Access to Clinical Trials Closer to Home Using Tele-health

The purpose of this chapter is to outline key considerations for increasing access to clinical trials for people with cancer living in rural and remote locations, and outline the contribution of tele-health models to facilitate study activity across rural and remote locations. Regional and rural group of the Clinical Oncology Society of Australia (COSA), the peak multidisciplinary cancer clinician body in Australia, has developed the Australasian Teletrial Model in collaboration with its stakeholders to improve rural access to clinical trials. Benefits of this model are not limited to regional, rural and remote systems. This model has the potential to connect larger centres even within the same city and improve the rate of recruitment of highly specialised clinical trials, including rare cancer trials. This model has been developed in consideration of the requirements for the proper conduct of clinical trials ensuring the protection of the rights and safety of trial participants and quality data for the demonstration of safe and efficacious cancer treatments. Ethical and safe conduct of clinical trials using this model requires that the following aspects are considered and addressed by implementation plans

Development of South Australian-Victorian Prostate Cancer Health Outcomes Research Dataset

Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer is the most commonly diagnosed and prevalent malignancy reported to Australian cancer registries, with numerous studies from single institutions summarizing patient outcomes at individual hospitals or States. In order to provide an overview of patterns of care of men with prostate cancer across multiple institutions in Australia, a specialized dataset was developed. This dataset, containing amalgamated data from South Australian and Victorian prostate cancer registries, is called the South Australian-Victorian Prostate Cancer Health Outcomes Research Dataset (SA-VIC PCHORD). RESULTS: A total of 13,598 de-identified records of men with prostate cancer diagnosed and consented between 2008 and 2013 in South Australia and Victoria were merged into the SA-VIC PCHORD. SA-VIC PCHORD contains detailed information about socio-demographic, diagnostic and treatment characteristics of patients with prostate cancer in South Australia and Victoria. Data from individual registries are available to researchers and can be accessed under individual data access policies in each State. CONCLUSIONS: The SA-VIC PCHORD will be used for numerous studies summarizing trends in diagnostic characteristics, survival and patterns of care in men with prostate cancer in Victoria and South Australia. It is expected that in the future the SA-VIC PCHORD will become a principal component of the recently developed bi-national Australian and New Zealand Prostate Cancer Outcomes Registry to collect and report patterns of care and standardised patient reported outcome measures of men nation-wide in Australia and New Zealand

Clinical Activity of Ripretinib in Patients with Advanced Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumor Harboring Heterogeneous KIT/PDGFRA Mutations in the Phase III INVICTUS Study

Ripretinib; Mutacions; Neoplàsies gastrointestinalsRipretinib; Mutations; Gastrointestinal neoplasmsRipretinib; Mutaciones; Neoplasias gastrointestinalesPurpose: Most patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) have activating mutations in KIT/PDGFRA and are initially responsive to tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI). The acquisition of secondary mutations leads to refractory/relapsed disease. This study reports the results of an analysis from the phase III INVICTUS study (NCT03353753) characterizing the genomic heterogeneity of tumors from patients with advanced GIST and evaluating ripretinib efficacy across KIT/PDGFRA mutation subgroups. Patients and Methods: Tumor tissue and liquid biopsy samples that captured circulating tumor DNA were collected prior to study enrollment and sequenced using next-generation sequencing. Subgroups were determined by KIT/PDGFRA mutations and correlation of clinical outcomes and KIT/PDGFRA mutational status was assessed. Results: Overall, 129 patients enrolled (ripretinib 150 mg once daily, n = 85; placebo, n = 44). The most common primary mutation subgroup detected by combined tissue and liquid biopsies were in KIT exon 11 (ripretinib, 61.2%; placebo, 77.3%) and KIT exon 9 (ripretinib, 18.8%; placebo, 15.9%). Patients receiving ripretinib demonstrated progression-free survival (PFS) benefit versus placebo regardless of mutation status (HR 0.16) and in all assessed subgroups in Kaplan–Meier PFS analysis (exon 11, P < 0.0001; exon 9, P = 0.0023; exon 13, P < 0.0001; exon 17, P < 0.0001). Among patients with wild-type KIT/PDGFRA by tumor tissue, PFS ranged from 2 to 23 months for ripretinib versus 0.9 to 10.1 months for placebo. Conclusions: Ripretinib provided clinically meaningful activity across mutation subgroups in patients with advanced GIST, demonstrating that ripretinib inhibits a broad range of KIT/PDGFRA mutations in patients with advanced GIST who were previously treated with three or more TKIs

Patient-reported outcomes in individuals with advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumor treated with ripretinib in the fourth-line setting: analysis from the phase 3 INVICTUS trial

Alopecia; Quality of life; RipretinibAlopecia; Calidad de vida; RipretinibAlopècia; Qualitat de vida; RipretinibBackground: Ripretinib is a novel switch-control kinase inhibitor that inhibits KIT and PDGFRA signaling. In the INVICTUS phase 3 trial, ripretinib increased median progression-free survival and prolonged overall survival vs. placebo in ≥ fourth-line advanced GIST. Here, we report prespecified analysis of quality of life (QoL) as assessed by patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures and an exploratory analysis evaluating the impact of alopecia on QoL. Methods: In the INVICTUS trial (NCT03353753), QoL was assessed using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30; physical function, role function, overall health, and overall QoL) and the EuroQoL 5-Dimension 5-Level (EQ-5D-5 L; visual analogue scale). Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) models compared changes in scores from baseline to treatment cycle 2, day 1 within and between ripretinib and placebo. Within the ripretinib arm, repeated measures models assessed the impact of alopecia on QoL. Results: Patients receiving ripretinib maintained QoL (as assessed by the EORTC QLQ-C30 and EQ-5D-5 L PRO measures) from baseline to cycle 2, day 1 whereas QoL declined with placebo, resulting in clinically significant differences between treatments (nominal P < 0.01). The most common treatment-emergent adverse event with ripretinib was alopecia; however, QoL was similarly maintained out to treatment cycle 10, day 1 in patients receiving ripretinib who developed alopecia and those who did not. Conclusion: PRO assessments in the INVICTUS trial suggest that patients on ripretinib maintain their QoL out to C2D1, unlike patients receiving placebo. Longitudinal QoL was maintained for patients receiving ripretinib out to cycle 10, day 1 (approximately 8 months; past the point of median progression-free survival with ripretinib [6.3 months]), even if the patients developed alopecia.This study and writing support were sponsored by Deciphera Pharmaceuticals, LLC, Waltham, MA, USA. MCH received partial salary support from a VA Merit Award Grant (2I01BX000338-05)

Patient-reported outcomes and tolerability in patients receiving ripretinib versus sunitinib after treatment with imatinib in INTRIGUE, a phase 3, open-label study

Gastrointestinal stromal tumours; Patient reported outcome measures; Protein kinase inhibitorsTumores del estroma gastrointestinal; Medidas de resultado informadas por el paciente; Inhibidores de proteína quinasaTumors de l'estroma gastrointestinal; Mesures de resultat informades pel pacient; Inhibidors de la proteïna cinasaPurpose In the INTRIGUE trial, ripretinib showed no significant difference versus sunitinib in progression-free survival for patients with advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumour (GIST) previously treated with imatinib. We compared the impact of these treatments on health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Patients and methods Patients were randomised 1:1 to once-daily ripretinib 150 mg or once-daily sunitinib 50 mg (4 weeks on/2 weeks off). Patient-reported outcomes were assessed using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire for Cancer-30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) questionnaire at day (D)1, and D29 of all cycles until treatment discontinuation. Change from baseline was calculated. Time without symptoms or toxicity (TWiST) was estimated as the mean number of days without progression, death, or grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events per patient over 1 year of follow-up. Results Questionnaire completion at baseline was 88.1% (199/226) for ripretinib and 87.7% (199/227) for sunitinib and remained high for enrolled patients throughout treatment. Patients receiving sunitinib demonstrated within-cycle variation in self-reported HRQoL, corresponding to the on/off dosing regimen. Patients receiving ripretinib reported better HRQoL at D29 assessments than patients receiving sunitinib on all scales except constipation. HRQoL was similar between treatments at D1 assessments, following 2 weeks without treatment for sunitinib patients. TWiST was greater for ripretinib patients (173 versus 126 days). Conclusion Patients receiving ripretinib experienced better HRQoL than patients receiving sunitinib during the dosing period and similar HRQoL to patients who had not received sunitinib for 2 weeks for all QLQ-C30 domains except constipation. Ripretinib may provide clinically meaningful benefit to patients with advanced GIST previously treated with imatinib.This study was sponsored by Deciphera Pharmaceuticals, LLC. This article was based on the original study INTRIGUE (NCT03673501) sponsored by Deciphera Pharmaceuticals, LLC. Support for third-party writing assistance for this article, provided by Hannah L Fox, PhD, and Alex Emerson, BA, of Costello Medical, Boston, MA, USA, was funded by Deciphera Pharmaceuticals, LLC in accordance with Good Publication Practice (GPP) 2022 guidelines (https://www.ismpp.org/gpp-2022)

The cost effectiveness of bevacizumab when added to capecitabine, with or without mitomycin-C, in first line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: results from the Australasian phase III MAX study

Background: Based on the clinical data, bevacizumab has been approved in Australia and globally for the treatment of advanced colorectal cancer. However, limited evidence exists for its cost-effectiveness. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the cost effectiveness of adding bevacizumab to capecitabine monotherapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer, using data from the prospective economic evaluation conducted alongside the MAX trial. Methods: Individual patient level data on resource use and progression free survival were prospectively collected in the phase III MAX trial. Resource use data were collected for the period between randomisation and disease progression, and unit costs were assigned from the perspective of the Australian health care funder. Effectiveness was measured in quality adjusted progression free survival years, with utility scores obtained from both the community valued EQ-5D questionnaire and the patient valued UBQ-C questionnaire. Progression free survival was used as a secondary effectiveness measure. Results: The addition of bevacizumab to capecitabine monotherapy cost approximately $192,156 (95$135,619 to $326,894) per quality adjusted progression free survival year gained when using publicly listed pharmaceutical prices and utility values from the EQ-5D questionnaire. This decreased to$149,455 (95% CI, $100,356 to$245,910) when values from the UBQ-C questionnaire were applied. The incremental cost per progression free survival year was $145,059 (95$106,703 to $233,225). Conclusions: Bevacizumab was not found to be cost effective at its listed price, based on results from the MAX trial.Roche Products Pty Lt

The cost effectiveness of bevacizumab when added to capecitabine, with or without mitomycin-C, in first line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: results from the Australasian phase III MAX study

Background: Based on the clinical data, bevacizumab has been approved in Australia and globally for the treatment of advanced colorectal cancer. However, limited evidence exists for its cost-effectiveness. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the cost effectiveness of adding bevacizumab to capecitabine monotherapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer, using data from the prospective economic evaluation conducted alongside the MAX trial. Methods: Individual patient level data on resource use and progression free survival were prospectively collected in the phase III MAX trial. Resource use data were collected for the period between randomisation and disease progression, and unit costs were assigned from the perspective of the Australian health care funder. Effectiveness was measured in quality adjusted progression free survival years, with utility scores obtained from both the community valued EQ-5D questionnaire and the patient valued UBQ-C questionnaire. Progression free survival was used as a secondary effectiveness measure. Results: The addition of bevacizumab to capecitabine monotherapy cost approximately $192,156 (95$135,619 to $326,894) per quality adjusted progression free survival year gained when using publicly listed pharmaceutical prices and utility values from the EQ-5D questionnaire. This decreased to$149,455 (95% CI, $100,356 to$245,910) when values from the UBQ-C questionnaire were applied. The incremental cost per progression free survival year was $145,059 (95$106,703 to $233,225). Conclusions: Bevacizumab was not found to be cost effective at its listed price, based on results from the MAX trial.Roche Products Pty Lt

Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Outcomes by Age Among ARCAD First- and Second-Line Clinical Trials

Metastatic Colorectal Cancer; OutcomesCáncer colorrectal metastásico; ResultadosCàncer colorrectal metastàtic; ResultatsBackground We evaluated the time to progression (TTP) and survival outcomes of second-line therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer among adults aged 70 years and older compared with younger adults following progression on first-line clinical trials. Methods Associations between clinical and disease characteristics, time to initial progression, and rate of receipt of second-line therapy were evaluated. TTP and overall survival (OS) were compared between older and younger adults in first- and second-line trials by Cox regression, adjusting for age, sex, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status, number of metastatic sites and presence of metastasis in the lung, liver, or peritoneum. All statistical tests were 2-sided. Results Older adults comprised 16.4% of patients on first-line trials (870 total older adults aged >70 years; 4419 total younger adults aged ≤70 years, on first-line trials). Older adults and those with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status >0 were less likely to receive second-line therapy than younger adults. Odds of receiving second-line therapy decreased by 11% for each additional decade of life in multivariable analysis (odds ratio = 1.11, 95% confidence interval = 1.02 to 1.21, P = .01). Older and younger adults enrolled in second-line trials experienced similar median TTP and median OS (median TTP = 5.1 vs 5.2 months, respectively; median OS = 11.6 vs 12.4 months, respectively). Conclusions Older adults were less likely to receive second-line therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer, though we did not observe a statistical difference in survival outcomes vs younger adults following second-line therapy. Further study should examine factors affecting decisions to treat older adults with second-line therapy. Inclusion of geriatric assessment may provide better criteria regarding the risks and benefits of second-line therapy.The National Cancer Institute Gastrointestinal Cancer Center Specialized Programs of Research Excellence (SPORE) Career Development Award (5P50CA127003-08) funded Dr McCleary’s effort. The ARCAD Foundation funded data collection and analysis

Irinotecan or FOLFIRI for 2nd line colorectal

Background Second-line treatment with irinotecan for advanced or metastatic colorectal cancer prolongs survival. It is uncertain whether irinotecan is better administered with 5- fluorouracil or alone in patients previously treated with a fluoropyrimidine. We compared toxicity (particularly diarrhoea), quality of life, and efficacy of combination chemotherapy and irinotecan in these patients. Methods In DaVINCI, a randomised phase II trial, patients with advanced colorectal cancer were randomly allocated to: combination therapy (FOLFIRI), irinotecan (180 mg/m2 IV over 90 min, day 1), 5-fluorouracil (400 mg/m2 IV bolus and 2400 mg/m2 by 46-hour infusion from day 1) and folinic acid (20 mg/m2 IV bolus, day 1), 2-weekly; or single-agent, irinotecan (350 mg/m2 IV over 90 min), 3-weekly. Toxicity was evaluated every treatment cycle; QOL and response 6 weekly. Analysis was by intention to treat. Results were also combined with those of other trials. Findings We randomised 44 patients to combination and 45 to single-agent. The most common toxicity was complete alopecia (single-agent 37%, combination 14%, P<0.02). Eight patients in the irinotecan arm and 4 in the combination arm had grade 3–4 diarrhoea (P=0.24). The treatment groups did not differ significantly in overall QOL changes, response rate, or progression free or overall survival. In a systematic review of 29 trials of second-line irinotecan-based treatment, single-agent irinotecan was associated with more diarrhoea and alopecia than the combination, but efficacy was similar. Interpretation Combination treatment compared with single-agent irinotecan appears to reduce the rateof complete alopecia and diarrhoea without compromising efficacy on clinical outcomes.Australasian Gastro-Intestinal Trials Grou

Randomized trial of short-course radiotherapy versus long-course chemoradiation comparing rates of local recurrence in patients with T3 rectal cancer: Trans-Tasman Radiation Oncology Group Trial 01.04

Glioblastoma is associated with a poor prognosis in the elderly. Survival has been shown to increase among patients 70 years of age or younger when temozolomide chemotherapy is added to standard radiotherapy (60 Gy over a period of 6 weeks). In elderly patients, more convenient shorter courses of radiotherapy are commonly used, but the benefit of adding temozolomide to a shorter course of radiotherapy is unknown