with greater hearing preservation because of unique dosimetric properties of proton radiotherapy.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate hearing preservation rates of FPRT in adults with VS and secondarily assess local control and treatment-related toxicity.

METHODS

A prospective, single-arm, phase 2 clinical trial was conducted of patients with VS from 2010 to 2019. All patients had serviceable hearing at baseline and received FPRT to a total dose of 50.4 to 54 Gy relative biological effectiveness (RBE) over 28 to 30 fractions. Serviceable hearing preservation was defined as a Gardner-Robertson score of 1 to 2, measured by a pure tone average (PTA) of ≤50 dB and a word recognition score (WRS) of ≥50%.

RESULTS

Twenty patients had a median follow-up of 4.0 years (range 1.0-5.0 years). Local control at 4 years was 100%. Serviceable hearing preservation at 1 year was 53% (95% CI 29%-76%), and primary end point was not yet reached. Median PTA and median WRS both worsened 1 year after FPRT (P < .0001). WRS plateaued after 6 months, whereas PTA continued to worsen up to 1 year after FPRT. Median cochlea D90 was lower in patients with serviceable hearing at 1 year (40.6 Gy [RBE] vs 46.9 Gy [RBE]), trending toward Wilcoxon rank-sum test statistical significance (P = .0863). Treatment was well-tolerated, with one grade 1 cranial nerve V dysfunction and no grade 2+ cranial nerve dysfunction.

CONCLUSION

FPRT for VS did not meet the goal of serviceable hearing preservation. Higher cochlea doses trended to worsening hearing preservation, suggesting that dose to cochlea correlates with hearing preservation independent of treatment modality.

Effect of a Symptom Monitoring Intervention for Patients Hospitalized With Advanced Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Symptom monitoring interventions are increasingly becoming the standard of care in oncology, but studies assessing these interventions in the hospital setting are lacking.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effect of a symptom monitoring intervention on symptom burden and health care use among hospitalized patients with advanced cancer.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This nonblinded randomized clinical trial conducted from February 12, 2018, to October 30, 2019, assessed 321 hospitalized adult patients with advanced cancer and admitted to the inpatient oncology services of an academic hospital. Data obtained through November 13, 2020, were included in analyses, and all analyses assessed the intent-to-treat population.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients in both the intervention and usual care groups reported their symptoms using the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS) and the 4-item Patient Health Questionnaire-4 (PHQ-4) daily via tablet computers. Patients assigned to the intervention had their symptom reports displayed during daily oncology rounds, with alerts for moderate, severe, or worsening symptoms. Patients assigned to usual care did not have their symptom reports displayed to their clinical teams.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was the proportion of days with improved symptoms, and the secondary outcomes were hospital length of stay and readmission rates. Linear regression was used to evaluate differences in hospital length of stay. Competing-risk regression (with death treated as a competing event) was used to compare differences in time to first unplanned readmission within 30 days.

RESULTS

From February 12, 2018, to October 30, 2019, 390 patients (76.2% enrollment rate) were randomized. Study analyses to assess change in symptom burden included 321 of 390 patients (82.3%) who had 2 or more days of symptom reports completed (usual care, 161 of 193; intervention, 160 of 197). Participants had a mean (SD) age of 63.6 (12.8) years and were mostly male (180; 56.1%), self-reported as White (291; 90.7%), and married (230; 71.7%). The most common cancer type was gastrointestinal (118 patients; 36.8%), followed by lung (60 patients; 18.7%), genitourinary (39 patients; 12.1%), and breast (29 patients; 9.0%). No significant differences were detected between the intervention and usual care for the proportion of days with improved ESAS-physical (unstandardized coefficient [B] = -0.02; 95% CI, -0.10 to 0.05; P = .56), ESAS-total (B = -0.05; 95% CI, -0.12 to 0.02; P = .17), PHQ-4-depression (B = -0.02; 95% CI, -0.08 to 0.04; P = .55), and PHQ-4-anxiety (B = -0.04; 95% CI, -0.10 to 0.03; P = .29) symptoms. Intervention patients also did not differ significantly from patients receiving usual care for the secondary end points of hospital length of stay (7.59 vs 7.47 days; B = 0.13; 95% CI, -1.04 to 1.29; P = .83) and 30-day readmission rates (26.5% vs 33.8%; hazard ratio, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.48-1.09; P = .12).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This randomized clinical trial found that for hospitalized patients with advanced cancer, the assessed symptom monitoring intervention did not have a significant effect on patients' symptom burden or health care use. These findings do not support the routine integration of this type of symptom monitoring intervention for hospitalized patients with advanced cancer.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03396510.

Percentile-based averaging and skeletal muscle gauge improve body composition analysis: validation at multiple vertebral levels

BACKGROUND

Skeletal muscle metrics on computed tomography (CT) correlate with clinical and patient-reported outcomes. We hypothesize that aggregating skeletal muscle measurements from multiple vertebral levels and skeletal muscle gauge (SMG) better predict outcomes than skeletal muscle radioattenuation (SMRA) or -index (SMI) at a single vertebral level.

METHODS

We performed a secondary analysis of prospectively collected clinical (overall survival, hospital readmission, time to unplanned hospital readmission or death, and readmission or death within 90 days) and patient-reported outcomes (physical and psychological symptom burden captured as Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale and Patient Health Questionnaire) of patients with advanced cancer who experienced an unplanned admission to Massachusetts General Hospital from 2014 to 2016. First, we assessed the correlation of skeletal muscle cross-sectional area, SMRA, SMI, and SMG at one or more of the following thoracic (T) or lumbar (L) vertebral levels: T5, T8, T10, and L3 on CT scans obtained ≤50 days before index assessment. Second, we aggregated measurements across all available vertebral levels using percentile-based averaging (PBA) to create the average percentile. Third, we constructed one regression model adjusted for age, sex, sociodemographic factors, cancer type, body mass index, and intravenous contrast for each combination of (i) vertebral level and average percentile, (ii) muscle metrics (SMRA, SMI, & SMG), and (iii) clinical and patient-reported outcomes. Fourth, we compared the performance of vertebral levels and muscle metrics by ranking otherwise identical models by concordance statistic, number of included patients, coefficient of determination, and significance of muscle metric.

RESULTS

We included 846 patients (mean age: 63.5 ± 12.9 years, 50.5% males) with advanced cancer [predominantly gastrointestinal (32.9%) or lung (18.9%)]. The correlation of muscle measurements between vertebral levels ranged from 0.71 to 0.84 for SMRA and 0.67 to 0.81 for SMI. The correlation of individual levels with the average percentile was 0.90-0.93 for SMRA and 0.86-0.92 for SMI. The intrapatient correlation of SMRA with SMI was 0.21-0.40. PBA allowed for inclusion of 8-47% more patients than any single-level analysis. PBA outperformed single-level analyses across all comparisons with average ranks 2.6, 2.9, and 1.6 for concordance statistic, coefficient of determination, and significance (range 1-5, μ = 3), respectively. On average, SMG outperformed SMRA and SMI across outcomes and vertebral levels: the average rank of SMG was 1.4, 1.4, and 1.4 for concordance statistic, coefficient of determination, and significance (range 1-3, μ = 2), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Multivertebral level skeletal muscle analyses using PBA and SMG independently and additively outperform analyses using individual levels and SMRA or SMI.

Associations of sarcopenia with hematologic toxicity, treatment intensity, and healthcare utilization in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer

84

Background: We evaluated the impact of baseline sarcopenia on hematologic toxicity, treatment intensity, and healthcare utilization in patients with mCRC receiving FOLFOX or FOLFIRI. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed patients with mCRC who received care at our institution from 1/2011-11/2018 and were part of a biobanking protocol. Included adults received either first-line palliative FOLFOX- or FOLFIRI-based regimens and were followed for 6 months. We categorized sarcopenia based on skeletal muscle index measured at diagnosis of metastatic disease and pre-defined sex-specific cutoff values (F < 39 cm2/m2, M < 55cm2/m2). Our primary aim was to evaluate the association of sarcopenia and hematologic toxicity, defined as the incidence of grade ≥3 (G≥3) neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, or anemia (NCI CTCAE v5.0). Secondary endpoints included treatment intensity (dose reductions, treatment delays, relative-dose intensity [RDI]), and healthcare utilization (ED visits and/or hospitalizations). Bivariate analyses were used to evaluate associations between baseline sarcopenia and outcomes. Results: 126 of 177 screened patients met inclusion criteria (70 (56%) males, median age 61 yrs (range, 29-85)). 59 (46.8%) patients were sarcopenic. More patients received FOLFOX than FOLFIRI (92 [73.0%] vs. 34 [27.0%]). At baseline, patients had a median weight 76.9kg (IQR, 70.0-90.4 kg), BMI 26.6 kg/m2 (IQR, 24.1-30.5 kg/m2), and BSA 1.90 m2 (IQR, 1.72-2.01 m2). The incidence of G≥3 hematologic toxicity was 39.0% vs. 23.9% in sarcopenic and non-sarcopenic patients, respectively (p = 0.06). Patients with sarcopenia experienced higher incidence of G≥3 neutropenia (30.5% vs. 14.9%, p = 0.03), while G≥3 thrombocytopenia was similar (3.4% vs. 1.5%). The incidence of dose reductions and treatment delays did not differ significantly (86.4% vs. 89.5%, 72.9% vs. 71.6%, respectively). RDI was decreased for the 5FU bolus (52.5% vs. 65.0%, p = 0.02). Rates of ED visits (32.2% vs. 19.4%, p = 0.10) and hospitalizations (32.2% vs. 26.9%, p = 0.51) did not differ compared between patients with and without sarcopenia. Conclusions: Patients with mCRC and baseline sarcopenia receiving FOLFOX- or FOLFIRI experienced a higher incidence of G≥3 neutropenia and lower 5FU bolus treatment intensity. Studies are needed to understand how best to adjust treatment according to patients’ muscle mass.

Effects of a perioperative geriatric intervention for older adults with Cancer: A randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Older adults with gastrointestinal cancers undergoing surgery often experience poor outcomes, such as prolonged postoperative hospital length of stay (LOS), intensive care unit (ICU) use, hospital readmissions, and complications. Involvement of geriatricians in the care of older adults with cancer can improve outcomes. We conducted a randomized trial of a perioperative geriatric intervention (PERI-OP) in older patients with gastrointestinal cancer undergoing surgery.

METHODS

From 9/2016-4/2019, we randomly assigned patients age ≥ 65 with gastrointestinal cancer planning to undergo surgical resection to receive PERI-OP or usual care. Patients assigned to PERI-OP met with a geriatrician preoperatively in the outpatient setting and postoperatively as an inpatient consultant. The primary outcome was postoperative hospital LOS. Secondary outcomes included postoperative ICU use, 90-day hospital readmission rates, and complication rates. We conducted intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol (PP) analyses.

RESULTS

ITT analyses included 137/160 patients who underwent surgery (usual care = 68/78, intervention = 69/82). PP analyses included the 68 usual care patients and the 30/69 intervention patients who received the preoperative and postoperative intervention components. ITT analyses demonstrated no significant differences between intervention and usual care in postoperative hospital LOS (7.23 vs 8.21 days, P = 0.374), ICU use (23.2% vs 32.4%, P = 0.257), 90-day hospital readmission rates (21.7% vs 25.0%, P = 0.690), or complication rates (17.4% vs 20.6%, P = 0.668). In PP analyses, intervention patients had shorter postoperative hospital LOS (5.90 vs 8.21 days, P = 0.024), but differences in ICU use (13.3% vs 32.4%, P = 0.081), 90-day hospital readmission rates (16.7% vs 25.0%, P = 0.439), and complication rates (6.7% vs 20.6%, P = 0.137) remained non-significant.

CONCLUSIONS

In this randomized trial, PERI-OP did not have a significant impact on postoperative hospital LOS, ICU use, hospital readmissions, or complications. However, the subgroup who received PERI-OP as planned experienced encouraging results. Future studies of PERI-OP should include efforts, such as telehealth, to ensure the intervention is delivered as planned.

Diagnostic Accuracy of Endobronchial Optical Coherence Tomography for the Microscopic Diagnosis of Usual Interstitial Pneumonia

Rationale: Early, accurate diagnosis of interstitial lung disease (ILD) informs prognosis and therapy, especially in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF). Current diagnostic methods are imperfect. High-resolution computed tomography has limited resolution, and surgical lung biopsy (SLB) carries risks of morbidity and mortality. Endobronchial optical coherence tomography (EB-OCT) is a low-risk, bronchoscope-compatible modality that images large lung volumes in vivo with microscopic resolution, including subpleural lung, and has the potential to improve the diagnostic accuracy of bronchoscopy for ILD diagnosis. Objectives: We performed a prospective diagnostic accuracy study of EB-OCT in patients with ILD with a low-confidence diagnosis undergoing SLB. The primary endpoints were EB-OCT sensitivity/specificity for diagnosis of the histopathologic pattern of usual interstitial pneumonia (UIP) and clinical IPF. The secondary endpoint was agreement between EB-OCT and SLB for diagnosis of the ILD fibrosis pattern. Methods: EB-OCT was performed immediately before SLB. The resulting EB-OCT images and histopathology were interpreted by blinded, independent pathologists. Clinical diagnosis was obtained from the treating pulmonologists after SLB, blinded to EB-OCT. Measurements and Main Results: We enrolled 31 patients, and 4 were excluded because of inconclusive histopathology or lack of EB-OCT data. Twenty-seven patients were included in the analysis (16 men, average age: 65.0 yr): 12 were diagnosed with UIP and 15 with non-UIP ILD. Average FVC and DlCO were 75.3% (SD, 18.5) and 53.5% (SD, 16.4), respectively. Sensitivity and specificity of EB-OCT was 100% (95% confidence interval, 75.8-100.0%) and 100% (79.6-100%), respectively, for both histopathologic UIP and clinical diagnosis of IPF. There was high agreement between EB-OCT and histopathology for diagnosis of ILD fibrosis pattern (weighted κ: 0.87 [0.72-1.0]). Conclusions: EB-OCT is a safe, accurate method for microscopic ILD diagnosis, as a complement to high-resolution computed tomography and an alternative to SLB.

Do you mind if I record?: Perceptions and practice regarding patient requests to record clinic visits in oncology

BACKGROUND

Audio recordings of oncology clinic discussions can help patients retain and understand information about their disease and treatment decisions. Access to this tool relies on acceptance of recordings by oncologists. This is the first study to evaluate experience and attitudes of oncologists toward patients recording clinic visits.

METHODS

Medical, radiation, and surgical oncologists from 5 US cancer centers and community affiliates were surveyed to evaluate clinicians' experience, beliefs, and practices regarding patient-initiated recordings.

RESULTS

Among 360 oncologists (69% response rate), virtually all (93%) have experienced patients seeking to record visits. Although 75% are comfortable with recording, 25% are uncomfortable and 56% report concerns ranging from less thorough discussions to legal liability. Most (85%) always agree when patients ask to record, but 15% never or selectively allow recording. Although 51% believe recording is positive for the patient-physician relationship, a sizable minority report that it can lead to less detailed conversations (28%) or avoidance of difficult topics, including prognosis (33%). Views did not vary based on subspecialty, practice setting, or geographic region, but older age and years in practice were associated with more positive views of recording. The majority of clinicians (72%) desire institutional policies to govern guidelines about recordings.

CONCLUSIONS

Most oncologists are comfortable with patient requests to record visits, but a sizable minority remain uncomfortable, and access to recording varies solely on physician preference. This difference in care delivery may benefit from institutional policies that promote access while addressing legitimate physician concerns over privacy and appropriate use of recordings.

Changes in patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and tumor markers (TMs) to predict treatment response and survival in patients with metastatic gastrointestinal (GI) cancer

154

Background: PROs assessing quality of life (QOL) and symptoms at a single timepoint frequently correlate with clinical outcomes in patients with cancer, yet efforts to understand how longitudinal changes in PROs can predict for treatment outcomes are lacking. In practice, oncologists often use changes in serum TMs (CEA and CA19-9) to monitor patients with GI cancer, and thus we sought to examine associations of 1-month changes in PROs and TMs with treatment response and survival outcomes among patients with advanced GI cancer. Methods: We prospectively enrolled patients with metastatic GI cancer prior to initiating chemotherapy at Massachusetts General Hospital from 5/2019-12/2020. At baseline (start of treatment) and 1-month later, we collected PROs (QOL [Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy General {FACT-G}], physical symptoms [Edmonton Symptom Assessment System {ESAS}], and psychological symptoms [Patient Health Questionnaire-4 {PHQ-4}]) and TMs. We used regression models to examine associations of 1-month changes in PROs and TMs with treatment response (clinical benefit [defined as decreased or stable tumor burden] or progressive disease at the time of first scan) and survival outcomes (progression-free survival [PFS] and overall survival [OS]), adjusted for baseline values of each respective variable. Results: We enrolled 159 of 191 patients approached (83.2% enrollment); 134 had 1-month follow-up data (median age = 64 years [range: 28 to 84 years], 64.2% male, 46.3% pancreaticobiliary cancer). For treatment response, 63.4% had clinical benefit and 36.6% had progressive disease at the time of first scan (mean time to first scan = 2.01 months). Changes in PROs (ESAS-Total: OR = 0.97, p = 0.022; ESAS-Physical: OR = 0.96, p = 0.027; PHQ-4 depression: OR = 0.67, p = 0.014; FACT-G: OR = 1.07, p = 0.001), but not TMs (CEA: OR = 1.00, p = 0.836 and CA19-9: OR = 1.00, p = 0.796), were associated with clinical benefit at the time of first scan. Changes in ESAS-Total (HR = 1.03, p = 0.004), ESAS-Physical (HR = 1.03, p = 0.021), PHQ-4 depression (HR = 1.22, p = 0.042), FACT-G (HR = 0.97, p = 0.003), and CEA (HR = 1.00, p = 0.001) were predictors of PFS. Changes in ESAS-Total (HR = 1.03, p = 0.006) and ESAS-Physical (HR = 1.04, p = 0.015) were predictors of OS, but 1-month changes in TMs (CEA: HR = 1.00, p = 0.377 and CA19-9: HR = 1.00, p = 0.367) did not significantly predict for OS. Conclusions: We found that 1-month changes in PROs can predict for treatment response and survival outcomes in patients with advanced GI cancers. Notably, 1-month changes in CEA only correlated with PFS, while changes in CA19-9 did not significantly predict treatment response or survival outcomes. These findings highlight the potential for early changes in PROs to predict treatment outcomes while underscoring the need to monitor and address PROs in patients with advanced cancer. Clinical trial information: NCT04776837.

Neoadjuvant versus Postoperative Chemoradiotherapy is Associated with Improved Survival for Patients with Resectable Gastric and Gastroesophageal Cancer

BACKGROUND

The optimal timing of chemoradiotherapy (CRT) for patients with localized gastric cancer remains unclear. This study aimed to compare the survival outcomes between neoadjuvant and postoperative CRT for patients with gastric and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancer.

METHODS

This retrospective study analyzed 152 patients with gastric (42%) or GEJ (58%) adenocarcinoma who underwent definitive surgical resection and received either neoadjuvant or postoperative CRT between 2005 and 2017 at the authors' institution. The primary end point of the study was overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

The median follow-up period was 37.5 months. Neoadjuvant CRT was performed for 102 patients (67%) and postoperative CRT for 50 patients (33%). The patients who received neoadjuvant CRT were more likely to be male and to have a GEJ tumor, positive lymph nodes, and a higher clinical stage. The median radiotherapy (RT) dose was 50.4 Gy for neoadjuvant RT and 45.0 Gy for postoperative RT (p < 0.001). The neoadjuvant CRT group had a pathologic complete response (pCR) rate of 26% and a greater rate of R0 resection than the postoperative CRT group (95% vs. 76%; p = 0.002). Neoadjuvant versus postoperative CRT was associated with a lower rate of any grade 3+ toxicity (10% vs. 54%; p < 0.001). The multivariable analysis of OS showed lower hazards of death to be independently associated neoadjuvant versus postoperative CRT (hazard ratio [HR] 0.57; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.36-0.91; p = 0.020) and R0 resection (HR 0.50; 95% CI 0.27-0.90; p = 0.021).

CONCLUSIONS

Neoadjuvant CRT was associated with a longer OS, a higher rate of R0 resection, and a lower treatment-related toxicity than postoperative CRT. The findings suggest that neoadjuvant CRT is superior to postoperative CRT in the treatment of gastric and GEJ cancer.

Association Between Administration of IL-6 Antagonists and Mortality Among Patients Hospitalized for COVID-19: A Meta-analysis

Importance

Clinical trials assessing the efficacy of IL-6 antagonists in patients hospitalized for COVID-19 have variously reported benefit, no effect, and harm.

Objective

To estimate the association between administration of IL-6 antagonists compared with usual care or placebo and 28-day all-cause mortality and other outcomes.

Data Sources

Trials were identified through systematic searches of electronic databases between October 2020 and January 2021. Searches were not restricted by trial status or language. Additional trials were identified through contact with experts.

Study Selection

Eligible trials randomly assigned patients hospitalized for COVID-19 to a group in whom IL-6 antagonists were administered and to a group in whom neither IL-6 antagonists nor any other immunomodulators except corticosteroids were administered. Among 72 potentially eligible trials, 27 (37.5%) met study selection criteria.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

In this prospective meta-analysis, risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool. Inconsistency among trial results was assessed using the I2 statistic. The primary analysis was an inverse variance-weighted fixed-effects meta-analysis of odds ratios (ORs) for 28-day all-cause mortality.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome measure was all-cause mortality at 28 days after randomization. There were 9 secondary outcomes including progression to invasive mechanical ventilation or death and risk of secondary infection by 28 days.

Results

A total of 10 930 patients (median age, 61 years [range of medians, 52-68 years]; 3560 [33%] were women) participating in 27 trials were included. By 28 days, there were 1407 deaths among 6449 patients randomized to IL-6 antagonists and 1158 deaths among 4481 patients randomized to usual care or placebo (summary OR, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.79-0.95]; P = .003 based on a fixed-effects meta-analysis). This corresponds to an absolute mortality risk of 22% for IL-6 antagonists compared with an assumed mortality risk of 25% for usual care or placebo. The corresponding summary ORs were 0.83 (95% CI, 0.74-0.92; P < .001) for tocilizumab and 1.08 (95% CI, 0.86-1.36; P = .52) for sarilumab. The summary ORs for the association with mortality compared with usual care or placebo in those receiving corticosteroids were 0.77 (95% CI, 0.68-0.87) for tocilizumab and 0.92 (95% CI, 0.61-1.38) for sarilumab. The ORs for the association with progression to invasive mechanical ventilation or death, compared with usual care or placebo, were 0.77 (95% CI, 0.70-0.85) for all IL-6 antagonists, 0.74 (95% CI, 0.66-0.82) for tocilizumab, and 1.00 (95% CI, 0.74-1.34) for sarilumab. Secondary infections by 28 days occurred in 21.9% of patients treated with IL-6 antagonists vs 17.6% of patients treated with usual care or placebo (OR accounting for trial sample sizes, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.85-1.16).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this prospective meta-analysis of clinical trials of patients hospitalized for COVID-19, administration of IL-6 antagonists, compared with usual care or placebo, was associated with lower 28-day all-cause mortality.

Trial Registration

PROSPERO Identifier: CRD42021230155.

Care Patterns and Overall Survival in Patients With Early-Onset Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

PURPOSE

Colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence in patients younger than 50 years of age, commonly defined as early-onset (EO-CRC), is rising. EO-CRC often presents with distinct clinicopathologic features. However, data on prognosis are conflicting and outcomes with modern treatment approaches for metastatic disease are still limited.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We prospectively enrolled patients with metastatic CRC (mCRC) to a biobanking and clinical data collection protocol from 2014 to 2018. We grouped the cohort based on age at initial diagnosis: < 40 years, 40-49 years, and ≥ 50 years. We used regression models to examine associations among age at initial diagnosis, treatments, clinicopathologic features, and survival.

RESULTS

We identified 466 patients with mCRC (45 [10%] age < 40 years, 109 [23%] age 40-49 years, and 312 [67%] age ≥ 50 years). Patients < 40 years of age were more likely to have received multiple metastatic resections (odds ratio [OR], 3.533; P = .0066) than their older counterparts. Patients with EO-CRC were more likely to receive triplet therapy than patients > 50 years of age (age < 40 years: OR, 6.738; P = .0002; age 40-49 years: OR, 2.949; P = .0166). Patients 40-49 years of age were more likely to have received anti-EGFR therapy (OR, 2.633; P = .0016). Despite differences in care patterns, age did not predict overall survival.

CONCLUSION

Despite patients with EO-CRC receiving more intensive treatments, survival was similar to the older counterpart. However, EO-CRC had clinical and molecular features associated with worse prognoses. Improved biologic understanding is needed to optimize clinical management of EO-CRC. The cost-benefit ratio of exposing patients with EO-CRC to more intensive treatments has to be carefully evaluated.

Phase II multicenter study of talazoparib for somatic BRCA1/2 mutant metastatic breast cancer

TPS1110

Background: PARP inhibitors are approved for the treatment of HER2 negative metastatic breast cancer (MBC) with germline BRCA1/2 mutations, based on phase III studies demonstrating an improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) compared to chemotherapy in this population and better patient reported outcomes (Robson, NEJM, 2017; Litton, NEJM, 2018). However, germline BRCA1/2 mutations account for only 5-10% of breast cancer, limiting the current clinical applicability of PARP inhibitors. Somatic BRCA1/2 mutations are detectable in circulating cell-free DNA (cfDNA) in ̃13.5% of patients with MBC; in pre-clinical models, pathogenic somatic BRCA1/2 mutations have been shown to respond to PARP inhibition (Vidula, CCR, 2020). The purpose of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of talazoparib, a PARP inhibitor, in patients with MBC who have somatic BRCA1/2 mutations detectable in cfDNA, in the absence of a germline BRCA1/2 mutation, which we hypothesize will be effective in this setting. This study may help expand the population of patients with MBC who benefit from PARP inhibitors. Methods: This is an investigator initiated multicenter, single arm, phase II clinical trial studying the efficacy of talazoparib in 30 patients with MBC who have pathogenic somatic BRCA1/2 mutations detected in cfDNA. Patients with MBC who are found to have pathogenic somatic BRCA1/2 mutations detected in cfDNA in the absence of a germline BRCA1/2 mutation are eligible. Patients may have triple negative (with ≥ 1 prior chemotherapy), or hormone receptor positive/HER2 negative breast cancer (with ≥ 1 prior hormone therapy). Patients may have received any number of prior lines of chemotherapy, including a prior platinum (in the absence of progression). They must have adequate organ function and ECOG performance status ≤2, and should not have previously received a PARP inhibitor. Patients are treated with talazoparib 1 mg daily until disease progression or intolerability, with serial imaging using CT chest/abdomen/pelvis and bone scan performed at baseline and every 12 weeks, and cfDNA collection every 4 weeks. Primary endpoint is PFS by RECIST 1.1. Patients are being enrolled in a two-stage design with 80% power to demonstrate that the treatment is associated with “success” (PFS > 12 weeks) in ≥53% patients (4% alpha). Secondary endpoints include objective response rate and safety (NCI CTCAE v 5.0). Exploratory analyses include studying serial changes in cfDNA BRCA1/2 mutant allelic frequency and comparing pre-and post-treatment cfDNA for the emergence of BRCA1/2 reversion and resistance mutations. This study is activated and open at Massachusetts General Hospital, where 2 patients are completing screening. It is also opening soon at 6 other academic centers (NCT03990896). Grant support includes a Pfizer ASPIRE award and 2020 Conquer Cancer Foundation of ASCO – Breast Cancer Research Foundation – Career Development Award. Clinical trial information: NCT03990896 .

Changes in patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and tumor markers (TMs) to predict treatment response and survival outcomes in patients with metastatic gastrointestinal (GI) cancer

6560

Background: PROs assessing quality of life (QOL) and symptoms at a single timepoint frequently correlate with clinical outcomes in patients with cancer, yet efforts to understand how longitudinal changes in PROs can predict for treatment outcomes are lacking. In practice, oncologists often use changes in serum TMs (CEA and CA19-9) to monitor patients with GI cancer, and thus we sought to examine associations of 1-month changes in PROs and TMs with treatment response and survival outcomes among patients with advanced GI cancer. Methods: We prospectively enrolled patients with metastatic GI cancer prior to initiating chemotherapy at Massachusetts General Hospital from 5/2019-12/2020. At baseline (start of treatment) and 1-month later, we collected PROs (QOL [Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy General {FACT-G}], physical symptoms [Edmonton Symptom Assessment System {ESAS}], and psychological symptoms [Patient Health Questionnaire-4 {PHQ-4}]) and TMs. We used regression models to examine associations of 1-month changes in PROs and TMs with treatment response (clinical benefit [defined as decreased or stable tumor burden] or progressive disease at the time of first scan) and survival outcomes (progression-free survival [PFS] and overall survival [OS]), adjusted for baseline values of each respective variable. Results: We enrolled 159 of 191 patients approached (83.2% enrollment); 134 had 1-month follow-up data (median age = 64 years [range: 28 to 84 years], 64.2% male, 46.3% pancreaticobiliary cancer). For treatment response, 63.4% had clinical benefit and 36.6% had progressive disease at the time of first scan (mean time to first scan = 2.01 months). Changes in PROs (ESAS-Total: OR = 0.97, p = 0.022; ESAS-Physical: OR = 0.96, p = 0.027; PHQ-4 depression: OR = 0.67, p = 0.014; FACT-G: OR = 1.07, p = 0.001), but not TMs (CEA: OR = 1.00, p = 0.836 and CA19-9: OR = 1.00, p = 0.796), were associated with clinical benefit at the time of first scan. Changes in ESAS-Total (HR = 1.03, p = 0.004), ESAS-Physical (HR = 1.03, p = 0.021), PHQ-4 depression (HR = 1.22, p = 0.042), FACT-G (HR = 0.97, p = 0.003), and CEA (HR = 1.00, p = 0.001) were predictors of PFS. Changes in ESAS-Total (HR = 1.03, p = 0.006) and ESAS-Physical (HR = 1.04, p = 0.015) were predictors of OS, but 1-month changes in TMs (CEA: HR = 1.00, p = 0.377 and CA19-9: HR = 1.00, p = 0.367) did not significantly predict for OS. Conclusions: We found that 1-month changes in PROs can predict for treatment response and survival outcomes in patients with advanced GI cancers. Notably, 1-month changes in CEA only correlated with PFS, while changes in CA19-9 did not significantly predict treatment response or survival outcomes. These findings highlight the potential for early changes in PROs to predict treatment outcomes while underscoring the need to monitor and address PROs in patients with advanced cancer.

Clinical and mutational profile of ARID1A-mutated gastrointestinal cancers: Duration of response to platinum-based chemotherapy

e15611

Background: ARID1A is mutated in several cancer types, with studies reporting mutations in up to 10% of colorectal cancers (CRC) and as high as 35% of gastric and pancreatic cancers. The ARID1A gene encodes a member of the SWI/SNF (SWItch/Sucrose Non-Fermentable) chromatin remodeling complex and functions as a tumor suppressor. ARID1A has also been implicated in double-stranded DNA repair via both homologous recombination and non-homologous end-joining, potentially conferring platinum sensitivity. We sought to characterize this subset of gastrointestinal (GI) malignancies. Methods: We identified patients with locally advanced or metastatic ARID1A-mutated GI malignancies treated at Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH) by next-generation sequencing. Patients were selected who gave consent to molecular testing and who were enrolled on to a study. We evaluated clinical characteristics and outcomes for patients undergoing treatment at MGH between 2009 and May 2020. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to calculate progression free survival (PFS) to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. Results: We captured 38 patients with ARID1A-mutated tumors. Median age at diagnosis was 66 (range 31-87) and 63.2% of patients were male (n = 24). Tumor types varied, including CRC (n = 13, 34.2%), esophagogastric (n = 13, 34.2%), pancreatic (n = 6, 15.7%), cholangiocarcinoma (n = 2, 5.3%), small bowel (n = 1, 2.6%), anal (n = 1, 2.6%), and unknown GI primary (n = 2, 5.3%). Most were metastatic at diagnosis (n = 23, 60.5%). The identified ARID1A mutations were each distinct, occurring along the length of the gene and were comprised of missense (n = 10, 26.3%), nonsense (n = 12, 31.6%), frameshift (n = 13, 34.2%), and splice-site (n = 3, 7.9%) mutations. We observed on average 4-5 co-mutations per tumor, with TP53 (n = 25, 65.8%), KRAS (n = 14, 36.8%), APC (n = 11, 28.9%), BRCA2 (n = 7, 18.4%) and BRAF (n = 7, 18.4%) occurring most frequently. Tumors were both microsatellite stable (n = 23, 60%) and microsatellite unstable (n = 7, 18.4%). Most patients (n = 37, 97.4%) received a platinum-based chemotherapy as first-line therapy including FOLFOX (n = 23, 60.5%), FOLFIRINOX (n = 10, 26.3%), gemcitabine/cisplatin (n = 2, 5.3%), carboplatin/5-FU (n = 1, 2.6%), and carboplatin/etoposide (n = 1, 2.6%). Median PFS for first-line platinum based chemotherapy was 14.0 months (CI 8.2-34.7) overall. For patients with CRC, PFS to platinum-based therapy was 14.0 months (CI 4.8-not reached) compared with 9.6 months for non-CRC (CI 7.4-not reached). Conclusions: To our knowledge, this is the first assessment of clinical characteristics and outcomes for ARID1A-mutated GI malignancies. Mutations in ARID1A are highly diverse, without a clear association with tumor type. Future studies assessing response to platinum-based chemotherapy are warranted.

Feasibility of integrating the Outcomes4Me smartphone navigation application into the care of breast cancer patients (FIONA)

1570

Background: Patients diagnosed with breast cancer (BC) face complex decisions about their care and many studies have shown that improved patient engagement results in increased satisfaction and better outcomes. Patient engagement includes education, treatment option selection, symptom tracking and reporting, and clinical trial opportunities. We conducted a pilot study to determine the feasibility of introducing the Outcomes4Me patient engagement app into the standard of care experience of BC patients. Methods: This was a pilot study (NCT04262518) conducted at an academic medical center. Eligible patients had any subtype of stage 1-4 BC and were on any type of chemo-, hormonal-, targeted-, or radiation-therapy for BC during the study period. Participants downloaded the app on their smartphone and their app usage was evaluated. Surveys were administered at baseline and end of study. Clinicians caring for patients using the app were surveyed at the end of the study. The primary endpoint was feasibility, defined as at least 40% of patients engaging with the app at least 3 times over the 12-week study period. Additional endpoints included usability, satisfaction, correlation of patient reported data with the EHR, clinical trial matching, and patient experience. Results: Between June 2020 and December 2020, 107 patients enrolled; results are reported for 90 patients with complete data as of 1/24/21. Baseline demographics: median age 53 (range: 27-77); 90% White, 4% Black, 3% Asian; 66% had hormone positive/HER2-, 20% HER2+, and 13% triple negative BC; 31% had stage 4 disease. At study entry, 93% had never used an app to help with their disease or treatment options. Over the 12 week study period, 58% of patients engaged with the app at least 3 times, meeting the primary feasibility endpoint. Patients engaged with the app on average 5.5 days (range: 0-40) with 20% engaging on more than 10 days during the study. The mean System Usability Score was 71 (median = 76) and was similar across age groups. The 5 app features deemed most (‘somewhat’ or ‘very’) helpful were: background about their BC (76%), information about treatment options (74%), newsfeed about their BC (70%), symptom tracking (65%), and clinical trial information (65%). 53% said that the app helped them keep track of symptoms and 33% said they are more likely to explore or enroll in a clinical trial after using the app. Conclusions: Integration of the Outcomes4Me app into the care management of BC patients is feasible with acceptable usability. Our results suggest that use of a patient smartphone app may be helpful for many aspects of patient education and engagement for patients with BC. The results also suggest that this type of intervention can help patients better track their symptoms and make them aware of clinical trials, potentially facilitating the management of side effects and accelerating clinical trials recruitment. Clinical trial information: NCT04262518.

Survival outcomes, treatment toxicity, and healthcare utilization in older adults with aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL)

7557

Background: Aggressive NHLs frequently affect older adults, and are often treated with intensive systemic therapy that is potentially curative but can cause substantial toxicities. Although balancing treatment efficacy with the risk of complications is critically important for older adults with NHL, few studies have described these patients’ survival outcomes, rates of toxicities, and healthcare utilization. Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of adults > 65 years diagnosed with aggressive NHL and treated with systemic therapy at Massachusetts General Hospital from 4/2000-7/2020. We abstracted patient demographic and clinical information, survival outcomes, treatment toxicity (rates and grade), and healthcare utilization outcomes (intensive care unit [ICU] admissions and unplanned hospitalizations within six months of treatment initiation) from the electronic health record. Using multivariable logistic regression, we examined patient and disease factors associated with rates of grade 3+ non-hematologic toxicity and unplanned hospitalization. Results: Of 295 patients (median age = 73 years [age 65-69: 32.5%; age 70-74: 26.1%; age 75-79: 20.0%; age 80+: 21.4%], 39.0% female), most had advanced stage disease (59.5%) and an ECOG performance status of 0 or 1 (83.1%). The most common diagnosis was de novo diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) or grade 3B follicular lymphoma (69.2%). Most common therapies were CHOP (65.8%) and EPOCH (17.0%) with or without Rituximab. With a median follow up of 5.9 years, 5-year overall survival (OS) was 74.2%. Among patients age 65-69, 70-74, 75-79, and 80+ years, 5-year OS by age group were 82.1%, 72.2%, 73.5%, and 66.3%, respectively. Overall, 42.4% had grade 3+ toxicity, while 8.1% had grade 4 or 5 toxicity. The rates of unplanned hospitalization and ICU admission during the first 6 months of therapy were 41.0% and 6.1%, respectively. In multivariable analysis, hypoalbuminemia (OR 4.22, 95%, p < 0.001) and number of comorbidities (OR 1.75, p < 0.001) were associated with a greater likelihood of grade 3+ toxicity. Hypoalbuminemia (OR 2.76, p = 0.003), number of comorbidities (OR 1.61, p = 0.001), and receipt of EPOCH (OR 5.41, p = 0.012) were associated with a greater likelihood of unplanned hospitalization. Conclusions: The majority of older adults receiving upfront therapy for aggressive NHL survive beyond 5 years, yet nearly half experience substantial treatment toxicities and unplanned hospitalizations. Our findings underscore the need to develop supportive care interventions to enhance the care experience for older adults with NHL.

Muscle Loss Is Associated with Overall Survival in Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Independent of Tumor Mutational Status and Weight Loss

Background

Survival in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) has been associated with tumor mutational status, muscle loss, and weight loss. We sought to explore the combined effects of these variables on overall survival.

Materials and Methods

We performed an observational cohort study, prospectively enrolling patients receiving chemotherapy for mCRC. We retrospectively assessed changes in muscle (using computed tomography) and weight, each dichotomized as >5% or ≤5% loss, at 3, 6, and 12 months after diagnosis of mCRC. We used regression models to assess relationships between tumor mutational status, muscle loss, weight loss, and overall survival. Additionally, we evaluated associations between muscle loss, weight loss, and tumor mutational status.

Results

We included 226 patients (mean age 59 ± 13 years, 53% male). Tumor mutational status included 44% wild type, 42% RAS‐mutant, and 14% BRAF‐mutant. Patients with >5% muscle loss at 3 and 12 months experienced worse survival controlling for mutational status and weight (3 months hazard ratio, 2.66; p < .001; 12 months hazard ratio, 2.10; p = .031). We found an association of >5% muscle loss with BRAF‐mutational status at 6 and 12 months. Weight loss was not associated with survival nor mutational status.

Conclusion

Increased muscle loss at 3 and 12 months may identify patients with mCRC at risk for decreased overall survival, independent of tumor mutational status. Specifically, >5% muscle loss identifies patients within each category of tumor mutational status with decreased overall survival in our sample. Our findings suggest that quantifying muscle loss on serial computed tomography scans may refine survival estimates in patients with mCRC.

Implications for Practice

In this study of 226 patients with metastatic colorectal cancer, it was found that losing >5% skeletal muscle at 3 and 12 months after the diagnosis of metastatic disease was associated with worse overall survival, independent of tumor mutational status and weight loss. Interestingly, results did not show a significant association between weight loss and overall survival. These findings suggest that muscle quantification on serial computed tomography may refine survival estimates in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer beyond mutational status.

Cancer cachexia has traditionally been defined using weight loss; however, loss of skeletal muscle may be a more objective measure. This article reports the results of a retrospective study that assessed whether skeletal muscle loss is associated with overall survival in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer, independent of tumor mutational status and weight loss.

Posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms in patients with acute myeloid leukemia

BACKGROUND

Patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) receiving intensive chemotherapy face a life-threatening illness, isolating hospitalization, and substantial physical and psychological symptoms. However, data are limited regarding risk factors of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms in this population.

METHODS

The authors conducted a secondary analysis of data from 160 patients with high-risk AML who were enrolled in a supportive care trial. The PTSD Checklist-Civilian Version was used to assess PTSD symptoms at 1 month after AML diagnosis. The Brief COPE and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Leukemia were to assess coping and quality of life (QOL), respectively. In addition, multivariate regression models were constructed to assess the relation between PTSD symptoms and baseline sociodemographic factors, coping, and QOL.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight percent of patients reported PTSD symptoms, describing high rates of intrusion, avoidance, and hypervigiliance. Baseline sociodemographic factors significantly associated with PTSD symptoms were age (B = -0.26; P = .002), race (B = -8.78; P = .004), and postgraduate education (B = -6.30; P = .029). Higher baseline QOL (B = -0.37; P ≤ .001) and less decline in QOL during hospitalization (B = -0.05; P = .224) were associated with fewer PTSD symptoms. Approach-oriented coping (B = -0.92; P = .001) was associated with fewer PTSD symptoms, whereas avoidant coping (B = 2.42; P ≤ .001) was associated with higher PTSD symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

A substantial proportion of patients with AML report clinically significant PTSD symptoms 1 month after initiating intensive chemotherapy. Patients' baseline QOL, coping strategies, and extent of QOL decline during hospitalization emerge as important risk factors for PTSD, underscoring the need for supportive oncology interventions to reduce the risk of PTSD in this population.

Differential effects of an electronic symptom monitoring intervention based on the age of patients with advanced cancer

BACKGROUND

Symptom monitoring interventions enhance patient outcomes, including quality of life (QoL), health care utilization, and survival, but it remains unclear whether older and younger patients with cancer derive similar benefits. We explored whether age moderates the improved outcomes seen with an outpatient electronic symptom monitoring intervention.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We carried out a secondary analysis of data from a randomized trial of 766 patients receiving chemotherapy for metastatic solid tumors. Patients received an electronic symptom monitoring intervention integrated with oncology care or usual oncology care alone. The intervention consisted of patients reporting their symptoms, which were provided to their physicians at clinic visits, and nurses receiving alerts for severe/worsening symptoms. We used regression models to determine whether age (older or younger than 70 years) moderated the effects of the intervention on QoL (EuroQol EQ-5D), emergency room (ER) visits, hospitalizations, and survival outcomes.

RESULTS

Enrollment rates for younger (589/777 = 75.8%) and older (177/230 = 77.0%) patients did not differ. Older patients (median age = 75 years, range 70-91 years) were more likely to have an education level of high school or less (26.6% versus 20.9%, P = 0.029) and to be computer inexperienced (50.3% versus 23.4%, P < 0.001) compared with younger patients (median age = 58 years, range 26-69 years). Younger patients receiving the symptom monitoring intervention experienced lower risk of ER visits [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.74, P = 0.011] and improved survival (HR = 0.76, P = 0.011) compared with younger patients receiving usual care. However, older patients did not experience significantly lower risk of ER visits (HR = 0.90, P = 0.613) or improved survival (HR = 1.06, P = 0.753) with the intervention. We found no moderation effects based on age for QoL and risk of hospitalizations.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with advanced cancer, age moderated the effects of an electronic symptom monitoring intervention on the risk of ER visits and survival, but not QoL. Symptom monitoring interventions may need to be tailored to the unique needs of older adults with cancer.

Efficacy of Tocilizumab in Patients Hospitalized with Covid-19

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of interleukin-6 receptor blockade in hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) who are not receiving mechanical ventilation is unclear.

METHODS

We performed a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial involving patients with confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, hyperinflammatory states, and at least two of the following signs: fever (body temperature >38°C), pulmonary infiltrates, or the need for supplemental oxygen in order to maintain an oxygen saturation greater than 92%. Patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive standard care plus a single dose of either tocilizumab (8 mg per kilogram of body weight) or placebo. The primary outcome was intubation or death, assessed in a time-to-event analysis. The secondary efficacy outcomes were clinical worsening and discontinuation of supplemental oxygen among patients who had been receiving it at baseline, both assessed in time-to-event analyses.

RESULTS

We enrolled 243 patients; 141 (58%) were men, and 102 (42%) were women. The median age was 59.8 years (range, 21.7 to 85.4), and 45% of the patients were Hispanic or Latino. The hazard ratio for intubation or death in the tocilizumab group as compared with the placebo group was 0.83 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.38 to 1.81; P = 0.64), and the hazard ratio for disease worsening was 1.11 (95% CI, 0.59 to 2.10; P = 0.73). At 14 days, 18.0% of the patients in the tocilizumab group and 14.9% of the patients in the placebo group had had worsening of disease. The median time to discontinuation of supplemental oxygen was 5.0 days (95% CI, 3.8 to 7.6) in the tocilizumab group and 4.9 days (95% CI, 3.8 to 7.8) in the placebo group (P = 0.69). At 14 days, 24.6% of the patients in the tocilizumab group and 21.2% of the patients in the placebo group were still receiving supplemental oxygen. Patients who received tocilizumab had fewer serious infections than patients who received placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

Tocilizumab was not effective for preventing intubation or death in moderately ill hospitalized patients with Covid-19. Some benefit or harm cannot be ruled out, however, because the confidence intervals for efficacy comparisons were wide. (Funded by Genentech; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04356937.).

Integrating Symptoms Into the Diagnostic Criteria for Breast Cancer-Related Lymphedema: Applying Results From a Prospective Surveillance Program

OBJECTIVE

The objectives of this study were to determine whether patients reporting symptoms are more likely to develop lymphedema and to describe the temporal relationship between symptom onset and lymphedema.

METHODS

This was a prospective longitudinal cohort study of 647 women treated for breast cancer and screened for lymphedema using arm volume measurements and subjective questionnaires (n = 647; 2284 questionnaires [median 3.5 per patient, range = 1-24]). Primary study outcome was lymphedema (relative volume change ≥10%). The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate cumulative lymphedema incidence. Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess the relationship between symptoms, other risk factors, and lymphedema.

RESULTS

A total of 64 patients (9.9%) developed lymphedema. On multivariable analysis, patients reporting increased arm size (hazard ratio = 3.09, 95% CI = 1.62-5.89) were more likely to progress to lymphedema than those who did not report this symptom. Of those who developed lymphedema, 37 (58%) reported an increased arm size a median of 6.1 months before lymphedema onset (range = 68.6 months before to 50.2 months after lymphedema onset).

CONCLUSION

Patients at risk of lymphedema who report increased arm size might do so prior to lymphedema onset and are at 3 times the risk of lymphedema as patients not reporting this symptom. Even without objective or observable edema, these patients should be followed vigilantly and considered for early intervention. Symptoms should be incorporated into screening and diagnostic criteria for lymphedema.

IMPACT

This study shows that patients at risk for breast cancer-related lymphedema who report increased arm size should be considered at high risk for progression to lymphedema-even without edema on measurement or clinical examination-and should be followed vigilantly, with consideration of early intervention.

LAY SUMMARY

If you are at risk of lymphedema and you feel as though your arm size has increased, you might develop lymphedema, and you are at 3 times the risk of lymphedema as patients not reporting this symptom. Even without measurable or observable edema, you should be followed vigilantly and consider early intervention.

Use of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) to predict treatment outcomes in patients with advanced cancer

186

Background: PROs assessing quality of life (QOL) and physical symptoms often correlate with clinical outcomes in patients (pts) with cancer. Yet, data are lacking about the use of PROs to predict treatment response. We evaluated associations of baseline PROs with treatment response, healthcare use, and survival among pts with advanced gastrointestinal cancer. Methods: We prospectively enrolled pts with metastatic gastrointestinal cancer prior to initiating chemotherapy at Massachusetts General Hospital. At baseline (start of treatment), pts reported their QOL (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy General [FACT-G], subscales assess QOL across 4 domains: functional, physical, emotional, social well-being) and symptom burden (Edmonton Symptom Assessment System [ESAS]). Higher scores on FACT-G indicate better QOL, while higher scores on ESAS represent a greater symptom burden. We used regression models to examine associations of baseline PRO scores with treatment response (clinical benefit [CB] or progressive disease [PD] at the time of first scan based on clinical documentation), healthcare use (unplanned hospital admissions), and survival. Results: From 5/2019-3/2020, we enrolled 112 of 131 (85.5% enrollment) consecutive pts (median age = 62.8, 61.6% male, 45.5% pancreatobiliary cancer). For treatment response, 64.3% had CB and 35.7% had PD. Higher ESAS-physical (B = 1.04, p = .027) and lower FACT-G functional (B = 0.92, p = .038) scores at baseline were significant predictors of PD. On the specific ESAS items, pts who experienced PD were more likely to report moderate/severe poor well-being (57.9% vs 29.7%; p = .001), pain (44.7% vs 25.0%; p < .050), drowsiness (42.1% vs 20.3%; p = .024), and diarrhea (23.7% vs 4.7%; p = .008) at baseline. Lower FACT-G total (HR = 0.96, p = .003), FACT-G physical (HR = 0.89, p < .001), FACT-G functional (HR = 0.87, p < .001), and higher ESAS-physical (HR = 1.03, p = .028) scores at baseline were significantly associated with greater risk of hospital admission. Lower FACT-G total (HR = 0.96, p = .009), FACT-G emotional (HR = 0.87, p = .014), as well as higher ESAS-total (HR = 1.03, p = .018) and ESAS-physical (HR = 1.03, p = .040) scores at baseline were significantly associated with greater risk of death. Conclusions: We found that baseline PROs predict treatment response in pts with advanced cancer, namely physical symptoms and functional QOL, in addition to healthcare use and survival outcomes. These findings further support the use of PROs to predict important clinical outcomes, including the novel finding of treatment response.

Oncologist experiences regarding patient-recorded clinical encounters: Implications for the patient-doctor relationship

290

Background: The high prevalence of smartphone use means that most patients can easily audio record medical consultations. Oncologists’ attitudes towards recording visits are unknown yet may impact patient care. Methods: A mail survey of oncologists practicing at 5 U.S. Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology sites collected information on clinicians’ beliefs, preferences, and practices regarding patient-initiated recordings, along with sociodemographic and practice characteristics. Descriptive statistics and bivariate analyses were calculated. Results: Of 523 eligible oncologists, 352 (67%) completed the survey. Median age was 47 years, 33% were female, and 86% worked in an academic setting. 53% were medical oncologists, 30% surgical oncologists, and 17% radiation oncologists. Virtually all (93%) reported experience with patients recording visits, 79% at least weekly. The majority (74%) perceived that patients record visits in order to help understand treatment choices. While 79% reported that they “always” agree to recordings, 26% reported discomfort. Nearly one-third (29%) reported concerns about liability, 26% felt recording made discussion less natural, and 18% felt recording changed the way they conveyed information. Although 86% agreed that patients have the right to record visits, nearly all felt physician permission was required and 53% reported having been previously recorded without permission. Only 51% believed recording had a positive impact on the patient-doctor relationship. One-quarter (28%) felt that recording led to a less detailed conversation and 33% felt it contributed to avoidance of difficult topics, such as prognosis. Most preferred the patient/family taking notes or having access to a written summary. Views did not vary significantly based on practice setting, specialty, or region of the country. Older age and greater years in practice were associated with both greater comfort with recording and the perception that recording has a positive impact on the patient-doctor relationship (p < 0.001). Conclusions: While most oncologists report comfort with audio recording and recognize benefits for patients, a substantial minority have reservations about its impact on clinical discussions and their liability exposure. Adopting clear institutional policies about recording could help address some concerns, such as surreptitious recording, while ensuring that patients’ interests are served.

Chemoradiation-Related Lymphopenia and Its Association with Survival in Patients with Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Anal Canal

BACKGROUND

Although treatment-related lymphopenia (TRL) is common and associated with poorer survival in multiple solid malignancies, few data exist for anal cancer. We evaluated TRL and its association with survival in patients with anal cancer treated with chemoradiation (CRT).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective analysis of 140 patients with nonmetastatic anal squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) treated with definitive CRT was performed. Total lymphocyte counts (TLC) at baseline and monthly intervals up to 12 months after initiating CRT were analyzed. Multivariable Cox regression analysis was performed to evaluate the association between overall survival (OS) and TRL, dichotomized by grade (G)4 TRL (<0.2k/μL) 2 months after initiating CRT. Kaplan-Meier and log-rank tests were used to compare OS between patients with versus without G4 TRL.

RESULTS

Median time of follow-up was 55 months. Prior to CRT, 95% of patients had a normal TLC (>1k/μL). Two months after initiating CRT, there was a median of 71% reduction in TLC from baseline and 84% of patients had TRL: 11% G1, 31% G2, 34% G3, and 8% G4. On multivariable Cox model, G4 TRL at two months was associated with a 3.7-fold increased risk of death. On log-rank test, the 5-year OS rate was 32% in the cohort with G4 TRL versus 86% in the cohort without G4 TRL.

CONCLUSION

TRL is common and may be another prognostic marker of OS in anal cancer patients treated with CRT. The association between TRL and OS suggests an important role of the host immunity in anal cancer outcomes.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

This is the first detailed report demonstrating that standard chemoradiation (CRT) commonly results in treatment-related lymphopenia (TRL), which may be associated with a poorer overall survival (OS) in patients with anal squamous cell carcinoma. The association between TRL and worse OS observed in this study supports the importance of host immunity in survival among patients with anal cancer. These findings encourage larger, prospective studies to further investigate TRL, its predictors, and its relationship with survival outcomes. Furthermore, the results of this study support ongoing efforts of clinical trials to investigate the potential role of immunotherapy in anal cancer.

Risk of malignancy in small pancreatic cysts decreases over time

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic cysts <15 mm without worrisome features have practically no risk of malignancy at the time of diagnosis but this can change over time. Optimal duration of follow-up is a matter of debate. We evaluated predictors of malignancy and attempted to identify a time to safely discontinue surveillance.

METHODS

Bi-centric study utilizing prospectively collected databases of patients with pancreatic cysts measuring <15 mm and without worrisome features who underwent surveillance at the Massachusetts General Hospital (1988-2017) and at the University of Verona Hospital Trust (2000-2016). The risk of malignant transformation was assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method and parametric survival models, and predictors of malignancy were evaluated using Cox regression.

RESULTS

806 patients were identified. Median follow-up was 58 months (6-347). Over time, 58 (7.2%) cysts were resected and of those, 11 had high grade dysplasia (HGD) or invasive cancer. Three additional patients had unresectable cancer for a total rate of malignancy of 1.7%. Predictors of development of malignancy included an increase in size ≥2.5 mm/year (HR = 29.54, 95% CI: 9.39-92.91, P < 0.001) and the development of worrisome features (HR = 9.17, 95% CI: 2.99-28.10, P = 0.001). Comparison of parametric survival models suggested that the risk of malignancy decreased after three years of surveillance and was lower than 0.2% after five years.

CONCLUSIONS

Pancreatic cysts <15  mm at the time of diagnosis have a very low risk of malignant transformation. Our findings indicate the risk decreases over time. Size increase of ≥2.5 mm/year is the strongest predictor of malignancy.

An elevated CA 19-9 is associated with invasive cancer and worse survival in IPMN

BACKGROUND

Current guidelines for IPMN include an elevated serum carbohydrate antigen (CA) 19-9 among the worrisome features. However, the correlation of CA 19-9 with histological malignant features and survival is unclear. Serum CEA is also currently used for preoperative management of IPMN, although its measurement is not evidence-based. Accordingly, we aimed to assess the role of these tumor markers as predictors of malignancy in IPMN.

METHODS

IPMN resected between 1998 and 2018 at Massachusetts General Hospital were analyzed. Clinical, pathological and survival data were collected and compared to preoperative levels of CA 19-9 and CEA. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) and Cox regression analyses were performed considering cut-offs of 37 U/ml (CA 19-9) and 5 μg/l (CEA).

RESULTS

Analysis of 594 patients showed that preoperative CA 19-9 levels > 37 U/ml (n = 128) were associated with an increased likelihood of invasive carcinoma when compared to normal levels (45.3% vs. 18.0%, P < 0.001), while there was no difference with respect to high-grade dysplasia (32.9% vs 31.9%, P = 0.88). The proportion of concurrent pancreatic cancer was higher in patients with CA 19-9 > 37 U/ml (17.2% vs 4.9%, P < 0.001). An elevated CA 19-9 was also associated with worse overall and disease-free survival (HR = 1.943, P = 0.007 and HR = 2.484, P < 0.001 respectively). CEA levels did not correlate with malignancy.

CONCLUSION

In patients with IPMN, serum CA19-9 > 37 U/ml is associated with invasive IPMN and concurrent pancreatic cancer as well as worse survival, but not with high-grade dysplasia. Serum CEA appears to have minimal utility in the management of these patients.

Relationships among skeletal muscle, symptom burden, health care use, and survival in hospitalized patients with advanced cancer

7006

Background: Loss of skeletal muscle mass (quantity) is common in patients with advanced cancer, but little is known about muscle density (quality). Hospitalized patients with advanced cancer are a highly symptomatic population at risk for the adverse effects of muscle loss. Thus, we sought to describe associations between muscle mass and density, symptom burden, health care use, and survival in these patients. Methods: We prospectively enrolled hospitalized patients with advanced cancer from 9/2014-4/2017. Upon admission, patients reported their physical (Edmonton Symptom Assessment System [ESAS]) and psychological (Patient Health Questionnaire 4 [PHQ4]) symptoms. We used computed tomography (CT) scans performed per routine care ≤45 days prior to enrollment to evaluate muscle mass and density at the level of the third lumbar vertebral body. We categorized patients as sarcopenic using validated sex specific cutoffs. We used regression models to examine associations between muscle mass and density and patients’ symptom burden, health care use, and survival. Results: Of 1,121 patients enrolled, 677 had evaluable CT scan data (mean age = 62.86±12.95 years; 51.1% female). The most common cancer types were gastrointestinal (36.8%) and lung (16.7%) cancer. Most met criteria for sarcopenia (64.0%). Older age and female sex were associated with lower muscle mass (age: B = -0.16, p < .01; female: B = -6.89, p < .01) and density (age: B = -0.33, p < 0.01; female: B = -1.66, p = .01), while higher BMI was associated with higher muscle mass (B = 0.58, p < .01) and lower muscle density (B = -0.61, p < .01). Higher muscle mass was significantly associated with improved survival (HR = 0.97, p < .01), but not with symptom burden or health care use. Higher muscle density was significantly associated with lower ESAS physical (B = -0.17, p = .02), ESAS total (B = -0.29, p < .01), PHQ4 depression (B = -0.03, p < .01) and PHQ4 anxiety (B = -0.03, p < .01) symptoms. Higher muscle density was also associated with decreased hospital length of stay (B = -0.07, p < .01), risk of readmission or death in 90 days (OR = 0.97, p < .01), and improved survival (HR = 0.97, p < .01). Conclusions: Most hospitalized patients with advanced cancer have muscle loss consistent with sarcopenia. We found that muscle mass (quantity) correlated with survival, whereas muscle density (quality) was associated with patients’ symptoms, health care use, and survival. These findings underscore the added importance of assessing muscle quality when seeking to address the adverse effects of muscle loss in oncology.

Phase II trial of a PARP inhibitor in somatic BRCA mutant metastatic breast cancer

TPS1113

Background: Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors are now approved for patients with germline BRCA1/2 mutated HER2 negative metastatic breast cancer (MBC). However, germline BRCA1/2 mutations only account for 5-10% of breast cancer. We previously demonstrated that a subset of MBC may harbor somatic BRCA1/2 mutations detectable by cell-free DNA (cfDNA) (Vidula, SABCS, 2017). We hypothesize that somatic BRCA1/2 mutant MBC may also respond to PARP inhibition, similar to ovarian cancer, where PARP inhibition is efficacious in both somatic and germline tumors (Oza, 2017). Methods: This single arm, open label, phase II clinical trial is evaluating the efficacy of talazoparib, a PARP inhibitor, in 30 patients with somatic pathogenic BRCA1/2 mutant MBC identified by cfDNA. Patients may have triple-negative disease with receipt of at least 1 prior chemotherapy regimen, or hormone receptor positive, HER2 negative disease with at least 1 prior hormone therapy for MBC. Patients may have received a prior platinum, in the absence of progression on platinum chemotherapy. Patients must not have a known germline BRCA1/2 mutation. Patients will be treated with talazoparib 1 mg daily until progression, unacceptable toxicity, or withdrawal of consent, with clinical exams monthly, scans (CT chest, abdomen, and pelvis, and bone scan as appropriate) every 3 months, and serial cfDNA collected monthly. The primary endpoint is progression-free survival, as defined by RECIST 1.1. Subjects are enrolled in a 2-stage design, which provides 80% power to demonstrate that treatment is associated with “success” (PFS > 12 weeks) in ³ 53% patients (4% alpha). Additional endpoints include objective response rate and toxicity (per NCI CTCAE version 5.0). Correlative endpoints include determining changes in BRCA1/2 mutant allele fraction, genomic evolution including emergence of BRCA reversion mutations, and the impact of biomarker changes on outcomes. This trial is currently enrolling patients at the Massachusetts General Hospital. Successful completion of this study may help expand the patient population that is able to benefit from PARP inhibition. Clinical trial information: NCT03990896 .

Multisite randomized trial of integrated palliative and oncology care for patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML)

12000

Background: Patients with AML receiving intensive chemotherapy experience substantial decline in their quality of life (QOL) and mood during their hospitalization for induction chemotherapy and often receive aggressive care at the end of life (EOL). We sought to examine the effect of integrated palliative and oncology care on QOL, mood, post-traumatic stress (PTSD) symptoms, and EOL outcomes in patients with AML. Methods: We conducted a multi-site randomized trial of integrated palliative and oncology care (n = 86) versus usual oncology care (n = 74) for patients with AML undergoing intensive chemotherapy. Patients assigned to the intervention were seen by palliative care clinicians at least twice per week during their hospitalization for induction chemotherapy and all subsequent hospitalizations. Patients completed the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Leukemia, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, and the PTSD Checklist to assess their QOL, mood, and PTSD symptoms at baseline, weeks 2, 4, 12, and 24. The primary endpoint was QOL at week-2. We used analysis of covariance and mixed linear effect models, controlling for baseline scores, to assess the effect of the intervention on patient-reported outcomes. Results: Between 1/2017 and 7/2019, we enrolled 160/235 (68.1%) of eligible patients. Compared to those receiving usual care, intervention patients reported better QOL (107.59 vs. 116.45, P = 0.039) and lower depression (7.20 vs. 5.68, P = 0.021), anxiety (5.94 vs. 4.53, P = 0.018), and PTSD symptoms (31.69 vs. 27.79, P = 0.009) at week 2. Intervention effects were sustained up to week 24 for QOL (B = 2.35, P = 0.048), depression (B = -0.42, P = 0.039), anxiety (B = -0.38, P = 0.042), and PTSD symptoms (B = -1.43, P = 0.002). Among deceased participants, those receiving the intervention were more likely to report discussing their EOL care preferences with their clinicians (75.0% vs. 40.0%, P = 0.009) and less likely to receive chemotherapy in the last 30 days of life (34.9% vs. 65.9%, P = 0.008). There was no difference in hospice utilization or hospitalization at the EOL. Conclusions: The integrated palliative and oncology care model for patients with AML receiving intensive chemotherapy led to substantial improvements in patients’ QOL, psychological distress, and EOL care. Thus, palliative care should be considered a new standard of care for patients with AML. Clinical trial information: NCT02975869 .

Randomized trial of a symptom monitoring intervention for hospitalized patients with advanced cancer (NCT03396510)

12014

Background: Hospitalized patients with advanced cancer experience a high symptom burden, which is associated with poor clinical outcomes and increased health care use. Symptom monitoring interventions are increasingly becoming standard of care in oncology, but studies of these interventions in the hospital setting are lacking. We evaluated the impact of a symptom monitoring intervention in hospitalized patients with advanced cancer. Methods: We randomly assigned hospitalized patients with advanced cancer who were admitted to the oncology service to a symptom monitoring intervention or usual care. Patients in both arms reported their symptoms (Edmonton Symptom Assessment System [ESAS] and Patient Health Questionnaire 4 [PHQ4], higher scores on both indicate greater symptom severity) daily via tablet computers. Patients assigned to the intervention had their symptom reports presented graphically with alerts for moderate/severe symptoms during daily oncology rounds. The primary endpoint was the proportion of days with improved symptoms for those who completed two or more days of symptoms. Secondary endpoints included hospital length of stay (LOS) and readmission rates. Results: From 2/2018-10/2019, we randomized 390 patients (76.2% enrollment rate); 320 completed two or more days of symptoms (median age=65.6 [range 18.8-93.2]; 43.8% female). The most common cancers were gastrointestinal (36.9%), lung (18.8%), and genitourinary (12.2%). Nearly half of patients (48.5%) had one or more comorbid conditions in addition to cancer. We found no significant differences between intervention and usual care regarding the proportion of days with improved ESAS total (B=-0.05, P=.17), ESAS physical (B=-0.02, P=.52), PHQ4 anxiety (B=-0.03, P=.33), and PHQ4 depression (B=-0.02, P=.44) symptoms. Intervention patients also did not differ from usual care with respect to secondary endpoints of hospital LOS (7.50 v 7.59 days, P=.88) and readmission rates within 30 days of discharge (32.5% v 25.6%, P=.18). Conclusions: For hospitalized patients with advanced cancer, this symptom monitoring intervention did not have a significant impact on their symptom burden and health care use. These findings do not support the routine integration of this type of symptom monitoring intervention for hospitalized patients with advanced cancer. The positive outcomes seen in previous studies of symptom monitoring interventions may not be reproduced in other patient populations and care settings. Support: UG1CA189823; Clinical trial information: NCT03396510 .

Medical oncologists’ perceptions of clinical trials for underrepresented populations

e19062

Background: Ethnic/racial minorities and socioeconomically disadvantaged patients remain underrepresented in cancer clinical trials (CCT), challenging the accuracy and generalizability of findings. While oncologists’ recommendations influence trial participation, we know little about their perspectives on recommending CCT to underrepresented patients. Methods: From 9/16-5/19 we conducted a sequential mixed methods study to assess oncologists’ attitudes toward recommending underrepresented patients for CCT. We performed individual interviews with 17 oncologists, developed a survey instrument, and surveyed a randomly selected sample of 98 oncologists (from ASCO, NCORP, MGH; RR = 31.2%). Descriptive statistics summarized attitudes, practices and challenges with trial enrollment of underrepresented patients. Results: Content analysis of interviews (age = 46.9, female = 37.5%, white = 75.0%) revealed overall support for CCT. Indeed, 84.4% of survey respondents (age = 53.3, female = 31.3%, white = 78.6%) considered CCT as central to their professional identity. Yet, 37.5% agreed CCT placed undue burden on oncologists. Oncologists’ concerns around informed consent and perceived lack of clinical/personal equipoise discouraged recommending CCT participation to vulnerable patients. Interviews revealed that nearly all believed that patients with certain vulnerabilities (e.g., literacy, social, financial barriers) had needs that conflicted with CCT demands, increasing the potential for harm. Oncologists were less likely to recommend CCT to patients who do not reliably report side effects (91.2%), demonstrate difficulty comprehending the costs/benefits of CCT (88.7%), lack support (87.6%), live far away (76.3%), or face insurance obstacles (73.2%). Notably, 67.7% affirmed they presented trials with varying enthusiasm based on perceived patient challenges; 32.4% deemed it hard to justify enrolling patients if efficacious standard treatment options exist outside of trials. Oncologists desired navigation support (63.3%) to offset concerns and facilitate trial discussion/enrollment. Conclusions: Findings confirm that oncologists value CCT; however, they experience conflict when considering CCT for patients with pre-existing hardships. Time constraints interfere with oncologists’ ability to adequately address and overcome perceived challenges to participation. Our findings underscore the need for programs that integrate informational support with patient navigation to increase enrollment of underrepresented patients into CCT.

Screening Tool Identifies Older Adults With Cancer at Risk for Poor Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Oncologists often struggle with managing the complex issues unique to older adults with cancer, and research is needed to identify patients at risk for poor outcomes.

METHODS

This study enrolled patients aged ≥70 years within 8 weeks of a diagnosis of incurable gastrointestinal cancer. Patient-reported surveys were used to assess vulnerability (Vulnerable Elders Survey [scores ≥3 indicate a positive screen for vulnerability]), quality of life (QoL; EORTC Quality of Life of Cancer Patients questionnaire [higher scores indicate better QoL]), and symptoms (Edmonton Symptom Assessment System [ESAS; higher scores indicate greater symptom burden] and Geriatric Depression Scale [higher scores indicate greater depression symptoms]). Unplanned hospital visits within 90 days of enrollment and overall survival were evaluated. We used regression models to examine associations among vulnerability, QoL, symptom burden, hospitalizations, and overall survival.

RESULTS

Of 132 patients approached, 102 (77.3%) were enrolled (mean [M] ± SD age, 77.25 ± 5.75 years). Nearly half (45.1%) screened positive for vulnerability, and these patients were older (M, 79.45 vs 75.44 years; P=.001) and had more comorbid conditions (M, 2.13 vs 1.34; P=.017) compared with nonvulnerable patients. Vulnerable patients reported worse QoL across all domains (global QoL: M, 53.26 vs 66.82; P=.041; physical QoL: M, 58.95 vs 88.24; P<.001; role QoL: M, 53.99 vs 82.12; P=.001; emotional QoL: M, 73.19 vs 85.76; P=.007; cognitive QoL: M, 79.35 vs 92.73; P=.011; social QoL: M, 59.42 vs 82.42; P<.001), higher symptom burden (ESAS total: M, 31.05 vs 15.00; P<.001), and worse depression score (M, 4.74 vs 2.25; P<.001). Vulnerable patients had a higher risk of unplanned hospitalizations (hazard ratio, 2.38; 95% CI, 1.08-5.27; P=.032) and worse overall survival (hazard ratio, 2.26; 95% CI, 1.14-4.48; P=.020).

CONCLUSIONS

Older adults with cancer who screen positive as vulnerable experience a higher symptom burden, greater healthcare use, and worse survival. Screening tools to identify vulnerable patients should be integrated into practice to guide clinical care.

The role of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA), tumor markers (TMs), and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in predicting treatment response in patients with metastatic gastrointestinal (GI) cancer

833

Background: Changes in ctDNA and serum TMs (CEA and CA19-9) can serve as predictors of response to systemic therapy in GI cancer patients (pts). Similarly, PROs correlate with survival and treatment response. We present a preliminary analysis of ctDNA, TMs, and PROs in predicting treatment response. Methods: We are enrolling 200 pts in a prospective study with metastatic pancreatic (PDAC), colorectal (CRC), gastroesophageal (GE), and biliary cancers. We are collecting ctDNA, TMs (CEA for all tumor types; CA19-9 for PDAC, GE, biliary), and PROs (FACT-G for QOL [higher scores indicate better QOL]; ESAS-r and PRO-CTCAE for symptoms; and PHQ-4 [consists of GAD-2 and PHQ-2 for anxiety and depression]; higher ESAS-r, PRO-CTCAE, and PHQ-4 scores reflect greater symptom burden) at baseline and 4 weeks. ctDNA is benchmarked against somatic tissue alterations, and serially assessed by digital droplet PCR. We correlated median percent change from baseline to 4 weeks for ctDNA, TMs, and PROs with treatment response (clinical benefit [CB], progressive disease [PD]). Results: From April to August 2019, we have enrolled 38/45 (84.4%) eligible pts (median age = 64 years; 36.8% female). Among these 38 pts, tumor types are PDAC (36.8%), CRC (31.6%), GE (28.9%), and biliary (2.6%). 18/38 pts were evaluable for ctDNA. Change in ctDNA was -94.5% in pts with CB (n = 10) and -19.5% in pts with PD (n = 8; p = 0.025). No correlation was observed between CEA and treatment response (p = 0.367). Change in CA19-9 was -1.5% for pts with CB and +47% for pts with PD (p = 0.019). Changes in PRO-CTCAE (p = 0.345), GAD-2 (p = 0.697), and ESAS scores (p = 0.743) did not differ between pts with CB and PD. However, changes in PHQ-2 (CB 0% v. PD +22.5%; p < 0.001), PHQ-4 (CB -8.5% v. PD +5%; p = 0.015), and FACT-G (CB +30% v. PD +5%; p = 0.049) were significant. Conclusions: Preliminary analysis suggests that ctDNA and PROs demonstrate promising utility for early prediction of treatment response, with favorable performance relative to standard TMs. Further analyses of larger pt numbers in this ongoing study may clarify the use and integration of these measures to better predict pt outcomes.

Patient Preferences for Use of Archived Biospecimens from Oncology Trials When Adequacy of Informed Consent Is Unclear

BACKGROUND

Oncology research increasingly involves biospecimen collection and data sharing. Ethical challenges emerge when researchers seek to use archived biospecimens for purposes that were not well defined in the original informed consent document (ICD). We sought to inform ongoing policy debates by assessing patient views on these issues.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We administered a cross-sectional self-administered survey to patients with cancer at an academic medical center. Survey questions addressed attitudes toward cancer research, willingness to donate biospecimens, expectations regarding use of biospecimens, and preferences regarding specific ethical dilemmas.

RESULTS

Among 240 participants (response rate 69%), virtually all (94%) indicated willingness to donate tissue for research. Most participants (86%) expected that donated tissue would be used for any research deemed scientifically important, and virtually all (94%) expected that the privacy of their health information would be protected. Broad use of stored biospecimens and data sharing with other researchers increased willingness to donate tissue. For three scenarios in which specific consent for proposed biobank research was unclear within the ICD, a majority of patient's favored allowing the research to proceed: 76% to study a different cancer, 88% to study both inherited (germline) and tumor specific (somatic) mutations, and 70% to permit data sharing. A substantial minority believed that research using stored biospecimens should only proceed with specific consent.

CONCLUSION

When debates arise over appropriate use of archived biospecimens, the interests of the research participants in seeing productive use of their blood or tissue should be considered, in addition to addressing concerns about potential risks and lack of specific consent.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

This survey evaluated views of patients with cancer regarding the permissible use of stored biospecimens from cancer trials when modern scientific methods are not well described in the original informed consent document. The vast majority of patients support translational research and expect that any biospecimens they donate will be used to advance knowledge. When researchers, policy makers, and those charged with research oversight debate use of stored biospecimens, it is important to recognize that research participants have an interest in productive use of their blood, tissue, or data, in addition to considerations of risks and the adequacy of documented consent.

FOLFOX plus ziv-aflibercept or placebo in first-line metastatic esophagogastric adenocarcinoma: A double-blind, randomized, multicenter phase 2 trial

BACKGROUND

Antiangiogenic therapy is a proven therapeutic modality for refractory gastric and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma. This trial assessed whether the addition of a high affinity angiogenesis inhibitor, ziv-aflibercept, could improve the efficacy of first-line mFOLFOX6 (oxaliplatin, leucovorin, and bolus plus infusional 5- fluorouracil) in metastatic esophagogastric adenocarcinoma.

METHODS

Patients with treatment-naive metastatic esophagogastric adenocarcinoma were randomly assigned (in a 2:1 ratio) in a multicenter, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial to receive first-line mFOLFOX6 with or without ziv-aflibercept (4 mg/kg) every 2 weeks. The primary endpoint was 6-month progression-free survival (PFS).

RESULTS

Sixty-four patients were randomized to receive mFOLFOX6 and ziv-aflibercept (43 patients) or mFOLFOX6 and a placebo (21 patients). There was no difference in the PFS, overall survival, or response rate. Patients treated with mFOLFOX6/ziv-aflibercept tended to be more likely to discontinue study treatment for reasons other than progressive disease (P = .06). The relative dose intensity of oxaliplatin and 5-fluorouracil was lower in the mFOLFOX6/ziv-aflibercept arm during the first 12 and 24 weeks of the trial. There were 2 treatment-related deaths due to cerebral hemorrhage and bowel perforation in the mFOLFOX6/ziv-aflibercept cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

Ziv-aflibercept did not increase the anti-tumor activity of first-line mFOLFOX6 in metastatic esophagogastric cancer, potentially because of decreased dose intensity of FOLFOX. Further evaluation of ziv-aflibercept in unselected, chemotherapy-naive patients with metastatic esophagogastric adenocarcinoma is not warranted.