Symptoms and toxicity of rituximab maintenance relative to observation following immunochemotherapy in patients with follicular lymphoma.

OBJECTIVES: The randomized phase 3 PRIMA trial established that 2 years of rituximab maintenance therapy after attaining disease response to immunochemotherapy as first-line treatment of follicular lymphoma, reduced the risk of disease progression, compared with observation, without adversely affecting patient-reported quality of life (QoL). We now report additional analyses of symptom burden and toxicity. METHODS: Symptom burden was measured by the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30 items. The proportion of patients with worsening, no change, or improvement in symptoms from maintenance baseline was compared between rituximab maintenance and observation groups with Pearson χ(2) tests. Improvement in symptoms after 1 and 2 years of maintenance was further analyzed using generalized mixed models. The adverse event (AE) rate was calculated from the toxicity checklist at each visit to explore the frequency and timing of the toxicity AE in each treatment arm. The study protocol was approved by local ethics committees and is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under NCT00140582. RESULTS: Being tired, needing to rest, feeling weak, and trouble sleeping were the most frequently reported symptoms at the end of immunochemotherapy. By the end of maintenance, notable improvement was seen for fatigue symptoms, trouble sleeping, shortness of breath, lack of appetite, and nausea, with no significant difference in QoL symptoms between the rituximab maintenance and observation groups. The rate of AEs was low, and hematologic toxicity induced during chemotherapy treatment improved in both rituximab maintenance and observation groups. DISCUSSION: These results indicated that rituximab maintenance did not negatively impact disease- or treatment-related symptoms.

Recommendations for including multiple symptoms as endpoints in cancer clinical trials: a report from the ASCPRO (Assessing the Symptoms of Cancer Using Patient-Reported Outcomes) Multisymptom Task Force.

The multiple symptoms arising from cancer and its treatment impose significant distress for patients. However, in clinical research, there is no agreed-upon way of assessing and presenting the effects of treatment on multiple symptoms, as either individual scores or a composite score. The ASCPRO (Assessing the Symptoms of Cancer Using Patient-Reported Outcomes) Multisymptom Task Force was established to make recommendations about measuring multiple symptoms as outcomes in cancer clinical trials. The Multisymptom Task Force addressed how to choose the symptoms to be assessed and how multiple individual symptom scores or composite scores of several symptoms might be used as clinical trial outcomes. Consensus was reached on a definition of a multisymptom outcome, the problem of source attribution, and the need for a hypothesis-driven conceptual framework to measure multisymptom outcomes. Validated single-item and multi-item measures currently available or that can be easily generated for oncology use were deemed sufficient for measuring multiple symptoms. The relative value of a composite score versus a set of individual symptom scores was discussed, along with issues in developing and deploying such a composite measure. The results indicated that more research on combining scores of different symptoms is needed. Symptom data should be a required component of cancer clinical trials. Patient-reported symptoms provide a unique patient perspective on treatment benefit and risk that goes beyond clinician-reported adverse events. A representation of changes in multiple symptoms would clarify the impact of treatment and enhance the interpretation of cancer clinical trials for clinicians, patients, and those who make health care policy.