Perspectives of patients with advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer on symptoms, impacts on daily activities, and thresholds for meaningful change: a qualitative research study

IntroductionAdvanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is associated with significant symptom burden. It is important to understand the impact of these disease-and treatment-related symptoms on patients’ daily lives and explore from a patient perspective what constitutes a meaningful change in NSCLC symptoms.MethodsPatient experience of advanced or metastatic NSCLC was explored in this prospective, non-interventional qualitative research study recruiting patients from the United States (US). Interviews were conducted to explore the most important symptoms, daily life impacts, and patients’ perspectives of what constitutes meaningful change when considering their current symptoms versus 6–12 months prior, based on the Patient Global Impression of Severity (PGI-S) and Patient Global Impression of Change (PGI-C) items.ResultsBetween February and April 2022, 19 US-based patients with Stage IV NSCLC were recruited; 95% were female, 63% were White, 79% had been diagnosed >1 year prior, and 63% were receiving targeted therapy. Over half the patients indicated their most important symptoms were fatigue, shortness of breath, and cough. Patient differentiation between whether symptoms were disease- or treatment-related lacked concordance, and often patients were unable to distinguish the two. The most frequently mentioned impacts of these symptoms on patients’ daily lives were difficulty walking, sleep disturbance, anxiety/depression, impact on relationships, and difficulty doing daily tasks. Most patients considered a one-point change on the PGI-S or PGI-C to be meaningful based on rating their symptom severity at the time of the interview compared with 6–12 months before the interview.ConclusionBased on their own symptom experience, patients with advanced or metastatic NSCLC indicated a one-point threshold for meaningful change, whether improvement or worsening. This suggests a one-point change on the PGI-S or PGI-C may be a potential anchor for patient-reported outcome (PRO) endpoints used in clinical trials. It is important to use PRO instruments that capture the symptoms and impacts identified as most important to patients. These findings highlight the importance of using qualitative methods to assess disease-related symptoms, treatment-related side effects, and the impacts on daily life for patients with advanced or metastatic NSCLC, underscoring how qualitative assessments can complement quantitative PRO instruments for evaluating clinical trials

Adjunctive rifampicin for Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia (ARREST): a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia is a common cause of severe community-acquired and hospital-acquired infection worldwide. We tested the hypothesis that adjunctive rifampicin would reduce bacteriologically confirmed treatment failure or disease recurrence, or death, by enhancing early S aureus killing, sterilising infected foci and blood faster, and reducing risks of dissemination and metastatic infection. METHODS: In this multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, adults (≥18 years) with S aureus bacteraemia who had received ≤96 h of active antibiotic therapy were recruited from 29 UK hospitals. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via a computer-generated sequential randomisation list to receive 2 weeks of adjunctive rifampicin (600 mg or 900 mg per day according to weight, oral or intravenous) versus identical placebo, together with standard antibiotic therapy. Randomisation was stratified by centre. Patients, investigators, and those caring for the patients were masked to group allocation. The primary outcome was time to bacteriologically confirmed treatment failure or disease recurrence, or death (all-cause), from randomisation to 12 weeks, adjudicated by an independent review committee masked to the treatment. Analysis was intention to treat. This trial was registered, number ISRCTN37666216, and is closed to new participants. FINDINGS: Between Dec 10, 2012, and Oct 25, 2016, 758 eligible participants were randomly assigned: 370 to rifampicin and 388 to placebo. 485 (64%) participants had community-acquired S aureus infections, and 132 (17%) had nosocomial S aureus infections. 47 (6%) had meticillin-resistant infections. 301 (40%) participants had an initial deep infection focus. Standard antibiotics were given for 29 (IQR 18-45) days; 619 (82%) participants received flucloxacillin. By week 12, 62 (17%) of participants who received rifampicin versus 71 (18%) who received placebo experienced treatment failure or disease recurrence, or died (absolute risk difference -1·4%, 95% CI -7·0 to 4·3; hazard ratio 0·96, 0·68-1·35, p=0·81). From randomisation to 12 weeks, no evidence of differences in serious (p=0·17) or grade 3-4 (p=0·36) adverse events were observed; however, 63 (17%) participants in the rifampicin group versus 39 (10%) in the placebo group had antibiotic or trial drug-modifying adverse events (p=0·004), and 24 (6%) versus six (2%) had drug interactions (p=0·0005). INTERPRETATION: Adjunctive rifampicin provided no overall benefit over standard antibiotic therapy in adults with S aureus bacteraemia. FUNDING: UK National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment