A randomized trial of expedited intra-arrest transfer versus more extended on-scene resuscitation for refractory out of hospital cardiac arrest: Rationale and design of the EVIDENCE trial

BACKGROUND

Refractory Out of Hospital Cardiac Arrest (r-OHCA) is common and the benefit versus harm of intra-arrest transport of patients to hospital is not clear.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the rate of survival to hospital discharge in adult patients with r-OHCA, initial rhythm pulseless ventricular tachycardia (VT)/ventricular fibrillation (VF) or Pulseless Electrical Activity (PEA) treated with 1 of 2 locally accepted standards of care:1 expedited transport from scene; or2 ongoing advanced life support (ALS) resuscitation on-scene.

HYPOTHESIS

We hypothesize that expedited transport from scene in r-OHCA improves survival with favorable neurological status/outcome.

METHODS/DESIGN

Phase III, multi-center, partially blinded, prospective, intention-to-treat, safety and efficacy clinical trial with contemporaneous registry of patient ineligible for the clinical trial. Eligible patients for inclusion are adults with witnessed r-OHCA; estimated age 18 to 70, assumed medical cause with immediate bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR); initial rhythm of VF/pulseless VT, or PEA; no return of spontaneous circulation following 3 shocks and/or 15 minutes of professional on-scene resuscitation; with mechanical CPR available. Two hundred patients will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to either expedited transport from scene or ongoing ALS at the scene of cardiac arrest.

SETTING

Two urban regions in NSW Australia.

OUTCOMES

Primary: survival to hospital discharge with cerebral performance category (CPC) 1 or 2. Secondary: safety, survival, prognostic factors, use of ECMO supported CPR and functional assessment at hospital discharge and 4 weeks and 6 months, quality of life, healthcare use and cost-effectiveness.

CONCLUSIONS

The EVIDENCE trial will determine the potential risks and benefits of an expedited transport from scene of cardiac arrest.

SCORE: a randomised controlled trial evaluating shared care (general practitioner and oncologist) follow-up compared to usual oncologist follow-up for survivors of colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

SCORE is the first randomised controlled trial (RCT) to examine shared oncologist and general practitioner (GP) follow-up for survivors of colorectal cancer (CRC). SCORE aimed to show that shared care (SC) was non-inferior to usual care (UC) on the EORTC QLQ-C30 Global Health Status/Quality of Life (GHQ-QoL) scale to 12 months.

METHODS

The study recruited patients from five public hospitals in Melbourne, Australia between February 2017 and May 2021. Patients post curative intent treatment for stage I-III CRC underwent 1:1 randomisation to SC and UC. SC replaced two oncologist visits with GP visits and included a survivorship care plan and primary care management guidelines. Assessments were at baseline, 6 and 12 months. Difference between groups on GHQ-QoL to 12 months was estimated from a mixed model for repeated measures (MMRM), with a non-inferiority margin (NIM) of -10 points. Secondary endpoints included quality of life (QoL); patient perceptions of care; costs and clinical care processes (CEA tests, recurrences). Registration ACTRN12617000004369p.

FINDINGS

150 consenting patients were randomised to SC (N = 74) or UC (N = 76); 11 GPs declined. The mean (SD) GHQ-QoL scores at 12 months were 72 (20.2) for SC versus 73 (17.2) for UC. The MMRM mean estimate of GHQ-QoL across the 6 month and 12 month follow-up was 69 for SC and 73 for UC, mean difference -4.0 (95% CI: -9.0 to 0.9). The lower limit of the 95% CI did not cross the NIM. There was no clear evidence of differences on other QoL, unmet needs or satisfaction scales. At 12 months, the majority preferred SC (40/63; 63%) in the SC group, with equal preference for SC (22/62; 35%) and specialist care (22/62; 35%) in UC group. CEA completion was higher in SC. Recurrences similar between arms. Patients in SC on average incurred USD314 less in health costs versus UC patients.

INTERPRETATION

SC seems to be an appropriate and cost-effective model of follow-up for CRC survivors.

FUNDING

Victorian Cancer Agency and Cancer Australia.

Nicotinamide for Skin-Cancer Chemoprevention in Transplant Recipients

BACKGROUND

Immunosuppressed organ-transplant recipients have an increased incidence of, and mortality from, skin cancer. Nicotinamide (vitamin B3) enhances the repair of ultraviolet (UV) radiation-induced DNA damage, reduces the cutaneous immunosuppressive effects of UV radiation, and reduces the incidence of keratinocyte cancers (including squamous-cell and basal-cell carcinomas) and actinic keratoses among high-risk immunocompetent patients. Whether oral nicotinamide is useful for skin-cancer chemoprevention in organ-transplant recipients is unclear.

METHODS

In this phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, organ-transplant recipients who had had at least two keratinocyte cancers in the past 5 years to receive 500 mg of nicotinamide or placebo twice daily for 12 months. Participants were examined for skin lesions by dermatologists at 3-month intervals for 12 months. The primary end point was the number of new keratinocyte cancers during the 12-month intervention period. Secondary end points included the numbers of squamous-cell and basal-cell carcinomas during the 12-month intervention period, the number of actinic keratoses until 6 months after randomization, safety, and quality of life.

RESULTS

A total of 158 participants were enrolled, with 79 assigned to the nicotinamide group and 79 to the placebo group. The trial was stopped early owing to poor recruitment. At 12 months, there were 207 new keratinocyte cancers in the nicotinamide group and 210 in the placebo group (rate ratio, 1.0; 95% confidence interval, 0.8 to 1.3; P = 0.96). No significant between-group differences in squamous-cell and basal-cell carcinoma counts, actinic keratosis counts, or quality-of-life scores were observed. Adverse events and changes in blood or urine laboratory variables were similar in the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In this 12-month, placebo-controlled trial, oral nicotinamide therapy did not lead to lower numbers of keratinocyte cancers or actinic keratoses in immunosuppressed solid-organ transplant recipients. (Funded by the National Health and Medical Research Council; ONTRANS Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry number, ACTRN12617000599370.).

SCORE: A multisite randomised controlled trial evaluating shared care for colorectal cancer survivors

84

Background: Colorectal cancer (CRC) survivorship is rising. Few studies have considered shared follow up (FU) care (SC) between oncologists and primary care providers (PCPs). SCORE is the first large RCT of SC for CRC survivors. Aim: to compare SC with usual care (UC) for CRC survivors. Primary objective: assess the effect of SC vs UC on the EORTC QLQ-C30 Global Health Status/Quality of Life (GHQ-QoL) scale to 12 months (mo). Secondary objectives: assess the effect of SC vs UC on QoL; pt perceptions of care; costs; clinical care processes (CEA tests, recurrences); and feasibility (recruitment, completion rate). Methods: Pts had stage I-III CRC, completed all treatments within 3 mo, spoke English, had a PCP, and no prior cancer. After pt consent, PCP could opt out. Pts were randomised 1 to 1 to SC or UC. SC replaced 2 routine oncologist visits with PCP visits and included a survivorship care plan, concerns checklist and management guidelines for the PCP. PCPs were asked to request CEA tests at 3 and 9 mo visits. Pts completed measures at baseline (BL) and at 6 and 12 mo FU. An estimate of the difference (diff) between groups on GHQ-QoL to 12 mo was obtained from a mixed model for repeated measures (MMRM). The test of non-inferiority was performed by evaluating the lower limit of the two-sided 95% confidence interval (CI) for the estimated diff (SC–UC) against a pre-specified non-inferiority margin (NIM) of -10 points. All randomised pts with available data were included in the primary analysis. Per-protocol population (PPP) comprised all randomised pts with ≥ 1 post-BL questionnaire (6 +/or 12 mo) and, for SC, ≥ 1 of the PCP visits. Results: 150 pts were randomised to SC (N=74) or UC (N=76); 11 PCPs declined. Median age 63 years, 39% women, 24% had radiotherapy. Primary: colon (59%), rectum (32%), overlapping (9%). 138/150 (92%) had BL and ≥1 post-BL GHQ-QoL score. 65/74 (88%) of SC pts attended 3- and/or 9-mo PCP visit. The mean (SD) GHQ-QoL scores at baseline / 6 mo / 12 mo were: 69 (18.7) / 69 (21.2) / 72 (20.2) for SC versus 68 (20.0) / 73 (15.1) / 73 (17.2) for UC. The MMRM mean estimate of GHQ-QoL across the 6 mo and 12 mo FU was 69 for SC and 73 for UC, mean diff -4.0 (95% CI: -9.0 to 0.9). The lower limit of the 95% CI did not cross the NIM. For the PPP (N=130/150), mean diff was -5.0 (95% CI: -10.1 to 0.2). No clear evidence of between group diffs on other C30 scales (accounting for multiplicity). At 12 mo, most popular preferences for FU were: SC for 40/63 (63%) in the SC group, similar preferences for SC 22/62 (35%) and ‘Hospital-based care with the doctors that treated the cancer’ 22/62 (35%) in UC. CEA completion was 89% at 3 and 83% at 9 mo in SC; 63% and 68% in UC. 5 recurrences in SC and 6 in UC arms. Conclusions: SCORE was highly feasible with high participation and retention, few PCPs declined. Compared to UC, pts having SC had non-inferior QoL. Adherence to CEA testing was higher in SC. Pts exposed to SC prefer this model of FU. Cost and implementation analyses will follow. Clinical trial information: ACTRN12617000004369 .

Supportive care needs and psychosocial outcomes of rural versus urban women with breast cancer

OBJECTIVE

To identify whether supportive care needs vary according to remoteness and area-level socio-economic status (SES) and to identify the combinations of socio-demographic, area-level and health factors that are associated with poorer quality of life, psychological distress and severity of unmet supportive care needs METHODS: Cross sectional data was collected from women with a breast cancer diagnosis (n=2,635) in Queensland, Australia, through a telephone survey including socio-demographic, health, psychosocial and supportive care needs measures. Hierarchical regression and cluster analyses were applied to assess the predictors of unmet need and psychosocial outcomes and to identify socio-demographic and health status profiles of women, comparing their level of unmet needs and psychosocial outcomes.

RESULTS

Women living in outer regional areas reported the highest severity of unmet need in the patient care domain. Greater unmet need for health systems and information and patient care was also evident for those in moderately and most disadvantaged areas. Three clusters were identified reflecting (1) older women with poorer health and lower education (19%); (2) younger educated women with better health and private insurance (61%); and (3) physically active women with localised cancer who had completed treatment (20%). Poorer outcomes were evident in the first two of these clusters.

CONCLUSIONS

This better understanding of the combinations of characteristics associated with poorer psychosocial outcomes and higher unmet need can be used to identify women with higher supportive care needs early and to target interventions. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Primary results of ANZ 1002: Post-operative radiotherapy omission in selected patients with early breast cancer trial (PROSPECT) following pre-operative breast MRI

572

Background: Selective use of radiotherapy (RT) after surgery for early breast cancer (EBC) has been an elusive goal. The role of breast MRI in localised EBC is controversial. We aimed to determine if preoperative MRI could identify patients with EBC in whom the ipsilateral invasive recurrence (IIR) rate was sufficiently low without RT, such that RT might be safely omitted. Here we report primary and secondary outcomes, and imaging/biopsy findings for occult lesions. Methods: PROSPECT is a prospective single-arm study. Criteria for omission of RT included age at least 50, nil/minimal or mild Background Parenchymal Enhancement (BPE) on MRI, unifocal pT1N0 cancer, not Triple Negative (TNBC), no LVI. All patients who underwent PROSPECT MRI were included in the analysis. Imaging findings on MMG, US and MRI were documented and all biopsies were recorded. Pathology of lesions identified by MRI was described. The primary outcome was the IIR at 5 years of those treated without RT. An IIR rate of 5% or less was considered acceptable. The protocol specified primary analysis occurred after the 100th patient reached 5 years follow up in May 2021. Results: Between 9/2011 and 5/2019, 443 patients had MRI after diagnosis. BPE was nil/minimal or mild in 344 patients. MRI detected 194 occult lesions in 144 (33%) patients; 139 (72%) were ipsilateral. 61 MMG/US occult malignant lesions - 36 invasive and 25 DCIS - were identified in 48 patients (11% of total cohort). Of 38 ipsilateral lesions in 32 patients (7% of total cohort), 23 were DCIS, 4 were T1a, 7 T1b and 4 T1c. 201 patients were treated on trial without RT. The median age was 63 years (range: 50 to 84), median tumour size 11 mm (range: 2 to 20), grade 1 (104), grade 2 (86) or grade 3 (11). The rate of IIR at 5 years was 1% (1/101). There were 2 IIRs at 4.6 and 7.7 years follow up, 1 regional recurrence, and 1 patient with both a regional and distant recurrence with 1 breast cancer death. There was 1 contralateral (CL) breast cancer, 1 CL DCIS, 2 other cancer diagnoses and 1 death from other causes. Of 242 patients undergoing MRI but not in the main study, median age was 63 range: 50-80, median tumour size, 13mm (range: 4-145). 9 underwent mastectomy (2% of total cohort). Followup is complete for 235. There was 3 IIR, 3 CL primary and no distant metastases or breast cancer deaths. Conclusions: Breast MRI in selected, low risk patients identified occult malignancy in 11% of patients. At a median of 5 years follow up the IIR and other breast cancer events was very low. This suggests that local recurrences may be due to occult breast cancers, and MRI may allow the identification of truly localised cancers for which radiation may be safely omitted. The event rate for the entire cohort was very low, suggesting that identification of occult malignancy in apparently unifocal EBC is beneficial. Confirmatory trials are needed. Clinical trial information: 12610000810011.

PEARL: A randomised phase 3 trial of palliative care early in advanced lung cancers (ALTG/TOGA 13/008)

12020

Background: Early referral to palliative care was associated with improved health-related quality of life (HRQL) and overall survival (OS) in a US phase 3 trial in lung cancer patients (pts). International studies in mixed cancer types have reported conflicting results. PEARL aimed to determine whether early referral to palliative care would improve HRQL, OS, and resource use in Australian pts with recently diagnosed, advanced thoracic cancers. Methods: Eligible participants (pts) in this unblinded, multi-centre, randomised, phase 3 trial had advanced thoracic cancers diagnosed within 60 days, and the ability to complete patient-rated outcome measures (PROMS). Pts were randomly allocated to early referral to palliative care (ER) or referral at clinician’s discretion (DR). All pts received standard oncological care. PROMS were completed at baseline, every 3-4 weeks for 6 months, then 6-8 weekly. The primary objective was to determine the frequency of sustained, substantial improvements in HRQL, defined as a 5-point improvement in the FACT-L Trial Outcome Index (TOI) maintained for at least 2 consecutive assessments. Secondary outcomes included OS, documentation of advanced care plan (ACP), PROM scores at 12 weeks, anxiety/depression (PROMIS-ED), lung cancer symptoms (FACT-L), global HRQL (ICECAP-SCM), carer-satisfaction and burden, and understanding of illness and prognosis. The accrual target of 200 gave 80% power (alpha 0.05) to detect an absolute improvement of 20% in the proportion of pts achieving the primary endpoint. Results: 113 pts and 78 carers were recruited when the trial closed for slow accrual. Pt characteristics were well balanced: 88 (75%) had NSCLC, 18 (16%) small cell and 7 (6%) mesothelioma. Median age was 69 (IQR 62-74), 63 (56%) were male; systemic anti-cancer therapy ongoing or planned in 88 (78%). Median follow-up was 30 months. First consultations with a palliative care specialist within 60 days of diagnosis occurred in more pts assigned ER vs DR (57% vs 3.5%). Sustained substantial improvements in FACT-L TOI were reported by similar numbers of pts assigned ER vs DR: 33% vs 32%, p = 0.9. OS was similar among those assigned ER versus DR (median 12 vs 18.4 months, p = 0.11). A similar % had a written advanced care plan at death: 15/40 (39%) vs 15/33 (47%). We found no important differences between arms in global HRQL (ICECAP-SCM), depression/anxiety (PROMIS-ED), lung cancer symptoms (FACT-L), carer satisfaction (FAMCARE-2), carer burden (CRA), or understanding of illness by carers or pts. Conclusions: Early referral to palliative care, compared with discretionary referral, did not improve important outcomes for Australian thoracic cancer pts or carers. Our findings suggest that the palliative care needs of such pts were addressed equally well by delayed referral when clinically indicated, resulting in reduced burden for resource-limited specialist palliative services. Clinical trial information: ACTRN12617000166370.