Wireless Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation (TENS) for Chronic Chemotherapy-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy (CIPN): A Proof-of-Concept Randomized Clinical Trial.

Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) affects approximately 30 to 60% of people who receive neurotoxic chemotherapy. CIPN is associated with impaired quality of life and function and has few effective treatments. This 6-site, subject and assessor-blinded randomized clinical trial (RCT) was designed to assess 1) preliminary efficacy (ie, alpha pre-specified at .2) of a wearable, app-controlled, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) device for chronic CIPN and 2) feasibility of conducting a confirmatory trial within the National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP) (NCT04367480). The primary outcome was the EORTC-CIPN20. The main secondary outcomes were individual symptoms assessed daily (via 0-10 numeric rating scales). The primary analysis was an analysis of covariance (outcome: EORTC-CIPN20, fixed effect: arm, covariates: baseline EORTC-CIPN20 and site). Secondary analyses used a similar analysis of covariance models (excluding site) for each symptom on subgroups of subjects with ≥4 out of 10 for that symptom at baseline. 142 eligible subjects were randomized and received a device; 130 (91%) completed the study. The difference between groups in the EORCT-CIPN20 at the endpoint (placebo-active) was 1.05 (95% Confidence Interval: -.56, 2.67; P = .199). The difference between groups for the individual symptoms was as follows: hot/burning pain: 1.37 (-.33, 3.08; P = .112), sharp/shooting pain: 1.21 (-.37, 2.79; P = .128), cramping: 1.35 (-.32, 3.02; P = .110), tingling: .23 (-.61, 1.08; P = .587), numbness: .27 (-.51, 1.05; P = .492). An RCT of an app-controlled TENS device for chronic CIPN with excellent retention is feasible in the NCORP. Preliminary efficacy evidence suggests that TENS is promising for pain and cramping from CIPN. A confirmatory RCT of TENS for painful CIPN is highly warranted. PERSPECTIVE: Daily, home-based TENS therapy demonstrates promising efficacy for painful CIPN symptoms in this proof-of-concept randomized clinical trial. Future confirmatory trial is warranted.

External Validation of Risk Factors for Unplanned Hospitalization in Older Adults With Advanced Cancer Receiving Chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Older adults (age ≥65 years) receiving chemotherapy are at risk for hospitalization. Predictors of unplanned hospitalization among older adults receiving chemotherapy for cancer were recently published using data from a study conducted by the Cancer and Aging Research Group (CARG). Our study aimed to externally validate these predictors in an independent cohort including older adults with advanced cancer receiving chemotherapy. METHODS: This validation cohort included patients (n=369) from the GAP70+ trial usual care arm. Enrolled patients were aged ≥70 years with incurable cancer and were starting a new line of chemotherapy. Previously identified risk factors proposed by the CARG study were ≥3 comorbidities, albumin level <3.5 g/dL, creatinine clearance <60 mL/min, gastrointestinal cancer, ≥5 medications, requiring assistance with activities of daily activities (ADLs), and having someone available to take them to the doctor (ie, presence of social support). The primary outcome was unplanned hospitalization within 3 months of treatment initiation. Multivariable logistic regression was applied including the 7 identified risk factors. Discriminative ability of the fitted model was performed by calculating the area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUC) curve. RESULTS: Mean age of the cohort was 77 years, 45% of patients were women, and 29% experienced unplanned hospitalization within the first 3 months of treatment. The proportions of hospitalized patients with 0-3, 4-5, and 6-7 identified risk factors were 24%, 28%, and 47%, respectively (P=.04). Impaired ADLs (odds ratio, 1.76; 95% CI, 1.04-2.99) and albumin level <3.5 g/dL (odds ratio, 2.23; 95% CI, 1.37-3.62) were significantly associated with increased odds of unplanned hospitalization. The AUC of the model, including the 7 identified risk factors, was 0.65 (95% CI, 0.59-0.71). CONCLUSIONS: The presence of a higher number of risk factors was associated with increased odds of unplanned hospitalization. This association was largely driven by impairment in ADLs and low albumin level. Validated predictors of unplanned hospitalization can help with counseling and shared decision-making with patients and their caregivers. CLINICALTRIALS: gov identifier: NCT02054741.

Communication About Fall Risk in Community Oncology Practice: The Role of Geriatric Assessment.

PURPOSE: Falls are a modifiable source of morbidity for older adults with cancer, yet are underassessed in oncology practice. In this secondary analysis of a nationwide cluster-randomized controlled trial, we examined characteristics associated with patient-oncologist conversations about falls, and whether oncologist knowledge of geriatric assessment (GA) resulted in more conversations. METHODS: Eligible patients (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02107443) were age ≥ 70 years, had stage III/IV solid tumor or lymphoma, were being treated with noncurative treatment intent, and ≥ 1 GA domain impairment. Patients in both arms underwent GA. At practices randomly assigned to the intervention arm, oncologists were provided a GA summary with management recommendations. In both arms, patients had one clinical encounter audio-recorded, transcribed, and coded to categorize whether a conversation about falls occurred. Generalized linear mixed models adjusted for arm, practice site, and other important covariates were used to generate proportions and odds ratios (ORs) from the full sample. RESULTS: Of 541 patients (intervention N = 293 and usual care N = 248, mean age: 77 years, standard deviation: 5.3), 528 had evaluable audio recordings. More patients had conversations about falls in the intervention versus usual care arm (61.3% v 10.3%, P < .001). Controlling for the intervention and practice site, history of falls (OR, 2.1; 95% CI, 1.3 to 3.6; P = .005) and impaired physical performance (OR, 4.7; 95% CI, 1.7 to 12.8; P = .002) were significantly associated with patient-oncologist conversations about falls. CONCLUSION: GA intervention increased conversations about falls. History of falls and impaired physical performance were associated with patient-oncologist conversations about falls in community oncology practice.

Association of Oncologist-Patient Communication With Functional Status and Physical Performance in Older Adults: A Secondary Analysis of a Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: The functional status and physical performance of older adults with cancer are underassessed and undertreated despite the high prevalence of impaired functional status and physical performance in this population and their associations with chemotherapy-induced toxic effects and mortality. Objective: To examine the association between providing oncologists with a geriatric assessment (GA) summary with recommendations and having oncologist-patient conversations about functional and physical performance. Design, Setting, and Participants: Data for this secondary analysis were collected from October 29, 2014, to April 28, 2017, for a national cluster randomized clinical trial conducted by the University of Rochester Cancer Center National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program evaluating the effect of a GA intervention on patient satisfaction with communication about aging-related concerns. There were 17 practice clusters in the intervention group and 14 in the usual care group. All 541 participants underwent a GA including standardized functional and physical performance measures and had 1 clinical encounter audio-recorded, transcribed, and blindly coded to categorize conversations by GA domain. Participants were aged 70 years or older, with a stage III or IV solid tumor or lymphoma with palliative treatment intent, and impairment in 1 or more GA domain. Statistical analysis was performed from August 18, 2020, to January 10, 2022. Interventions: Oncologist practices randomized to the intervention received a GA summary and validated recommendations for each patient prior to the audio-recorded clinical encounter. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary analysis of this clinical trial assessed the effect of the intervention on patient satisfaction with oncologist communication about aging-related concerns. This secondary analysis assessed the post hoc hypothesis that the intervention would be associated with an increase in the proportion of patients having conversations with their oncologists and receiving oncologist recommendations specific to functional and physical performance concerns. Results: A total of 541 patients (276 men [51%]; mean [SD] age, 77.5 [5.2] years [range, 70-96 years]) were analyzed at baseline. Excluding 13 patients without audio recordings, 86% of patients (95% CI, 78%-91%) in the intervention group vs 59% of patients (95% CI, 47%-69%; P < .001) receiving usual care had conversations about functional or physical performance. Conversations were more frequently initiated by oncologists in the intervention group (84%; 95% CI, 77%-90%) than oncologists in the usual care group (58%; 95% CI, 45%-70%; P < .001). Oncologists in the intervention group were more likely to address patients' concerns (43%; 95% CI, 33%-53%) than oncologists in the usual care group (17%; 95% CI, 10%-26%; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: In this secondary analysis of a cluster randomized clinical trial, providing oncologists with a GA summary was associated with an increase in the number of oncologist-patient conversations about functional and physical performance-related concerns with recommendations to address these concerns. These findings support the use of the GA summary and recommendations as important tools in caring for older adults with advanced cancer and functional or physical impairments. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02107443.

A prospective trial of abiraterone acetate plus prednisone in Black and White men with metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Retrospective analyses of randomized trials suggest that Black men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) have longer survival than White men. The authors conducted a prospective study of abiraterone acetate plus prednisone to explore outcomes by race. METHODS: This race-stratified, multicenter study estimated radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) in Black and White men with mCRPC. Secondary end points included prostate-specific antigen (PSA) kinetics, overall survival (OS), and safety. Exploratory analysis included genome-wide genotyping to identify single nucleotide polymorphisms associated with progression in a model incorporating genetic ancestry. One hundred patients self-identified as White (n = 50) or Black (n = 50) were enrolled. Eligibility criteria were modified to facilitate the enrollment of individual Black patients. RESULTS: The median rPFS for Black and White patients was 16.6 and 16.8 months, respectively; their times to PSA progression (TTP) were 16.6 and 11.5 months, respectively; and their OS was 35.9 and 35.7 months, respectively. Estimated rates of PSA decline by ≥50% in Black and White patients were 74% and 66%, respectively; and PSA declines to <0.2 ng/mL were 26% and 10%, respectively. Rates of grade 3 and 4 hypertension, hypokalemia, and hyperglycemia were higher in Black men. CONCLUSIONS: Multicenter prospective studies by race are feasible in men with mCRPC but require less restrictive eligibility. Despite higher comorbidity rates, Black patients demonstrated rPFS and OS similar to those of White patients and trended toward greater TTP and PSA declines, consistent with retrospective reports. Importantly, Black men may have higher side-effect rates than White men. This exploratory genome-wide analysis of TTP identified a possible candidate marker of ancestry-dependent treatment outcomes.

Caregiver-Oncologist Prognostic Concordance, Caregiver Mastery, and Caregiver Psychological Health and Quality of Life.

BACKGROUND: Caregivers of adults with cancer often report a different understanding of the patient's prognosis than the oncologist. We examine the associations of caregiver-oncologist prognostic concordance with caregiver depressive symptoms, distress, and quality of life (QoL). We also explore whether these relationships differed by caregiver environment mastery, an individual's sense of control, and effectiveness in managing life situations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used data from a national geriatric assessment cluster-randomized trial (URCC 13070) that recruited patients aged 70 years and older with incurable cancer considering any line of cancer treatment at community oncology practices, their caregivers, and their oncologists. At enrollment, caregivers and oncologists estimated the patient's prognosis (0-6 months, 7-12 months, 1-2 years, 2-5 years, and >5 years; identical responses were concordant). Caregivers completed the Ryff's environmental mastery at enrollment. At 4-6 weeks, caregivers completed the Patient Health Questionnaire-2 (depressive symptoms), distress thermometer, and 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey (quality of life [QoL]). We used generalized estimating equations in models adjusted for covariates. We then assessed the moderation effect of caregiver mastery. RESULTS: Of 411 caregiver-oncologist dyads (mean age = 66.5 years), 369 provided responses and 28% were concordant. Prognostic concordance was associated with greater caregiver depressive symptoms (ß = 0.30; p = .04) but not distress or QoL. A significant moderation effect for caregiver depressive symptoms was found between concordance and mastery (p = .01). Specifically, among caregivers with low mastery (below median), concordance was associated with greater depressive symptoms (ß = 0.68; p = .003). CONCLUSIONS: Caregiver-oncologist prognostic concordance was associated with caregiver depressive symptoms. We found a novel moderating effect of caregiver mastery on the relationship between concordance and caregiver depressive symptoms. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Caregiver-oncologist prognostic concordance is associated with greater caregiver depressive symptoms, particularly in those with low caregiver mastery. When discussing prognosis with caregivers, physicians should be aware that prognostic understanding may affect caregiver psychological health and should assess their depressive symptoms. In addition, while promoting accurate prognostic understanding, physicians should also identify strengths and build resilience among caregivers.

Associations of Uncertainty With Psychological Health and Quality of Life in Older Adults With Advanced Cancer.

CONTEXT: Older adults with advanced cancer face uncertainty related to their disease and treatment. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the associations of uncertainty with psychological health and quality of life (QoL) in older adults with advanced cancer. METHODS: Secondary cross-sectional analysis of baseline data from a national clustered geriatric assessment trial. Patients 70 years and older with advanced cancer considering a new line of chemotherapy were recruited. We measured uncertainty using the modified nine-item Mishel Uncertainty in Illness Scale. Dependent variables included anxiety (Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7), depression (Generalized Depression Scale-15), distress (distress thermometer), QoL (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General), and emotional well-being (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General subscale). We used multivariate linear regression analyses to evaluate the association of uncertainty with each dependent variable. We conducted a partial least squares analysis with a variable importance in projection (VIP) plot to assess the contribution of individual variables to the model. Variables with a VIP <0.8 were considered less influential. RESULTS: We included 527 patients (median age 76 years; range 70-96). In multivariate analyses, higher levels of uncertainty were significantly associated with greater anxiety (ß = 0.11; SE = 0.04), depression (ß = 0.09; SE = 0.02), distress (ß = 0.12; SE = 0.02), as well as lower QoL (ß = -1.08; SE = 0.11) and emotional well-being (ß = -0.29; SE = 0.03); the effect sizes were considered small. Uncertainty items related to disease and treatment were most strongly associated with psychological health and QoL scores (all VIP >0.8). CONCLUSION: Uncertainty among older patients with advanced cancer is associated with worse psychological health and QoL. Tailored uncertainty management strategies are warranted.

Complete Response to Dual Immunotherapy in a Young Adult with Metastatic Alveolar Soft Part Sarcoma Enabled by a Drug Recovery Program in a Community Practice.

Alveolar soft part sarcoma (ASPS) is an extremely rare tumor that frequently occurs in adolescent and young adults (AYA). Survival is poor for patients with metastatic and/or relapsed disease not amenable to local control, and limited therapeutic options are available. A major barrier to cancer care in the United States AYA population is lack of access to coordinated care and appropriate therapies for those who lack insurance or who are underinsured. We report a 25-year-old unemployed, uninsured, single mother who presented with a 12.8 × 21 cm soft tissue thigh mass with heterogeneous avidity, max standardized uptake value of 9, with metastatic disease to the ipsilateral inguinal lymph nodes and to the bilateral lungs. After local control of the primary mass was obtained, a recently developed, comprehensive drug replacement program (DRP) was used to gain access to nivolumab, and after frank progression was noted, ipilimumab was added every 6 weeks. No biomarkers associated with response to immunotherapy were identified. After four cycles, a complete response was observed and patient remains disease free 36 months after beginning dual immunotherapy treatment. We obtained immunotherapy agents through a DRP and describe the development and the utility of this program in the community setting. Our report highlights both first documented sustained complete response to sequenced immunotherapy in an AYA with ASPS as well as a comprehensive DRP, which enabled access to therapy for our patient.

Effect of Erlotinib Plus Bevacizumab vs Erlotinib Alone on Progression-Free Survival in Patients With Advanced EGFR-Mutant Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Phase 2 Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: Erlotinib is a standard first-line therapy for patients with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutant non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Median progression-free survival (PFS) with erlotinib is approximately 10 months. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether adding bevacizumab to erlotinib treatment results in superior progression-free survival compared with erlotinib alone. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This phase 2 randomized clinical trial compared erlotinib plus bevacizumab with erlotinib alone in EGFR-mutant NSCLC. The trial was conducted in 17 US academic and community medical centers among 88 patients with EGFR exon 19 deletion or exon 21 L858R mutation based on local testing and stage 4 NSCLC who were eligible for bevacizumab. Patients were enrolled between November 2, 2012, and August 22, 2016, and followed up for a median (range) of 33 (0.7-62.5) months. Data were analyzed on August 28, 2018, and included data from November 2, 2012, to August 20, 2018. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized with equal allocation to 150 mg of oral erlotinib daily alone or with 15 mg/kg of intravenous bevacizumab every 3 weeks. Study therapy continued until disease progression, unacceptable adverse event, or withdrawal of consent. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was PFS as assessed by the investigator; secondary outcomes were objective response rate (ORR), adverse events, and overall survival (OS). Analysis was designed to detect a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.667 for PFS (an improvement from a median PFS of 10 to 15 months). RESULTS: Among 88 patients enrolled, the median (range) age was 63 (31-84) years; 62 patients (70%) were female; 75 (85%) were white, 8 (9%) were African American, 3 (3%) were Asian, and for 2 (2%), data on race were not available. Forty-eight patients (55%) were never smokers, 45 patients (51%) were of Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 1, and 59 patients (67%) had EGFR exon 19 deletion. Compared with erlotinib, the combination did not result in a significant difference in PFS (HR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.50-1.31; P = .39; median PFS 17.9 [combination] and 13.5 months [erlotinib]), ORR (81% vs 83%; P = .81), and OS (HR, 1.41; 95% CI, 0.71-2.81; P = .33; median OS, 32.4 months [combination] and 50.6 months [erlotinib]). Adverse events of grade 3 or higher observed in 5 or more patients in the combination and erlotinib arms were skin eruption in 11 (26%) vs 7 (16%) patients, diarrhea in 4 (9%) vs 6 (13%) patients, hypertension in 17 (40%) vs 9 (20%) patients, and proteinuria in 5 (12%) vs 0 (0%) patients. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Erlotinib plus bevacizumab compared with erlotinib did not result in a significant improvement in PFS in EGFR-mutant NSCLC. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01532089.

Beliefs About Advanced Cancer Curability in Older Patients, Their Caregivers, and Oncologists.

BACKGROUND: Ensuring older patients with advanced cancer and their oncologists have similar beliefs about curability is important. We investigated discordance in beliefs about curability in patient-oncologist and caregiver-oncologist dyads. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used baseline data from a cluster randomized trial assessing whether geriatric assessment improves communication and quality of life in older patients with advanced cancer and their caregivers. Patients were aged ≥70 years with incurable cancer from community oncology practices. Patients, caregivers, and oncologists were asked: "What do you believe are the chances the cancer will go away and never come back with treatment?" Options were 100%, >50%, 50/50, <50%, and 0% (5-point scale). Discordance in beliefs about curability was defined as any difference in scale scores (≥3 points were severe). We used multivariate logistic regressions to describe correlates of discordance. RESULTS: Discordance was present in 60% (15% severe) of the 336 patient-oncologist dyads and 52% (16% severe) of the 245 caregiver-oncologist dyads. Discordance was less common in patient-oncologist dyads when oncologists practiced longer (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 0.90, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.84-0.97) and more common in non-Hispanic white patients (AOR 5.77, CI 1.90-17.50) and when patients had lung (AOR 1.95, CI 1.29-2.94) or gastrointestinal (AOR 1.55, CI 1.09-2.21) compared with breast cancer. Severe discordance was more common when patients were non-Hispanic white, had lower income, and had impaired social support. Caregiver-oncologist discordance was more common when caregivers were non-Hispanic white (AOR 3.32, CI 1.01-10.94) and reported lower physical health (AOR 0.88, CI 0.78-1.00). Severe discordance was more common when caregivers had lower income and lower anxiety level. CONCLUSION: Discordance in beliefs about curability is common, occasionally severe, and correlated with patient, caregiver, and oncologist characteristics. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Ensuring older patients with advanced cancer and their caregivers have similar beliefs about curability as the oncologist is important. This study investigated discordance in beliefs about curability in patient-oncologist (PO) and caregiver-oncologist (CO) dyads. It found that discordance was present in 60% (15% severe) of PO dyads and 52% (16% severe) of CO dyads, raising serious questions about the process by which patients consent to treatment. This study supports the need for interventions targeted at the oncologist, patient, caregiver, and societal levels to improve the delivery of prognostic information and patients'/caregivers' understanding and acceptance of prognosis.

Daily Lisinopril vs Placebo for Prevention of Chemoradiation-Induced Pulmonary Distress in Patients With Lung Cancer (Alliance MC1221): A Pilot Double-Blind Randomized Trial.

PURPOSE: Chemoradiation (CRT) is an integral treatment modality for patients with locally advanced lung cancer. It has been hypothesized that current use of an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor during CRT may be protective for treatment-related lung damage and pneumonitis. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We conducted a pilot, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trial. Study-eligible patients receiving curative thoracic radiation therapy (RT) were randomly assigned to 20 mg of lisinopril or placebo once daily during and up to 3 months after RT. All patients received concurrent chemotherapy. The primary endpoint was adverse event profiling. Multiple patient-reported outcome (PRO) surveys, including the Lung Cancer Symptom Scale, Function Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Lung, and the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Lung Cancer Questionnaire, were applied with a symptom experience questionnaire. Exploratory comparative statistics were used to detect differences between arms with χ2 and Kruskal-Wallis testing. RESULTS: Five institutions enrolled 23 patients. However, accrual was less than expected. Eleven and 12 patients were in the placebo and lisinopril arms, respectively (mean age, 63.5 years; male, 62%). Baseline characteristics were balanced. Eighteen patients (86%) were former or current smokers. The primary endpoint was met; neither arm had grade 3 or higher hypotension, acute kidney injury, allergic reaction (medication-induced cough), or anaphylaxis (medication-related angioedema). Few PRO measures suggested that compared with the placebo arm, patients receiving lisinopril had less cough, less shortness of breath, fewer symptoms from lung cancer, less dyspnea with both walking and climbing stairs, and better overall quality of life (for all, P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Although underpowered because of low accrual, our results suggest that there was a clinical signal for safety-and possibly beneficial by limited PRO measures-in concurrently administering lisinopril during thoracic CRT to mitigate or prevent RT-induced pulmonary distress. Our results showed that a definitive, larger-scale, randomized phase 3 trial is needed in the future.

Recruiting colorectal cancer survivors to a surveillance study: Barriers and successful strategies.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) survival rates are increasing. Effective strategies to recruit CRC survivors to surveillance studies are needed. OBJECTIVE: We analyzed the barriers encountered while recruiting CRC survivors to a study assessing their surveillance care experiences. METHODS: The study included three phases: (I) focus groups/key informant interviews; (II) cognitive interviews; and (III) a statewide population-based telephone survey. PARTICIPANTS: In Phases I-II, clinic-based data and cancer center registries were used to identify CRC survivors who had received CRC resection within the past 18 months. In Phase III, survivors who had received CRC resection within the past two years were identified via a statewide, population-based cancer registry. RESULTS: In Phase I, 16 survivors participated in focus groups at two National Cancer Center-affiliated sites (response rate=29.6%). Eighteen additional survivors participated in individual interviews (response rate=50%). In Phase II, 11 survivors participated in cognitive interviews (response rate=81.8%). In Phase III, 150 survivors participated in the statewide survey (response rate=62.2%). CONCLUSIONS: Group-based/in-person recruitment efforts were unsuccessful due to scheduling barriers, lack of transportation, and remaining discomfort from previous resection surgery. Telephone-based data collection strategies produced higher response rates. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: To enhance CRC surveillance research, future studies could incorporate CRC survivor-centered recruitment strategies.

N08C9 (Alliance): A Phase 3 Randomized Study of Sulfasalazine Versus Placebo in the Prevention of Acute Diarrhea in Patients Receiving Pelvic Radiation Therapy.

PURPOSE: To provide confirmatory evidence on the use of sulfasalazine to reduce enteritis during pelvic radiation therapy (RT), following 2 prior single-institution trials suggestive that benefit existed. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A multi-institution, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial was designed to assess the efficacy of sulfasalazine versus placebo in the treatment of RT-related enteritis during RT including the posterior pelvis (45.0-53.5 Gy) and conducted through a multicenter national cooperative research alliance. Patients received 1000 mg of sulfasalazine or placebo orally twice daily during and for 4 weeks after RT. The primary endpoint was maximum severity of diarrhea (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0). Toxicity and bowel function were assessed by providers through a self-administered bowel function questionnaire taken weekly during RT and for 6 weeks afterward. RESULTS: Eighty-seven patients were enrolled in the trial between April 29, 2011, and May 13, 2013, with evenly distributed baseline factors. At the time of a planned interim toxicity analysis, more patients with grade ≥3 diarrhea received sulfasalazine than received placebo (29% vs 11%, P=.04). A futility analysis showed that trial continuation would be unlikely to yield a positive result, and a research board recommended halting study treatment. Final analysis of the primary endpoint showed no significant difference in maximum diarrhea severity between the sulfasalazine and placebo arms (P=.41). CONCLUSIONS: Sulfasalazine does not reduce enteritis during pelvic RT and may be associated with a higher risk of adverse events than placebo. This trial illustrates the importance of confirmatory phase 3 trials in the evaluation of symptom-control agents.

Repeated measures analyses of dermatitis symptom evolution in breast cancer patients receiving radiotherapy in a phase 3 randomized trial of mometasone furoate vs placebo (N06C4 [alliance]).

PURPOSE: Radiotherapy-related dermatological toxicities over time have not been well quantified. We examined during and immediately following radiation therapy skin toxicities over time in a randomized study of mometasone furoate vs placebo during breast radiotherapy. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients with breast cancer undergoing radiotherapy to the breast or chest wall were randomized. Symptoms related to skin toxicity were addressed weekly using provider-reported Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE v3.0) and 4 patient-reported outcomes (PRO) surveys. We applied repeated measures and risk analysis methodologies. RESULTS: One hundred seventy-six patients were enrolled. By CTCAE, significant differences favoring mometasone were detected over time in all toxicities except skin striae, atrophy, and infection. Statistically significant differences between arms at baseline but not over time occurred for all Linear Analog Self-Assessment. Statistically significant differences occurred for all symptoms in the temporal profile of symptoms as measured by PRO surveys (all P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: The use of longitudinal methods enhanced the ability of PRO tools to detect differences between study arms. Our results strengthened the conclusions of the original report that mometasone reduced acute skin toxicities. PRO surveys can accurately assess patients' experiences of symptom type and intensity over time and should be included in future clinical trials. For radiotherapy-related dermatological toxicity, we hypothesized that clinically significant differences over time, if any, can be found by repeated measures. We examined the acute skin toxicities in a randomized study of mometasone vs placebo during breast radiotherapy. For secondary end points, we showed that longitudinal methods enhanced the detection of differences between study arms and strengthened the conclusions from the original report. Frequent patient-reported outcome surveys over time should be included in future clinical trials.

Mode equivalence and acceptability of tablet computer-, interactive voice response system-, and paper-based administration of the U.S. National Cancer Institute's Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE).

BACKGROUND: PRO-CTCAE is a library of items that measure cancer treatment-related symptomatic adverse events (NCI Contracts: HHSN261201000043C and HHSN 261201000063C). The objective of this study is to examine the equivalence and acceptability of the three data collection modes (Web-enabled touchscreen tablet computer, Interactive voice response system [IVRS], and paper) available within the US National Cancer Institute (NCI) Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE) measurement system. METHODS: Participants (n = 112; median age 56.5; 24 % high school or less) receiving treatment for cancer at seven US sites completed 28 PRO-CTCAE items (scoring range 0-4) by three modes (order randomized) at a single study visit. Subjects completed one page (approx. 15 items) of the EORTC QLQ-C30 between each mode as a distractor. Item scores by mode were compared using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC); differences in scores within the 3-mode crossover design were evaluated with mixed-effects models. Difficulties with each mode experienced by participants were also assessed. RESULTS: 103 (92 %) completed questionnaires by all three modes. The median ICC comparing tablet vs IVRS was 0.78 (range 0.55-0.90); tablet vs paper: 0.81 (0.62-0.96); IVRS vs paper: 0.78 (0.60-0.91); 89 % of ICCs were ≥0.70. Item-level mean differences by mode were small (medians [ranges] for tablet vs. IVRS = -0.04 [-0.16-0.22]; tablet vs paper = -0.02 [-0.11-0.14]; IVRS vs paper = 0.02 [-0.07-0.19]), and 57/81 (70 %) items had bootstrapped 95 % CI around the effect sizes within +/-0.20. The median time to complete the questionnaire by tablet was 3.4 min; IVRS: 5.8; paper: 4.0. The proportion of participants by mode who reported "no problems" responding to the questionnaire was 86 % tablet, 72 % IVRS, and 98 % paper. CONCLUSIONS: Mode equivalence of items was moderate to high, and comparable to test-retest reliability (median ICC = 0.80). Each mode was acceptable to a majority of respondents. Although the study was powered to detect moderate or larger discrepancies between modes, the observed ICCs and very small mean differences between modes provide evidence to support study designs that are responsive to patient or investigator preference for mode of administration, and justify comparison of results and pooled analyses across studies that employ different PRO-CTCAE modes of administration. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02158637.

Race and Prevalence of Large Bowel Polyps Among the Low-Income and Uninsured in South Carolina.

BACKGROUND: Compared to whites, blacks have higher colorectal cancer incidence and mortality rates and are at greater risk for early-onset disease. The reasons for this racial disparity are poorly understood, but one contributing factor could be differences in access to high-quality screening and medical care. AIMS: The present study was carried out to assess whether a racial difference in prevalence of large bowel polyps persists within a poor and uninsured population (n = 233, 124 blacks, 91 whites, 18 other) undergoing screening colonoscopy. METHODS: Eligible patients were uninsured, asymptomatic, had no personal history of colorectal neoplasia, and were between the ages 45-64 years (blacks) or 50-64 years (whites, other). We examined the prevalence of any adenoma (conventional, serrated) and then difference in adenoma/polyp type by race and age categories. RESULTS: Prevalence for ≥1 adenoma was 37 % (95 % CI 31-43 %) for all races combined and 36 % in blacks <50 years, 38 % in blacks ≥50 years, and 35 % in whites. When stratified by race, blacks had a higher prevalence of large conventional proximal neoplasia (8 %) compared to whites (2 %) (p value = 0.06) but a lower prevalence of any serrated-like (blacks 18 %, whites 32 %; p value = 0.02) and sessile serrated adenomas/polyps (blacks 2 %, whites 8 % Chi-square p value; p = 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Within this uninsured population, the overall prevalence of adenomas was high and nearly equal by race, but the racial differences observed between serrated and conventional polyp types emphasize the importance of taking polyp type into account in future research on this topic.

ReCAP: Impact of Multidisciplinary Care on Processes of Cancer Care: A Multi-Institutional Study.

PURPOSE: The role of multidisciplinary care (MDC) on cancer care processes is not fully understood. We investigated the impact of MDC on the processes of care at cancer centers within the National Cancer Institute Community Cancer Centers Program (NCCCP). METHODS: The study used data from patients diagnosed with stage IIB to III rectal cancer, stage III colon cancer, and stage III non­small-cell lung cancer at 14 NCCCP cancer centers from 2007 to 2012. We used an MDC development assessment tool­with levels ranging from evolving MDC (low) to achieving excellence (high)­to measure the level of MDC implementation in seven MDC areas, such as case planning and physician engagement. Descriptive statistics and cluster-adjusted regression models quantified the association between MDC implementation and processes of care, including time from diagnosis to treatment receipt. RESULTS: A total of 1,079 patients were examined. Compared with patients with colon cancer treated at cancer centers reporting low MDC scores, time to treatment receipt was shorter for patients with colon cancer treated at cancer centers reporting high or moderate MDC scores for physician engagement (hazard ratio [HR] for high physician engagement, 2.66; 95% CI, 1.70 to 4.17; HR for moderate physician engagement, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.19 to 1.89) and longer for patients with colon cancer treated at cancer centers reporting high 2MDC scores for case planning (HR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.49 to 0.85). Results for patients with rectal cancer were qualitatively similar, and there was no statistically significant difference among patients with lung cancer. CONCLUSION: MDC implementation level was associated with processes of care, and direction of association varied across MDC assessment areas.

Validity and Reliability of the US National Cancer Institute's Patient-Reported Outcomes Version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE).

IMPORTANCE: To integrate the patient perspective into adverse event reporting, the National Cancer Institute developed a patient-reported outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE). OBJECTIVE: To assess the construct validity, test-retest reliability, and responsiveness of PRO-CTCAE items. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A total of 975 adults with cancer undergoing outpatient chemotherapy and/or radiation therapy enrolled in this questionnaire-based study between January 2011 and February 2012. Eligible participants could read English and had no clinically significant cognitive impairment. They completed PRO-CTCAE items on tablet computers in clinic waiting rooms at 9 US cancer centers and community oncology practices at 2 visits 1 to 6 weeks apart. A subset completed PRO-CTCAE items during an additional visit 1 business day after the first visit. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Primary comparators were clinician-reported Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) and the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Core Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30). RESULTS: A total of 940 of 975 (96.4%) and 852 of 940 (90.6%) participants completed PRO-CTCAE items at visits 1 and 2, respectively. At least 1 symptom was reported by 938 of 940 (99.8%) participants. Participants' median age was 59 years; 57.3% were female, 32.4% had a high school education or less, and 17.1% had an ECOG PS of 2 to 4. All PRO-CTCAE items had at least 1 correlation in the expected direction with a QLQ-C30 scale (111 of 124, P<.05 for all). Stronger correlations were seen between PRO-CTCAE items and conceptually related QLQ-C30 domains. Scores for 94 of 124 PRO-CTCAE items were higher in the ECOG PS 2 to 4 vs 0 to 1 group (58 of 124, P<.05 for all). Overall, 119 of 124 items met at least 1 construct validity criterion. Test-retest reliability was 0.7 or greater for 36 of 49 prespecified items (median [range] intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.76 [0.53-.96]). Correlations between PRO-CTCAE item changes and corresponding QLQ-C30 scale changes were statistically significant for 27 prespecified items (median [range] r=0.43 [0.10-.56]; all P≤.006). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Evidence demonstrates favorable validity, reliability, and responsiveness of PRO-CTCAE in a large, heterogeneous US sample of patients undergoing cancer treatment. Studies evaluating other measurement properties of PRO-CTCAE are under way to inform further development of PRO-CTCAE and its inclusion in cancer trials.