Feasibility assessment of patient reporting of symptomatic adverse events in multicenter cancer clinical trials

IMPORTANCE: In cancer clinical trials, symptomatic adverse events (AEs), such as nausea, are reported by investigators rather than by patients. There is increasing interest to collect symptomatic AE data via patient-reported outcome (PRO) questionnaires, but it is unclear whether it is feasible to implement this approach in multicenter trials. OBJECTIVE: To examine whether patients are willing and able to report their symptomatic AEs in multicenter trials. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A total of 361 consecutive patients enrolled in any 1 of 9 US multicenter cancer treatment trials were invited to self-report 13 common symptomatic AEs using a PRO adaptation of the National Cancer Institute’s Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) via tablet computers at 5 successive clinic visits. Patient adherence was tracked with reasons for missed self-reports. Agreement with clinician AE reports was analyzed with weighted κ statistics. Patient and investigator perspectives were elicited by survey. The study was conducted from March 15, 2007, to August 11, 2011. Data analysis was performed from August 9, 2013, to March 21, 2014. RESULTS: Of the 361 patients invited to participate, 285 individuals enrolled, with a median age of 57 years (range, 24-88), 202 (74.3%) female, 241 (85.5%) white, 73 (26.8%) with a high school education or less, and 176 (64.7%) who reported regular internet use (denominators varied owing to missing data). Across all patients and trials, there were 1280 visits during which patients had an opportunity to self-report (ie, patients were alive and enrolled in a treatment trial at the time of the visit). Self-reports were completed at 1202 visits (93.9% overall adherence). Adherence was highest at baseline and declined over time (visit 1, 100%; visit 2, 96%; visit 3, 95%; visit 4, 91%; and visit 5, 85%). Reasons for missing PROs included institutional errors in 27 of 48 (56.3%) of the cases (eg, staff forgetting to bring computers to patients at visits), patients feeling “too ill” in 8 (16.7%), patient refusal in 8 (16.7%), and internet connectivity problems in 5 (10.4%). Patient-investigator CTCAE agreement was moderate or worse for most symptoms (most κ < 0.05), with investigators reporting fewer AEs than patients across symptoms. Most patients believed that the system was easy to use (234 [93.2%]) and useful (230 [93.1%]), and investigators thought that the patient-reported AEs were useful (133 [94.3%]) and accurate (119 [83.2%]). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Participants in multicenter cancer trials are willing and able to report their own symptomatic AEs at most clinic visits and report more AEs than investigators. This approach may improve the precision of AE reporting in cancer trials

RasGRP1 is a potential biomarker to stratify anti-EGFR therapy response in colorectal cancer.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most frequent neoplastic disorder and is a main cause of tumor-related mortality as many patients progress to stage IV metastatic CRC. Standard care consists of combination chemotherapy (FOLFIRI or FOLFOX). Patients with WT KRAS typing are eligible to receive anti-EGFR therapy combined with chemotherapy. Unfortunately, predicting efficacy of CRC anti-EGFR therapy has remained challenging. Here we uncover that the EGFR-pathway component RasGRP1 acts as CRC tumor suppressor in the context of aberrant Wnt signaling. We find that RasGRP1 suppresses EGF-driven proliferation of colonic epithelial organoids. Having established that RasGRP1 dosage levels impacts biology, we focused on CRC patients next. Mining five different data platforms, we establish that RasGRP1 expression levels decrease with CRC progression and predict poor clinical outcome of patients. Lastly, deletion of one or two Rasgrp1 alleles makes CRC spheroids more susceptible to EGFR inhibition. Retrospective analysis of the CALGB80203 clinical trial shows that addition of anti-EGFR therapy to chemotherapy significantly improves outcome for CRC patients when tumors express low RasGRP1 suppressor levels. In sum, RasGRP1 is a unique biomarker positioned in the EGFR pathway and of potential relevance to anti-EGFR therapy for CRC patients

Supplementary Material for: Phase I Trial of Sorafenib Following Liver Transplantation in Patients with High-Risk Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Liver transplantation offers excellent long-term survival for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients who fall within established criteria. For those outside such criteria, or with high-risk pathologic features in the explant, HCC recurrence rates are higher. We conducted a multicenter phase I trial of sorafenib in liver transplantation patients with high-risk HCC. Subjects had HCC outside the Milan criteria (pre- or post-transplant), poorly differentiated tumors, or vascular invasion. We used a standard 3+3 phase I design with a planned duration of treatment of 24 weeks. Correlative studies included the number of circulating endothelial cells (CECs), plasma biomarkers, and tumor expression of p-Erk, p-Akt, and c-Met in tissue micro-arrays. We enrolled 14 patients with a median age of 63 years. Of these, 93% were men and 71% had underlying hepatitis C virus (HCV) and 21% had HBV. The maximum tolerated dose of sorafenib was 200 mg BID. Grade 3-4 toxicities seen in >10% of subjects included leukopenia (21%), elevated gamma-glutamyl transferase (21%), hypertension (14%), hand-foot syndrome (14%) and diarrhea (14%). Over a median follow-up of 953 days, one patient died and four recurred. The mean CEC number at baseline was 21 cells/4 ml for those who recurred, and 80 cells/4 ml for those who did not (p=0.10). Mean soluble vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-2 levels decreased after 1 month on sorafenib (p=0.09), but did not correlate with recurrence. There was a trend for tumor c-Met expression to correlate with increased risk of recurrence. Post-transplant sorafenib was found to be feasible and tolerable at 200 mg PO BID. The effect of post-transplant sorafenib on recurrence-free survival is potentially promising but needs further validation in a larger study