SPONTANEOUS EXTERNAL BILIARY FISTULA

Click on the link to view

Real time patient-reported outcome measures in patients with cancer: Early experience within an integrated health system

BACKGROUND: While patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have benefit in cancer clinical trials, real-world applications are lacking. This study describes the method of implementation of a cancer enterprise-wide PROMs platform. METHODS: After establishing a multispecialty stakeholder group within a large integrated health system, domain-specific instruments were selected from the National Institutes of Health\u27s Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) instruments (pain interference, fatigue, physical function, and depression) and were administered at varying frequencies throughout each patient\u27s cancer journey. All cancer patients with an oncologic visit were eligible to complete the PROMs prior to the visit using a patient portal, or at the time of the visit using a tablet. PROMs were integrated into clinical workflow. Clinical partnerships were essential for successful implementation. Descriptive preliminary data were compared using multivariable logistic regression to determine the factors associated with method of PROMs completion. RESULTS: From September 16, 2020 to July 23, 2021, 23 of 38 clinical units (60.5%) implemented PROMs over 2392 encounters and 1666 patients. Approximately one third of patients (n = 629, 37.8%) used the patient portal. Black patients (aOR 0.70; 95% CI: 0.51-0.97) and patients residing in zip codes with higher percentage of unemployment (aOR: 0.07, 95% CI: 0.01-0.41) were among the least likely to complete PROMs using the patient portal. CONCLUSIONS: Successful system-wide implementation of PROMs among cancer patients requires engagement from multispecialty stakeholders and investment from clinical partners. Attention to the method of PROMs collection is required in order to reduce the potential for disparities, such as Black populations and those residing in areas with high levels of unemployment

Treatment of Small-Cell Lung Cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology Endorsement of the American College of Chest Physicians Guideline

PURPOSE: The American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP) produced an evidence-based guideline on treatment of patients with small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). Because of the relevance of this guideline to American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) membership, ASCO reviewed the guideline, applying a set of procedures and policies used to critically examine guidelines developed by other organizations. METHODS: The ACCP guideline on the treatment of SCLC was reviewed for developmental rigor by methodologists. An ASCO Endorsement Panel updated the literature search, reviewed the content, and considered additional recommendations. RESULTS: The ASCO Endorsement Panel determined that the recommendations from the ACCP guideline, published in 2013, are clear, thorough, and based on current scientific evidence. ASCO endorses the ACCP guideline on the treatment of SCLC, with the addition of qualifying statements. RECOMMENDATIONS: Surgery is indicated for selected stage I SCLC. Limited-stage disease should be treated with concurrent chemoradiotherapy in patients with good performance status. Thoracic radiotherapy should be administered early in the course of treatment, preferably beginning with cycle one or two of chemotherapy. Chemotherapy should consist of four cycles of a platinum agent and etoposide. Extensive-stage disease should be treated primarily with chemotherapy consisting of a platinum agent plus etoposide or irinotecan. Prophylactic cranial irradiation prolongs survival in patients with limited-stage disease who achieve a complete or partial response to initial therapy and may do so in similarly responding patients with extensive-stage disease as well. Additional information is available at http://www.asco.org/endorsements/sclc and http://www.asco.org/guidelineswiki

Cardiac and Pulmonary Dosimetric Parameters in Lung Cancer Patients Undergoing Post-Operative Radiation Therapy in the Real-World Setting

Purpose/Objective(s): The recently published Lung ART trial reported increased rates of cardiac and pulmonary toxicity in the post-operative radiation therapy arm. It remains unknown whether the dosimetric parameters reported in Lung ART are representative of real-world practice. The purpose of this study is to examine heart and lung dose exposure in patients receiving post-operative radiation therapy for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) across a statewide consortium. Materials/Methods: From 2012 to 2020, 377 patients at 27 academic and community centers within the Michigan Radiation Oncology Quality Consortium (MROQC) underwent surgical resection followed by post-operative radiation therapy for non-metastatic NSCLC. Demographic and dosimetric data were prospectively collected for these patients. Rates of 3D-CRT and IMRT use were analyzed. Mean heart dose (MHD), heart V5, heart V35, mean lung dose (MLD), lung V20, target volume and minimum dose to 95% PTV were calculated for these patients and the reported dosimetric parameters were stratified by treatment modality. Results: 51% of patients in this cohort had N2 disease at the time of surgery, 18% had a positive margin. 65.8% of patients were treated with IMRT compared to 32.1% treated with 3D-CRT. Average MHD for all patients was 10.3 Gy, mean Heart V5 was 40.3% and mean heart V35 was 12.6%. Average MLD was 11.2 Gy and mean lung V20 was 18.9%. These dosimetric parameters did not significantly differ based on treatment modality, with MHD and MLD 9.9 Gy and 10.1 Gy, respectively, for patients treated with 3D-CRT compared to 10.6 Gy and 11.8 Gy for patients treated with IMRT. Conclusion: Cardiac and lung dosimetric parameters for patients receiving post-operative radiation therapy for NSCLC are similar to the dosimetric characteristics reported in Lung ART. The mean heart and mean lung doses observed are slightly lower (MHD 10.3 Gy, MLD 11.2 Gy) compared to Lung ART (MHD 13 Gy, MLD 13 Gy), possibly owing to increased use of IMRT. These data support application of Lung ART\u27s findings outside of the clinical trial setting

RTOG/NRG 1115 Quality of Life of Phase III Dose Escalated Radiation Therapy (RT) and Standard Androgen Deprivation Therapy (ADT) with GnRH Agonist vs. Dose Escalated RT and ADT with GnRH Agonist and Orteronel (TAK-700) for Men with High-Risk Prostate

Purpose/Objective(s): Quality of life (QOL) was assessed with the hypothesis that QOL and fatigue scores would not differ significantly between the ADT + RT (Arm A) and the experimental group receiving ADT + RT + oreteronel (Arm B). Materials/Methods: In both arms, ADT with GnRH agonist was given for 24 mos, and dose escalated RT started 8-10 wks after initiation of ADT. In Arm B, oreteronel was given BID for 24 mos. QOL was measured with Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC) and EQ-5D global QOL assessment. EPIC has 4 domains: bowel, urinary, sexual, and hormonal. EQ-5D index score was calculated using health states obtained from 5 dimensions, and a visual analog score (VAS). For EPIC, EQ-5D index and VAS, higher scores indicate better QOL. Fatigue was measured by the 7-item Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) short form. Total score is standardized into a T-score with mean of 50 and standard deviation of 10 with higher score representing more fatigue. Change scores, calculated as follow-up minus baseline, were compared between arms. Longitudinal analysis using repeated measures mixed effects models was conducted (prior to ADT [baseline], one wk prior to starting RT, last wk of RT, and 1 and 2.5 yrs after initiation of therapy). Results: Of 231 eligible patients, 196 consented to QOL, 102 on Arm A and 94 on Arm B. Compliance prior to start of RT and end of RT was 83%. At 1 and 2.5 yrs, 80% and 62% of pts, respectively, completed the EPIC. There were no differences between any EPIC domain between arms from the start of RT through the end of follow-up. Men on oreteronel had a significantly greater decline in bowel score prior to starting RT then control patients (-6.12, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -9.24, -3.01 vs. -1.93, 95% CI: -4.48, 0.63, respectively, p=0.038). Arm B patients also had a statistically significant and clinically meaningful worse change in urinary score vs control from baseline to pre-RT (-2.33, 95% CI: -5.02, 0.36 vs. 1.38, 95% CI: -1.07, 3.83, respectively, p=0.043). No other timepoints were significant. The only sig. between arm difference in EPIC sexual and hormonal scores was also at pre-RT in favor of Arm A over Arm B; p=0.024 and p=0.0024 respectively). Fatigue was also greater in the oreteronel patients prior to starting RT (3.81, 95% CI: 1.88, 5.74 vs. 1.18, 95% CI: -0.23, 2.60, p=0.028). Conclusion: The addition of oreteronel to RT and ADT resulted in greater declines in QOL prior to the start of RT but did not result in significant differences at any other time points. Although oreteronel development has been halted, the QOL results are encouraging for other drugs in this class that remain under investigation. In ongoing prospective trials, QOL impacts should be measured in conjunction with changes in clinical outcome and survival. This project was supported by grants UG1CA189867, U10CA180868, U10CA180822 from the National Cancer Institute and Takeda Pharmaceutical

Patient-Reported Outcomes (PROs) in NRG Oncology RTOG 1010: Phase III Trial Evaluating the Addition of Trastuzumab to Trimodality Treatment of HER2 Overexpressing (HER2+) Esophageal Adenocarcinoma (EAC)

Purpose/Objective(s): NRG/RTOG 1010 evaluated the benefit of trastuzumab for patients (pts) with HER2+ localized EAC receiving trimodality therapy. Adding trastuzumab did not improve disease-free (primary endpoint) or overall survival, nor treatment toxicity (Lancet Oncology 2022). The primary PRO objective was improvement (impr) in the FACT-Esophageal Cancer Subscale (ECS) score with trastuzumab at restaging prior to surgery. A secondary objective was to assess if impr in ECS score is associated with pathologic complete response (pCR). Materials/Methods: Pts with HER2+ EAC (T1N1-2; T2-3N0-2) were stratified by presence of adenopathy & randomized 1:1 to weekly paclitaxel, carboplatin with 50.4 Gy radiation (CRT) followed by surgery ± trastuzumab (CRT+T), 4mg/kg week 1, 2mg/kg/weekly x 5 during CRT, 6 mg/kg x1 prior to surgery, and then 6mg/kg every 3 weeks (wks) x 13. The ECS, v4, was done at baseline, 6-8 wks post-CRT and at 1 & 2 years. Impr in ECS and its Swallowing Index (SI) & Eating Index (EI) were defined as increases of 5, 2 & 2 points, respectively, from baseline. PRO sample size provided ≥ 80% power with 1-sided 0.05 alpha & a chi-squared test to determine if the proportion of pts categorized as improved at 6-8 wks is ≥ 25% higher for the CRT+T arm. Correlation between pCR & impr in ECS score was evaluated via chi-squared test. Results: From 2010-2015, 203 HER2+ pts were randomized; 194 eligible. Of 171 PRO consenting pts, the ECS was completed by 162 (95%) at baseline, 108 (64%) 6-8 wks, 82 (49%) 1 year & 55 (33%) at 2 years. The main reason for FACT-E noncompliance was pt death. Patient & tumor characteristics were similar between arms. Median age was 63 years; 86% male; 96% white; 65% Zubrod 0, 80% cT3 & 71% cN1-2 (AJCC 7th ed). For ECS scores at 6-8 wks, the mean change (Δ) was higher (better) from baseline at 4.6 (95% CI: 1.3, 7.8) for the CRT+T arm vs 0.9 (95% CI: -2.7, 4.6) for the CRT arm; the proportion of pts with an impr in 6-8 wks ECS was higher on the CRT+T arm (46% vs 38% on the CRT arm) although not significantly different (p=0.39). Table 1 shows ECS, SI & EI scores for all timepoints. At 6-8 wks, 30% with a pCR had an impr in ECS vs 45% of nonpCR pts (p=0.18). There were no significant correlations between pCR and ECS, SI & EI impr at any time points. Conclusion: The addition of trastuzumab to trimodality therapy for localized HER2+ EAC did not significantly improve survival or PROs. ECS score improvement following therapy was not associated with a pCR. The higher proportion of pts with improved ECS at 6-8 weeks and 2 years in the CRT+T arm is interesting and suggests that HER2 may still be an important target to explore

Recommended Patient-Reported Core Set of Symptoms to Measure in Head and Neck Cancer Treatment Trials

We identified a standard core set of patient-reported symptoms and health-related quality-of-life (HRQOL) domains to be assessed in head and neck (H&N) cancer clinical trials. The core symptom and HRQOL domain scores were used to guide recommendations by a working group of experts as part of a National Cancer Institute Symptom Management and HRQOL Clinical Trials Planning Meeting. A PubMed search was conducted using the search terms of “health-related quality of life” and “head & neck cancer,” limited to publications from January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2010. Fifty-four articles were used to guide the choice of recommendations. Twenty-nine symptoms and nine domains were identified, from which 12 H&N-specific core symptoms and HRQOL domains were recommended: swallowing, oral pain, skin changes, dry mouth, dental health, opening mouth/trismus, taste, excess/thick mucous/saliva, shoulder disability/motion, voice/hoarseness, social domain, and functional domain. This core set of 12 H&N-specific, patient-reported symptoms and HRQOL domains should be assessed in future H&N cancer clinical trials

655MO Quality of life in patients with p16+ oropharyngeal cancer receiving accelerated radiotherapy (RT) with either cisplatin or cetuximab in NRG/RTOG 1016

Background: This phase 3 randomized non-inferiority de-escalation trial compared cetuximab (cetux) vs cisplatin (cis), concurrent with accelerated RT 70 Gy/6 weeks, in p16+ oropharyngeal cancer (OPC). Quality of life (QOL) was an important secondary endpoint. Methods: EORTC QLQ-C30/HN35 was completed at baseline, end of treatment, 3, 6, and 12 months post. The substudy aimed for 400 eligible patients. We report completion rates and compare by arm for change from baseline in each domain (0.05 two-sided alpha and MID of 10 points) using linear mixed models. Results: Consent was 91% (381/419 offered substudy); 6 protocol deviations excluded (n=375). No significant differences in patient/tumor characteristics were found by participation status. Completion rates (%) at the 5 times did not differ by arm (cis/cetux): 92/94, 74/77, 76/81, 76/81, and 73/74. The swallowing domain of HN35 (previously reported) did not differ significantly by arm. No significant difference was seen by arm for the 6-mo change from baseline on any domain. At end of RT (only), dry mouth was significantly worse for RT+cetux. At end of treatment, all domains showed statistically and clinically significant mean worsening across both arms except Emotional Functioning, Dyspnea, Diarrhea, and Teeth. Most domains returned within 10 points of baseline by 6 mo, with the following maintaining significant impairment: Senses (taste/smell), Social Eating, Opening Mouth, Dry Mouth, Sticky Saliva. At 12 mo post-treatment, worsening from baseline persisted for Senses, Dry Mouth, Sticky Saliva, and Weight Gain. Pain Killer use improved significantly from baseline to 3, 6, and 12 mo. Conclusions: Although replacing RT+cis with RT+cetux did not benefit QOL, this study has confirmed the responsiveness of EORTC QLQ-C30/HN35 to the effects of concurrent systemic/RT for OPC. Dry Mouth, Sticky Saliva, and Senses showed large, significant, and persistent impairments, and remain worthwhile targets for future de-escalation efforts. Domains related to eating (Swallowing, Appetite, Nutritional Supplements, Social Eating, Weight Loss) did not show sustained significant impairment on this instrument in this study. Clinical trial identification: NCT01302834

What do we know about the α/β for prostate cancer?

Since last decade, the debate on the parameter which reflects prostate cancer sensitivity to fractionation in a radiotherapy treatment, the α/β, has become extensive. Unlike most tumors, the low labeling indices (LI) and large potential doubling time that characterize the prostate tumor led some authors to consider that it may behave as a late responding tissue. So far, the existing studies with regard to this subject point to a low value of α/β, around 2.7 Gy, which may be considered as a therapeutic gain in relation to surrounding normal tissues by using fewer and larger fractions. The aim of this paper is to review several estimates that have been made in the last few years regarding the prostate cancer α/β both from clinical and experimental data, as well as the set of factors that have potentially influenced these evaluations

Methods for specifying the target difference in a randomised controlled trial : the Difference ELicitation in TriAls (DELTA) systematic review

Peer reviewedPublisher PD