A systematic review of methodologies, endpoints, and outcome measures in randomized trials of radiation therapy-induced nausea and vomiting.

PURPOSE: Clinical trials in radiation therapy-induced nausea and vomiting (RINV) appear to have varied methodologies, endpoints, and outcome measures. This complicates trial comparisons, weakens practice guideline recommendations, and contributes to variability in supportive care patterns of practice. We systematically reviewed RINV trials to describe and compare their pertinent design features. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ovid versions of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, EMBASE, and MEDLINE to January/February 2017 were searched for adult phase III trials of RINV management strategies. Key abstracted data included trial interventions and eligibility criteria, standard radiation therapy (RT) metrics, symptom assessment procedures, symptom definitions and grading systems, pre-specified and reported endpoints, and other outcome measures. RESULTS: From 1166 references identified in the initial database search, we selected 34 trials for analysis that collectively randomized 4529 patients (median 61, range 11-1492). Twenty-eight trials (82%) were published prior to the year 2000. Twenty-seven trials (79%) involved multiple fraction RT and 7 (21%) single fraction RT. Twenty-four trials (71%) evaluated prophylactic interventions, 9 (26%) rescue interventions, and 1 trial did not specify. Thirty-three trials (97%) evaluated pharmacologic interventions. Twenty trials (59%) had patient report symptoms, 5 (15%) healthcare professionals or researchers, and 10 (29%) did not specify. Nausea was not defined in any trial but was reported as a stand-alone symptom in 26 trials (76%) and was graded in 20 (59%), with categorical qualitative scales being the most common method. Vomiting was defined in 3 trials (9%), was reported as a stand-alone symptom in 17 (47%), and was graded in 7 (21%), with continuous numerical scales being the most common method. Retching was defined in 3 trials, was not reported as a stand-alone symptom in any trial, and was graded in 1 (3%). Twenty-one trials (62%) created compound symptom measures that combined individual symptoms. Fifteen trials (44%) reported "emetic episode/event" measures but only 9 defined them. Seventeen trials (50%) reported complicated endpoints (e.g., "response," "control," "success") that combined multiple symptom or compound symptom measures, but 7 did not define them comprehensively. Ten trials (29%) defined a primary endpoint a priori. CONCLUSIONS: Methodologies, endpoints, and outcome measures varied considerably among 34 randomized trials in RINV.

High prevalence of potential drug-drug interactions in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer treated with abiraterone acetate.

PURPOSE: Abiraterone acetate (AA), used to treat metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), inhibits androgen biosynthesis by blocking cytochrome P450 (CYP) 17A1. It also inhibits other cytochromes involved in the metabolism of various widely used medications. As such, there is presumably a high potential for drug-drug interactions (DDIs) that can diminish the efficacy of AA or concurrent medications, or increase the risk of DDI-related adverse events (AEs). However, the scale of AA-associated DDIs is currently unknown. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of pharmacy records and electronic patient charts to retrieve individual drug histories and on-treatment AEs of mCRPC patients beginning AA therapy in a tertiary care setting. Potential DDIs were analyzed using two commercial databases, Lexicomp and Micromedex. RESULTS: Eighty-four informative patients were identified. Sixty-five patients (77 %) and 44 patients (52 %) were flagged for one or more potential DDIs by the Lexicomp and Micromedex databases, respectively. One hundred eighty-four potential DDIs were identified overall, with a median of 1 DDI per patient in both databases. Possibly due to rigorous DDI screening before AA treatment initiation, we did not identify a definite instance of DDI-related AEs. CONCLUSIONS: The use of commercial DDI databases suggests a substantial risk of potentially consequential DDIs in mCRPC patients undergoing AA therapy. However, prospective investigations with larger patient populations are required to better establish the clinical relevance of these DDIs.

Projected referral to other healthcare services in an outpatient palliative radiotherapy clinic.

AIMS: To investigate the projected referral to other healthcare services in an outpatient palliative radiotherapy clinic. METHODS: Patients referred for palliative radiotherapy from 1999 to 2002 inclusive and 2007 to 2009 inclusive were evaluated. The Edmonton Symptom Assessment System, which assesses nine symptoms, was completed by 1439 patients prior to radiotherapy consultation. The numeric scale was converted into a categorical scale of none, mild, moderate and severe. Patients with moderate-to-severe symptoms were identified as potential referrals to other healthcare services. RESULTS: Tiredness (66%), poor sense of wellbeing (64%), pain (57%) and poor appetite (52%) had the most patients scoring in the moderate-to-severe range. Moderate-to-severe anxiety and depression occurred in 39 and 30% of patients, respectively, reflecting the percentage of projected referrals for symptom and/or psychosocial management. CONCLUSION: Cancer symptoms are complex, and a multidisciplinary and collaborative approach should be taken to provide timely management and maintain patients' quality of life.

Poor Accrual in Palliative Research Studies: An Update From the Rapid Response Radiotherapy Program.

BACKGROUND: In June 2003, the Rapid Response Radiotherapy Program (RRRP) implemented changes to recruitment strategies in attempts to increase patient accrual to research studies. Such modifications included the use of a dedicated research assistant to screen for and identify eligible study patients, the introduction of more appropriate inclusion criteria, and the switch towards telephone interviews to minimize patient burden. The purpose of this study is to provide an update on patient accrual in the RRRP. METHODS: All patients seen in the RRRP from January 2002 to December 2009 were recorded in a prospective database. Reasons for referral, eligibility for clinical trials, reasons for non-accrual, and various demographics information were recorded. Descriptive statistics summarized findings. RESULTS: A total of 4726 patient visits were recorded from January 1st, 2002 to December 31st, 2009. Prior to changes, the overall rate of accrual into research studies was 14.9% versus 48.1% after changes were implemented. Patients were not accrued onto studies mainly to due ineligibility according to study protocol. Other reasons such as language barrier (12.1%), physician objection (3.5%), patient declining participation (11.3%) and lack of a research assistant (9.3%) were cited. CONCLUSIONS: Changes in clinical structure and study design can significantly impact accrual patterns in palliative radiotherapy studies. Despite these changes however, the majority of patients are still not enrolled in studies. Therefore additional efforts need to be made to maximize patient accrual and minimize attrition.