Evaluation of two strategies to implement physical cancer rehabilitation guidelines for survivors of abdominopelvic cavity tumors:a controlled before-and-after study

PURPOSE: This study evaluates the effectiveness and feasibility of two strategies to implement physical cancer rehabilitation (PCR) guidelines for patients who have survived abdominopelvic cavity malignancies. METHODS: We tested and compared two tailored strategies to implement PCR guidelines for survivors of gastrointestinal, female organ and urogenital organ malignancies, in a clustered controlled before-and-after study. A patient-directed (PD) strategy was tested in five cancer centers, aiming to empower survivors. A multifaceted (MF) strategy was tested in four cancer centers, aiming additionally to influence healthcare professionals and the healthcare organization. Data were collected from existing registration systems, patient questionnaires and professional questionnaires. We measured both implementation- and client outcomes. For insight into the effectiveness we measured indicators related to PCR guidelines: (1) screening with the Distress Thermometer (DT) (=primary outcome measure), (2) information provision concerning physical activity (PA) and physical cancer rehabilitation programs (PCRPs), (3) advice to take part in PA and PCRPs, (4) referral to PCRPs, (5) participation in PCRPs, (6) PA uptake (PAU); and patient reported outcomes (PROs) such as (7) quality of life, (8) fatigue, and (9) empowerment. Furthermore, survivor and center determinants were assessed as possible confounders. Multilevel analyses were performed to compare the scores of the indicators of the PD and MF strategies, as well as the differences between the characteristics of these groups. The use of and experiences with both strategies were measured using questionnaires and Google Analytics to assess feasibility. RESULTS: In total, 1326 survivors participated in the study, 673 in the before- and 653 in the after-measurement. Regarding our primary outcome measure, we found a significant improvement of screening with the DT between the before- and after-measurement for both strategies, respectively from 34.2 to 43.1% (delta=8.9%; odds ratio (OR)=1.6706; p=0.0072) for the PD strategy and from 41.5 to 56.1% (delta=14.6%; OR=1.7098; p=0.0028) for the MF strategy. For both the primary and secondary outcomes, no statistically significant effect of the MF strategy compared to the PD strategy was observed. We found good use of and positive experiences with both strategies. CONCLUSION: Implementation strategies containing tools enhancing patient empowerment seem to be effective in increasing the systematic screening with the DT for survivors of abdominopelvic cavity malignancies. Further research is needed to assess the additional effectiveness of strategies that stimulate compliance among healthcare professionals and healthcare organizations. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Using implementation strategies containing tools enhancing patient empowerment seem to be effective in increasing the systematic screening with the DT and might improve the quality of care of patients who have survived abdominopelvic cavity malignancies. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11764-021-01045-3

Study protocol: an evaluation of the effectiveness, experiences and costs of a patient-directed strategy compared with a multi-faceted strategy to implement physical cancer rehabilitation programmes for cancer survivors in a European healthcare system; a controlled before and after study

Background The need for physical cancer rehabilitation programmes (PCRPs), addressing adverse effects from cancer, is growing. Implementing these programmes into daily practice is still a challenge. Since barriers for successful implementation often arise at different levels in healthcare, multi-faceted strategies focusing on multiple levels are likely more effective than single-faceted strategies. Nevertheless, most studies implementing PCRPs used strategies directed at patients only. The aim of this study is to develop and identify the most effective strategy to implement PCRPs into daily care. We want to assess the added value of a multi-faceted strategy compared with a single-faceted patient-directed strategy. Methods/design We will conduct a clustered controlled before and after study (CBA) in the Netherlands that compares two strategies to implement PCRPs. The patient-directed (PD) strategy (five hospitals) will focus on change at the patient level. The multi-faceted (MF) strategy (five hospitals) will focus on change at the patient, professional and organizational levels. Eligibility criteria are as follows: (A) patients: adults; preferably (history of) cancer in the gastro-intestinal, reproductive and/or urological system; successful primary treatment; and without recurrence/metastases. (B) Healthcare professionals: involved in cancer care. A stepwise approach will be followed: Step 1: Analysis of the current implementation of PCRPs and the examination of barriers and facilitators for implementation, via a qualitative study with patients (four focus groups n = 10–12) and their healthcare workers (four focus groups n = 10–12 and individual interviews n = 30–40) and collecting data on adherence to quality indicators (n = 500 patients, 50 per hospital). Step 2: Selection and development of interventions to create a PD and MF strategy during expert roundtable discussions, using the knowledge gained in step 1 and a literature search of the effect of strategies for implementing PCRPs. Step 3: Test and compare both strategies with a clustered CBA (effectiveness, process evaluation and costs), by data extraction from existing registration systems, questionnaires and interviews. For the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness, n = 500 patients, 50 per hospital. For the process evaluation, n = 50 patients, 5 per hospital, and n = 40 healthcare professionals, 4 per hospital. Main outcome measures: % screened patients, % referrals to PCRPs, incremental costs and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs)

Distinct Genomic Profiles Are Associated with Treatment Response and Survival in Ovarian Cancer

SIMPLE SUMMARY: In most patients with ovarian cancer, their disease eventually becomes resistant to chemotherapy. The timing and type of treatment given are therefore highly important. Currently, treatment choice is mainly based on the subtype of cancer (from a histological point of view), prior response to chemotherapy, and the time it takes for the disease to recur. In this study, we combined complete genome data of the tumor with clinical data to better understand treatment responses. In total, 132 tumor samples were included, all from patients with disease that had spread beyond the primary location. By clustering the samples based on genetic characteristics, we have identified subgroups with distinct response rates and survival outcomes. We suggest that in the future, this data can be used to make more informed treatment choices for individuals with ovarian cancer. ABSTRACT: The majority of patients with ovarian cancer ultimately develop recurrent chemotherapy-resistant disease. Treatment stratification is mainly based on histological subtype and stage, prior response to platinum-based chemotherapy, and time to recurrent disease. Here, we integrated clinical treatment, treatment response, and survival data with whole-genome sequencing profiles of 132 solid tumor biopsies of metastatic epithelial ovarian cancer to explore genome-informed stratification opportunities. Samples from primary and recurrent disease harbored comparable numbers of single nucleotide variants and structural variants. Mutational signatures represented platinum exposure, homologous recombination deficiency, and aging. Unsupervised hierarchical clustering based on genomic input data identified specific ovarian cancer subgroups, characterized by homologous recombination deficiency, genome stability, and duplications. The clusters exhibited distinct response rates and survival probabilities which could thus potentially be used for genome-informed therapy stratification for more personalized ovarian cancer treatment

Pharmacokinetic boosting of olaparib:A randomised, cross-over study (PROACTIVE-study)

Background: Pharmacokinetic (PK) boosting is the intentional use of a drug-drug interaction to enhance systemic drug exposure. PK boosting of olaparib, a CYP3A-substrate, has the potential to reduce PK variability and financial burden. The aim of this study was to investigate equivalence of a boosted, reduced dose of olaparib compared to the non-boosted standard dose. Methods: This cross-over, multicentre trial compared olaparib 300 mg twice daily (BID) with olaparib 100 mg BID boosted with the strong CYP3A-inhibitor cobicistat 150 mg BID. Patients were randomised to the standard therapy followed by the boosted therapy, or vice versa. After seven days of each therapy, dense PK sampling was performed for noncompartmental PK analysis. Equivalence was defined as a 90% Confidence Interval (CI) of the geometric mean ratio (GMR) of the boosted versus standard therapy area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC0–12 h) within no-effect boundaries. These boundaries were set at 0.57–1.25, based on previous pharmacokinetic studies with olaparib capsules and tablets. Results: Of 15 included patients, 12 were eligible for PK analysis. The GMR of the AUC0–12 h was 1.45 (90% CI 1.27–1.65). No grade ≥3 adverse events were reported during the study. Conclusions: Boosting a 100 mg BID olaparib dose with cobicistat increases olaparib exposure 1.45-fold, compared to the standard dose of 300 mg BID. Equivalence of the boosted olaparib was thus not established. Boosting remains a promising strategy to reduce the olaparib dose as cobicistat increases olaparib exposure Adequate tolerability of the boosted therapy with higher exposure should be established.</p

Real-life data on treatment and outcomes in advanced ovarian cancer : An observational, multinational cohort study (RESPONSE trial)

Background This study aimed to describe the treatment strategies and outcomes for women with newly diagnosed advanced high-grade serous or endometrioid ovarian cancer (OC). Methods This observational study collected real-world medical record data from eight Western countries on the diagnostic workup, clinical outcomes, and treatment of adult women with newly diagnosed advanced (Stage III-IV) high-grade serous or endometrioid OC. Patients were selected backward in time from April 1, 2018 (the index date), with a target of 120 patients set per country, followed for >= 20 months. Results Of the 1119 women included, 66.9% had Stage III disease, 11.7% had a deleterious BRCA mutation, and 26.6% received bevacizumab; 40.8% and 39.3% underwent primary debulking surgery (PDS) and interval debulking surgery (IDS), respectively. Of the patients who underwent PDS, 55.5% had no visible residual disease (VRD); 63.9% of the IDS patients had no VRD. According to physician-assessed responses (at the first assessment after diagnosis and treatment), 53.2% of the total population had a complete response and 25.7% had a partial response to first-line chemotherapy after surgery. After >= 20 months of follow-up, 32.9% of the patients were disease-free, 46.4% had progressive disease, and 20.6% had died. Bevacizumab use had a significant positive effect on overall survival (hazard ratio [HR], 0.62; 95% CI, 0.42-0.91; p = .01). A deleterious BRCA status had a significant positive effect on progression-free survival (HR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.41-0.84; p < .01). Conclusions Women with advanced high-grade serous or endometrioid OC have a poor prognosis. Bevacizumab use and a deleterious BRCA status were found to improve survival in this real-world population. Lay summary Patients with advanced (Stage III or IV) ovarian cancer (OC) have a poor prognosis. The standard treatment options of surgery and chemotherapy extend life beyond diagnosis for 5 years or more in only approximately 45% of patients. This study was aimed at describing the standard of care in eight Western countries and estimating how many patients who are diagnosed with high-grade serous or endometrioid OC could potentially be eligible for first-line poly(adenosine diphosphate ribose) polymerase inhibitor (PARPi) maintenance therapy. The results highlight the poor prognosis for these patients and suggest that a significant proportion (79%) would potentially be eligible for first-line PARPi maintenance treatment.Peer reviewe

Phenotype-guided targeted therapy based on functional signal transduction pathway activity in recurrent ovarian cancer patients:The STAPOVER study protocol

Objective: Ovarian cancer is the fifth cause of cancer-related death among women. The benefit of targeted therapy for ovarian cancer patients is limited even if treatment is stratified by molecular signature. There remains a high unmet need for alternative diagnostics that better predict targeted therapy, as current diagnostics are generally inaccurate predictors. Quantitative assessment of functional signal transduction pathway (STP) activity from mRNA measurements of target genes is an alternative approach. Therefore, we aim to identify aberrantly activated STPs in tumour tissue of patients with recurrent ovarian cancer and start phenotype-guided targeted therapy to improve survival without compromising quality of life. Study design: Patients with recurrent ovarian cancer and either 1) have platinum-resistant disease, 2) refrain from standard therapy or 3) are asymptomatic and not yet eligible for standard therapy will be included in this multi-centre prospective cohort study with multiple stepwise executed treatment arms. Targeted therapy will be available for patients with aberrantly high functional activity of the oestrogen receptor, androgen receptor, phosphoinositide 3-kinase or Hedgehog STP. The primary endpoint of this study is the progression-free survival (PFS) ratio (PFS2/PFS1 ratio) according to RECIST 1.1 determined by the PFS on matched targeted therapy (PFS2) compared to PFS on prior therapy (PFS1). Secondary endpoints include among others best overall response, overall survival, side effects, health-related quality of life and cost-effectiveness. Conclusion: The results of this study will show the clinical applicability of STP activity in selecting recurrent ovarian cancer patients for effective therapies.</p

Patterns of recurrence in the randomised PORTEC-3 trial of chemoradiotherapy for endometrial cancer

n/

Assessing the information desire of patients with advanced cancer by providing information with a decision aid, which is evaluated in a randomized trial: a study protocol

Contains fulltext : 95653.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)BACKGROUND: There is a continuing debate on the desirability of informing patients with cancer and thereby involving them in treatment decisions. On the one hand, information uptake may be hampered, and additional stress could be inflicted by involving these patients. On the other hand, even patients with advanced cancer desire information on risks and prognosis. To settle the debate, a decision aid will be developed and presented to patients with advanced disease at the point of decision making. The aid is used to assess the amount of information desired. Factors related to information desire are explored, as well as the ability of the medical oncologist to judge the patient's information desire. The effects of the information on patient well-being are assessed by comparing the decision aid group with a usual care group. METHODS/DESIGN: This study is a randomized controlled trial of patients with advanced colorectal, breast, or ovarian cancer who have started treatment with first-line palliative chemotherapy. The trial will consist of 100 patients in the decision aid group and 70 patients in the usual care group. To collect complete data of 170 patients, 246 patients will be approached for the study. Patients will complete a baseline questionnaire on sociodemographic data, well-being measures, and psychological measures, believed to predict information desire. The medical oncologist will judge the patient's information desire. After disease progression is diagnosed, the medical oncologist offers the choice between second-line palliative chemotherapy plus best supportive care (BSC) and BSC alone. Randomization will take place to determine whether patients will receive usual care (n = 70) or usual care and the decision aid (n = 100). The aid offers information about the potential risks and benefits of both treatment options, in terms of adverse events, tumour response, and survival. Patients decide for each item whether they desire the information or not. Two follow-up questionnaires will evaluate the effect of the decision aid. DISCUSSION: This study attempts to settle the debate on the desirability of informing patients with cancer. In contrast to several earlier studies, we will actually deliver information on treatment options to patients at the point of decision making