International standards for the analysis of quality-of-life and patient-reported outcome endpoints in cancer randomised controlled trials: recommendations of the SISAQOL Consortium

Reading and Interpreting Quality-of-Life Results in Cancer Trials

AbstractThere is growing attention paid to patient-reported outcomes and health-related quality of life as end points in clinical trials in oncology. Such results should contribute to the definition of treatment value, inform communication with patients in clinical practice, and impact treatment choice among various options. This review seeks to help clinicians gain familiarity with the correct reading and interpretation of quality-of-life results.

Longitudinal assessment of functional independence of older adults after lung cancer surgery: Final results of the JCOG1710A prospective cohort study

INTRODUCTION

We previously reported the results of a prospective observational study evaluating activities of daily living (ADL) at six months after curative surgical resection in patients aged ≥75 years with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In this manuscript, we report the 24-month longitudinal ADL outcomes in this population, providing important data to support treatment decision-making and to identify risk factors for long-term functional decline.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a prospective, multi-institutional observational cohort study conducted in Japan. We evaluated patients aged ≥75 years who underwent curative surgery for stage 0-III NSCLC. ADL were evaluated at 6, 12, and 24 months postoperatively using the Tokyo Metropolitan Institute of Gerontology Index of Competence (TMIG-IC), which encompasses dimensions of instrumental activities of daily living. We defined ADL deterioration as a decline of ≥3 points or missing data and performed multivariable analyses for ADL deterioration.

RESULTS

The follow-up data of 876 patients were available for a median of 24.2 months. At 6, 12, and 24 months postoperatively, the proportion of patients with ADL deterioration was 11.0 %, 10.3 %, and 12.6 %, respectively. Multivariable analysis revealed that factors such as poor performance status, low G8 score, undergoing segmentectomy instead of wedge resection, and surgery duration <3 h were associated with ADL deterioration after six months. Conversely, a low G8 score was sole factor associated with a decline in the TMIG-IC score after 24 months. Multivariable analysis demonstrated that at six months, segmentectomy was significantly associated with more ADL deterioration compared with wedge resection, with an odds ratio (OR) of 4.96 (95 % confidence interval [CI]: 1.88-13.07). However, segmentectomy and wedge resection showed no significant difference at 24 months (OR: 0.92, 95 % CI: 0.40-2.10).

DISCUSSION

Among patients aged ≥75 years undergoing lung cancer surgery, approximately 10 % experienced a decline in ADL at six months postoperatively; however, the proportion remained stable thereafter, suggesting no further functional deterioration. Short-term ADL tended to be preserved with wedge resection, but this advantage diminished over time. The insights from this study are also expected to inform patient decision-making regarding treatment strategy.

Comparison of statistical methods for the analysis of patient-reported outcomes (PROs), particularly the Short-Form 36 (SF-36), in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) using standardised effect size (SES): an empirical analysis

BACKGROUND

The Short-Form 36 (SF-36), a widely used patient-reported outcome (PRO), is a questionnaire completed by patients measuring health outcomes in clinical trials. The PRO scores can be discrete, bounded, and skewed. Various statistical methods have been suggested to analyse PRO data, but their results may not be presented on the same scale as the original score, making it difficult to interpret and compare different approaches. This study aims to unify and compare the estimates from different statistical methods for analysing PROs, particularly the SF-36, in randomised controlled trials (RCTs), using standardised effect size (SES) summary measure.

METHODS

SF-36 outcomes were analysed using ten statistical methods: multiple linear regression (MLR), median regression (Median), Tobit regression (Tobit), censored absolute least deviation regression (CLAD), beta-binomial regression (BB), binomial-logit-normal regression (BLN), ordered logit model (OL), ordered probit model (OP), fractional logistic regression (Frac), and beta regression (BR). Each SF-36 domain score at a specific follow-up in three clinical trials was analysed. The estimated treatment coefficients and SESs were generated, compared, and interpreted. Model fit was evaluated using the Akaike information criterion.

RESULTS

Estimated treatment coefficients from the untransformed scale-based methods (Tobit, Median, & CLAD) deviated from MLR, whereas the SESs from Tobit produced almost identical values. Transformed scale-based methods (OL, OP, BB, BLN, Frac, and BR) shared a similar pattern, except that OL generated higher absolute coefficients and BLN produced higher SESs than other methods. The SESs from Tobit, BB, OP, and Frac had better agreement against MLR than other included methods.

CONCLUSIONS

The SES is a simple method to unify and compare estimates produced from various statistical methods on different scales. As these methods did not produce identical SES values, it is crucial to comprehensively understand and carefully select appropriate statistical methods, especially for analysing PROs like SF-36, to avoid drawing wrong estimates and conclusions using clinical trial data. Future research will focus on simulation analysis to compare the estimation accuracy and robustness of these methods.

Patient-reported outcomes and acupuncture-related adverse events are overlooked in acupuncture randomised controlled trials: a cross-sectional meta-epidemiological study

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and acupuncture-related adverse events (A-AEs) in acupuncture randomised controlled trials (RCTs).

DESIGN

Cross-sectional meta-epidemiological study.

DATA SOURCES

We comprehensively searched for eligible studies between 1 January 2014 and 1 May 2024, in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CBM, CNKI, Wanfang Data and VIP Database.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

RCTs that used acupuncture as the intervention group to obtain the efficacy and/or safety of acupuncture therapy. Acupuncture therapy should be based on Traditional Medicine theory.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

We assessed (1) the general characteristics of acupuncture RCTs; (2) the general characteristics of PROs; (3) the reporting scores of PROs by the Extension of Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials of Patient-Reported Outcomes (CONSORT PRO Extension); (4) the general characteristic of A-AEs; (5) the incidence of A-AEs.

RESULTS

We included 476 studies in this study. 296 (62.2%) used PROs as study outcomes, 272 (57.1%) reported safety outcomes. The Visual Analogue Scale (149, 23.7%) and the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (42, 6.7%) were the most common PROs reported. The reporting of PROs was incomplete, with sufficiently reporting scores ranging from 2.7% to 97.6% across the CONSORT PRO Extension. 164 studies reported A-AEs, of which 141 reported specific details, and we found that the OR for the incidence of AEs in the acupuncture group compared to the control group was 1.434 (95% CI 1.148 to 1.793). We identified 1277 reports of A-AEs in eligible studies, predominantly tissue injury (eg, haematoma, bleeding), irritation (eg, pain, post-acupuncture discomfort), with no reports of serious A-AEs. The reporting of A-AEs lacked details on the acquisition methods (15.5%), occurrence time (5.5%), A-AEs' treatment (18.1%) and A-AEs' recovery (19.7%). Studies that reported funding, registry information, acupuncturist qualifications and non-significant primary outcomes were associated with the A-AEs' reporting, and the difference was statistically significant (p≤0.05).

CONCLUSION

This study found that the reporting of PROs and A-AEs was insufficient in acupuncture RCTs. Future studies should clarify the clinical significance of using PROs as outcomes and report AEs comprehensively to provide patients with sufficient information on the benefits and harms of acupuncture treatments.

Survival Without Quality of Life Deterioration in the GORTEC 2014-04 "OMET" Randomized Phase 2 Trial in Patients with Head and Neck Cancer with Oligometastases using Stereotactic Ablative Radiation Therapy (SABR) alone or Chemotherapy and SABR

PURPOSE

Patients with oligometastasis may have prolonged survival with multisite stereotactic ablative radiation therapy (SABR). Evidence to support this paradigm is scarce in squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (HNSCC). The multicenter open-label randomized GORTEC 2014-04 (NCT03070366) phase 2 study assesses survival without definitive quality of life (QoL) deterioration of omitting upfront chemotherapy in oligometastatic patients with HNSCC using SABR alone, in the French Head and Neck Intergroup.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Eligible participants (≥18 years old with 1-3 oligometastases, the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group score 0-2) were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive chemo-SABR or SABR alone. Salvage treatments were left to the physician's appreciation. The standard therapy was considered to be systemic therapy and SABR (chemo-SABR; EXTREME regimen [5 fluorouracil/platinum/cetuximab]). The primary endpoint was 1-year (±3 months) overall survival rate without definitive deterioration (ie, without subsequent better QoL score) of the global European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QoL Questionnaire-Core30 score.

RESULTS

Between September 2015 and October 2022, 69 participants were assigned to receive chemo-SABR (N = 35) or SABR alone (N = 34); 57 had lung-only metastases (82.6%), and 40 had isolated metastasis (58.0%). The median baseline QoL score was 66.7 (IQR, [50.0-83.3]). The median follow-up was 55.3 months (95% CI, 45.0-69.7). Of participants (N = 59) evaluable for the primary endpoint, 16 of 29 (55.2%, 90% CI, 0.38-0.71) and 16 of 30 (53.3%, 90% CI, 0.37-0.69) were alive and free of QoL deterioration at 1 year in the SABR-alone and chemo-SABR arms. However, QoL deterioration was deeper with chemo-SABR (50.0; IQR, [41.7-66.7]) than with SABR alone (16.7; IQR, [16.7-41.7]). In intent-to-treat analysis (N = 69), median survival was 42.3 months (95% CI, 26.5-not reached) with chemo-SABR and 41.1 months (95% CI, 32.1-66.9) with SABR alone; median progression-free survival was 12.9 (95% CI, 7.5-17.3) and 7.4 months (95% CI, 4.2-15.6) in the chemo-SABR and SABR alone arms, respectively. Rates of severe treatment-related toxicities were 21 of 35 (60.0%) with chemo-SABR and 3 of 34 (8.8%, no grade 5) with SABR alone.

CONCLUSIONS

Using SABR alone, the omission of upfront EXTREME-based chemotherapy and maintenance cetuximab in oligometastatic patients with HNSCC resulted in similar survival but much less severe QoL deterioration and fewer toxicity rates. SABR alone could be a reasonable alternative in oligometastatic patients with HNSCC.

Advancing drug development in myelodysplastic syndromes

ABSTRACT

Myelodysplastic syndromes/neoplasms (MDSs) are heterogeneous stem cell malignancies characterized by poor prognosis and no curative therapies outside of allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Despite some recent approvals by the US Food and Drug Administration, (eg, luspatercept, ivosidenib, decitabine/cedazuridine, and imetelstat), there has been little progress in the development of truly transformative therapies for the treatment of patients with MDS. Challenges to advancing drug development in MDS are multifold but may be grouped into specific categories, including criteria for risk stratification and eligibility, response definitions, time-to-event end points, transfusion end points, functional assessments, and biomarker development. Strategies to address these challenges and optimize future clinical trial design for patients with MDS are presented here.

Impact of adapted physical activity and diet counselling on health-related quality of life in women undergoing adjuvant breast cancer therapy

In the monocentric APAD1 trial, 143 women with non-metastatic breast cancer were randomised to undergo either an adapted physical activity and diet counselling (APAD) program or usual care. Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) was prospectively evaluated using the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire at baseline, during treatment (adjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy) and during follow-up. Our objective was two-fold: to analyse the impact of APAD on HRQoL using three approaches; to illustrate the advantages and disadvantages of each approach, and derive methodological recommendations. Analytical approaches utilised were: statistical testing to compare the mean HRQoL scores between baseline and end of study in both groups and the mean HRQoL scores between the two groups at the different assessment times; linear mixed models that modelled the longitudinal score data in both groups and tested whether the score trajectories were different between the groups; a survival analysis comparing the time to deterioration of HRQoL between the groups using a minimal clinically important difference. This study shows a substantial clinical benefit of the APAD intervention on HRQoL, especially for global health status/HRQoL, functioning scales and the fatigue symptom scale. Furthermore, this study highlights the advantages and disadvantages of three standard approaches used to analyse HRQoL data.Trial registration: The APAD1 study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (number NCT01495650, date 20/12/2011).

Best practices and pragmatic approaches for patient-reported outcomes and quality of life measures in cancer clinical trials

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are often collected in cancer clinical trials. Data obtained from trials with PROs are essential in evaluating participant experiences relating to symptoms, financial toxicity, or health-related quality of life. Although most features of clinical trial design, implementation, and analyses apply to trials with PROs, several considerations are unique. In this paper, we focus on specific issues such as selection of the tool, timing and frequency of assessments, and data collection methods. We discuss how the estimand framework can be used in connection with PROs, properties of common estimation methods, and handling of missing outcomes. With a plethora of literature available, we aim to summarize best practices and pragmatic approaches to the design and analysis of the studies incorporating PROs.

Statistical Methods for Analyzing EQ-5D in Randomized Clinical Trials: A Systematic Literature Review

OBJECTIVES

We conducted a systematic literature review to summarize the application of statistical methods for analyzing treatment effect on EQ-5D in randomized clinical trials (RCTs).

METHOD

We searched 2 electronic databases (MEDLINE and EMBASE, from inception through 2021) and www.

CLINICALTRIAL

gov. Eligible studies were RCTs that analyzed postbaseline EQ-5D data by treatment group. Information on trial characteristics, EQ-5D data characteristics, and statistical methods were extracted. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize results by dimension response, EQ visual analog scale (EQ VAS), and EQ-5D utility.

RESULTS

A total of 2125 trials met the eligibility criteria. EQ-5D was commonly considered a secondary (n = 1219, 57.4%) or exploratory (n = 775, 36.5%) endpoint in RCTs. EQ-5D utilities were the most analyzed. Both utilities and EQ VAS were primarily analyzed in numerical format. The most common statistical models for analyzing utilities were the linear fixed-effect model for single postbaseline (192/589, 32.6%) and the linear mixed-effect model for multiple post-baselines (338/984, 34.3%). Of the 2054 studies that analyzed numerical EQ-5D, 221 (10.8%) examined model assumptions and 438 (21.3%) adjusted for the baseline score. Missing data were explicitly assessed in 661 trials, among which 347 (52.5% of 661) applied imputations, with the 2 most used imputation methods being multiple imputations (n = 200, 57.6% of 347) and last observation carried forward (n = 106, 30.5% of 347).

CONCLUSIONS

This review found that health utilities are the most frequently analyzed EQ-5D data collected in clinical trials, followed by EQ VAS. Significant variation was observed in the selection of models, with most trials lacking adjustments for baseline data and appropriate methods for handling missing data.

Health-related Quality of Life Assessment in Renal Cell Cancer: A Scoping Review

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

In oncology, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) capturing health-related quality of life (HRQOL) play an increasing role in clinical trials, drug approval, and policy making. This scoping review aimed to identify and elaborate on HRQOL-focussed PROMs used in renal cell cancer (RCC) clinical trials.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Web of Science, PsychINFO, Academic Search Elite, CINAHL, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched systematically for original peer-reviewed articles on clinical trials including RCC patients and using PROMs, published between 1950 and 2023. Prespecified trial characteristics and information on the PROMs used were extracted. Frequencies and proportions of categorical data, and ranges and medians of continuous variables were calculated.

KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS

Of the 48 unique studies included, the majority followed a randomised controlled design (34, 71%) and evaluated systemic treatments (38, 79%). The trials used 27 different PROMs (max = 6, median = 2), of which only 4 (15%) were developed specifically for kidney cancer patients. Of the trials, 46% did not use any RCC-specific PROM. European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D), European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Core Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30), Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy Kidney Symptom Index (FKSI) -15/19-item version, FKSI-Disease Related Symptoms, and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) were the most frequently used questionnaires, with pain, ability to work, fatigue, worry, and sleep quality being the most commonly assessed issues.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

A variety of PROMs are used in RCC patients, hindering interpretability across trials. The PROMs used differ in terms of both the domains assessed and how the issues are translated into questionnaire items. Though RCC-specific PROMs exist, these have flaws in terms of relevance to patients. To answer predefined relevant HRQOL research questions, revised RCC-specific PROMs and standardisation of their integration into clinical trials are warranted.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Researchers are more and more interested in the health-related quality of life of kidney cancer patients and use questionnaires to measure it. This review shows that there are many different health-related quality of life questionnaires that are used in different combinations in clinical trials for kidney cancer patients. This makes it very difficult to compare these study results and draw reliable conclusions for the actual clinical treatment. It was even found that some of the questionnaires used do not capture things that patients actually consider important (eg, emotional issues such as dealing with thoughts about cancer and depression). Therefore, more work needs to be done to develop questionnaires that ask what is really important to kidney cancer patients' health-related quality of life. If these questionnaires are used in a consistent way in clinical trials, the results can be better compared. This will help treat kidney cancer patients in the best possible way.

Real-world quality-of-life of patients with HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer treated with palbociclib plus endocrine therapy: EORTC QLQ-C30 results from POLARIS

PURPOSE

To evaluate patient-reported health-related quality-of-life (QoL) in patients with hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HR+/HER2-) advanced/metastatic breast cancer (ABC) treated with palbociclib in the longitudinal real-world study, POLARIS.

METHODS

Data were prospectively collected from adult patients with HR+/HER2- ABC treated with palbociclib plus endocrine therapy (ET) in routine clinical practice. QoL was assessed with the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality-of-Life Questionnaire-Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) and reported at baseline and months 6, 12, and 18. Data were expressed as absolute scores at a given time and change from baseline for global QoL and functional/symptom scales. Global Heath Status (GHS)/QoL scores were also determined across 6 patient subgroup categories (e.g., age, visceral disease status). Additionally, the proportions of patients with scores below (functional scales) or above (symptom scales) EORTC-validated thresholds reflecting clinical importance of a health problem were determined.

RESULTS

Among patients treated with palbociclib plus ET (N = 1250) who completed questionnaires at any of the study timepoints, mean GHS/QoL scores at months 6 (69.3), 12 (70.1), and 18 (69.9) were higher than baseline (64.0). Similar trends were observed for functional and symptom scales. Mean GHS/QoL scores over time were consistent across the evaluated subgroups. Decreases in the proportions of patients with clinically important functional impairment/symptoms were observed for most functional/symptom scales from baseline through month 18.

CONCLUSION

Findings from this real-world study indicate patients with HR+/HER2- ABC treated with palbociclib plus ET maintain their QoL for at least 18 months.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT03280303; registered 12 September 2017.

Conceptualizing meaningful between-group difference in change over time: a demonstration of possible viewpoints

PURPOSE

Determining if group-level differences in health outcomes are meaningful has recently been neglected in favour of determining if individuals have experienced a meaningful change. We explore interpretation of a meaningful between-group difference (MBGD) in clinical outcome assessment scores, primarily in the context of randomized clinical trials.

METHODS

We constructed a series of possible 'viewpoints' on how to conceptualize MBGD thresholds. Each viewpoint is discussed critically in terms of potential advantages and disadvantages, with simulated data to facilitate their consideration.

RESULTS

Five viewpoints are presented and discussed. The first considers whether thresholds for meaningful within-individual change over time can be equally applied at the group-level, which is shown to be untenable. Viewpoints 2-4 consider what would have to be observed in treatment groups to conclude a meaningful between-group difference has occurred, framed in terms of the proportion of patients perceiving that they had meaningfully improved. The final viewpoint considers an alternative framework where stakeholders are directly questioned on the meaningfulness of varying magnitudes of between-group differences. The choice of a single threshold versus general interpretative guidelines is discussed.

CONCLUSION

There does not appear to be a single method with clear face validity for determining MBGD thresholds. Additionally, the notion that such thresholds can be purely data-driven is challenged, where a degree of subjective stakeholder judgement is likely required. Areas for future research are proposed, to move towards robust method development.

Single-modality endocrine therapy versus radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery in women aged 70 years and older with luminal A-like early breast cancer (EUROPA): a preplanned interim analysis of a phase 3, non-inferiority, randomised trial

BACKGROUND

Optimal therapy following breast-conserving surgery in older adults with low-risk, early-stage breast cancer remains uncertain. The EUROPA trial aims to compare the effects of radiotherapy and endocrine therapy as single-modality treatments on health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and ipsilateral breast tumour recurrence (IBTR) outcomes in this population.

METHODS

This non-inferiority, phase 3, randomised study was conducted at 18 academic hospitals across Italy (17 centres) and Slovenia (one centre). Eligible patients were women aged 70 years or older with histologically confirmed, stage I, luminal A-like breast cancer, who had undergone breast-conserving surgery and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive single-modality endocrine therapy or radiotherapy. Endocrine therapy consisted of daily oral aromatase inhibitors or tamoxifen, for a total planned duration of 5-10 years as per clinical discretion, while radiotherapy was administered as either whole breast or partial breast irradiation, delivered in 5-15 fractions. Randomisation was stratified by health status according to the Geriatric 8 (G8) screening tool and by age, with allocation concealed and no blinding. The co-primary endpoints were the change in HRQOL, assessed by the global health status (GHS) scale of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire 30-item core module at 24 months, and 5-year IBTR rates (not reported here). This preplanned interim analysis was performed once at least 152 patients completed the 24-month GHS HRQOL assessment. The safety population comprised patients who received the study intervention at least once after randomisation. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04134598, and is ongoing and actively recruiting.

FINDINGS

Between March 4, 2021, and June 14, 2024, 731 women were randomly assigned to receive radiotherapy (n=365) or endocrine therapy (n=366). This analysis included 104 patients in the radiotherapy group and 103 in the endocrine therapy group, with a median follow-up of 23·9 months (IQR 22·9-24·2). Patients were predominantly White (204 [99%] of 207) and the median age was 75·0 years (IQR 73·0-80·0) in the radiotherapy group and 74·0 years (72·0-80·0) in the endocrine therapy group. 86 patients in the radiotherapy group and 75 in the endocrine therapy group completed the 24-month HRQOL assessment. The mean baseline GHS score was 71·9 (SD 19·1) in the radiotherapy group and 75·5 (19·3) in the endocrine therapy group. At 24 months, the age-adjusted, G8 score-adjusted mean change from baseline in GHS was -3·40 (95% CI -7·82 to 1·03; p=0·13) in the radiotherapy group and -9·79 (-14·45 to -5·13; p<0·0001) in the endocrine therapy group, with an adjusted mean difference of 6·39 (0·14 to 12·65; p=0·045) favouring radiotherapy. Treatment-related adverse events were less frequent in the radiotherapy group (65 [67%] of 97 patients) compared with the endocrine therapy group (76 [85%] of 89). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were arthralgia (six [7%] of 89 in the endocrine therapy group vs 0 of 97 in the radiotherapy group), pelvic organ prolapse (three [3%] vs 0), fatigue, hot flashes, myalgia, bone pain, and fractures (two [2%] vs 0 for each). Serious adverse events were reported in 15 (15%) patients in the radiotherapy group and 13 (15%) in the endocrine therapy group. There were no treatment-related deaths in either group.

INTERPRETATION

Endocrine therapy was associated with a greater reduction in HRQOL, as measured by GHS, compared with radiotherapy at 24 months. While these interim results suggest radiotherapy might better preserve HRQOL in older women with low-risk early breast cancer, further data on disease control outcomes and final patient accrual are needed to draw definitive conclusions.

FUNDING

Fondazione Radioterapia Oncologica.

Bladder Tumor-Focused Adaptive Radiation Therapy: Clinical Outcomes of a Phase I Dose Escalation Study

PURPOSE

We determine the maximum tolerated tumor-focused dose (MTD) for the radical treatment of muscle invasive bladder cancer enabled by image guided adaptive radiation therapy and long-term clinical outcomes.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Fifty-nine patients with T2 to T4aN0M0 unifocal urothelial muscle invasive bladder cancer suitable for daily radical radiation therapy were recruited prospectively to an ethics-approved protocol (NCT01124682). The uninvolved bladder (PTVbladder) was planned to 52 Gy in 32 fractions. The bladder tumor (PTVtumor) was planned to an assigned dose level of 68, 70, 72, or 74 Gy. If organ at risk dose constraints were violated, then PTVtumor was planned to 64 Gy. Dose level allocation was determined by concurrent toxicity assessment of all previous patients recruited. Acute toxicity was evaluated using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v3.0; late toxicity was evaluated using Radiation Therapy Oncology Group criteria. The MTD was predefined as the highest dose level with an estimated probability of ≤ 15% ≥ G3 late toxicity and an observed rate of <50% acute G3 and <10% acute G4 toxicity.

RESULTS

Twenty-six patients were assigned to 68 Gy, of whom 6 were planned to 64 Gy; 29 patients were assigned to 70 Gy of whom 1 was planned to 68 Gy, 2 patients were assigned and planned to 72 Gy; no patients were assigned to 74 Gy. Three patients did not complete the treatment as planned, of whom only 1 patient stopped treatment because dose-limiting toxicity occurred. The MTD was 70 Gy. Acute genito-urinary and gastro-intestinal G3 acute toxicity was seen in 19% and 7% of patients, respectively. No acute G4 genito-urinary or gastro-intestinal toxicity was seen. Late toxicity (any) G3 and G4 was seen in 14% and 2% of patients, respectively. The 5-year overall survival was 58% (95% CI, 44%-71%). The bladder preservation rate was 89% (95% CI, 88%-96%) with 6 patients not retaining native bladder function.

CONCLUSIONS

Bladder tumor-focused dose escalation to 70 Gy using image guided adaptive radiation therapy is feasible with acceptable toxicity. This dose level has been evaluated in a phase II randomized control trial (RAIDER NCT02447549).

Increasing Life Expectancy in Patients with Genitourinary Malignancies: Impact of Treatment Burden on Disease Management and Quality of Life

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Treatment burden refers to the overall impact of medical treatments on a patient's well-being and daily life. Our objective is to evaluate the impact of treatment burden on quality of life (QoL) in patients with genitourinary (GU) malignancies, highlighting the importance of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in clinical trials to inform treatment decisions and improve patient care.

METHODS

We conducted a narrative review of clinical trials focused on GU malignancy (prostate, bladder, and kidney) between January 2000 and June 2024, analyzing related PROs and findings regarding treatment burden.

KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS

Recent landmark clinical trials demonstrate significant improvements in overall survival across GU malignancies with novel therapies. However, the reporting of QoL outcomes in these trials is often inadequate, with many lacking comprehensive data or long-term impact. Current publications are increasingly evaluating treatment burden and its impact on patient well-being as a critical outcome, but most clinical trials to date have failed to assess treatment burden across key domains including financial, time and travel, and medication management.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

While advancements in treatment have extended longevity in patients with GU malignancies, the treatment burden associated with the receipt of novel agents and its implications for QoL remain inadequately uncharacterized.

Time to deterioration of patient-reported outcome endpoints in cancer clinical trials: targeted literature review and best practice recommendations

BACKGROUND

Time to deterioration (TTD) endpoints are often utilized in the analysis of patient-reported outcome (PRO) data in oncology clinical trials but different endpoint definitions and analysis frameworks exist that can impact result interpretation. This review examined the analysis, reporting and heterogeneity of TTD endpoints in the literature, the impact of analysis methods on results, and provides recommendations for future trials.

METHODS

A targeted literature review of articles published between 2017 and 2022 was performed to collate TTD endpoints reported in oncology randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Details of endpoints and results were extracted including; deterioration definition, PRO assessment schedule, methods for handling intercurrent events, statistical analysis methods, main trial results (overall survival and/or progression-free survival) and TTD endpoint results.

RESULTS

Seventy RCTs were included covering 849 individual TTD endpoints. There were 17 primary cancer types, with lung (26%), breast (11%), and prostate (7%) cancers the most common. Most trials (71%) were for people with advanced cancer. Full definitions of TTD endpoints were often missing. There were no clear trends for a specific TTD definition within cancer types or stages. However, statistical analysis methods were consistent among trials.

CONCLUSION

The TTD definition can vary and is ultimately driven by the research question. Points to consider for successfully implementing PRO TTD endpoints in oncology include consideration of the trial setting (e.g., early vs. advanced cancer), expected treatment effect (e.g., improvement vs. worsening), likely adverse event profile (including early vs. delayed) and PRO data collection frequency in order to improve utility of these endpoints.

Remote Symptom Monitoring of Patients With Advanced Lung Cancer (The ProWide Study): A Randomized Controlled Trial

PURPOSE

Remote symptom monitoring of patients with cancer has previously shown potential for improving clinical outcomes. This study aimed to evaluate the effects of remote symptom monitoring in patients with lung cancer after palliative induction treatment.

METHODS

In a Danish multicenter randomized controlled trial, patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to remote symptom monitoring (intervention arm) added to standard of care versus standard of care (control arm). Key eligibility criteria were stage III-IV lung cancer (small cell lung cancer and non-small cell lung cancer), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≤2, and no sign of disease progression after initial induction treatment. Patients in the intervention arm completed a weekly electronic questionnaire, assessing 14 common symptoms related to lung cancer. When a patient reported a severity exceeding a predefined threshold, the patient was subsequently contacted by phone to address potential clinical needs. Symptom monitoring was discontinued after progression. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). Secondary measures included assessment of health-related quality of life (HRQoL).

RESULTS

Of 494 randomly assigned patients, 240 were assigned to the intervention arm and 254 were assigned to the control arm. At a median follow-up of 3.5 years, symptom monitoring did not significantly improve OS compared with standard care (hazard ratio [HR], 0.93 [95% CI, 0.75 to 1.16]; P = .53). Exploratory subgroup analyses indicated improved survival for patients treated with carboplatin/vinorelbine (HR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.45 to 0.98]; P = .04) and in departments with previous implementation of patient-reported outcomes (HR, 0.66 [95% CI, 0.44 to 0.98]; P = .04). HRQoL analyses did not reveal clinically meaningful effects.

CONCLUSION

In the Danish health care system, remote symptom monitoring did not improve OS but led to modest improvements in HRQoL for patients with advanced lung cancer.

Patient-reported outcome domains in multiple myeloma randomized controlled trials and association with survival outcomes

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are crucial endpoints in multiple myeloma (MM) randomized controlled trials (RCTs), yet there is significant variability in their methodology and reporting. Our study aimed to (a) identify the most commonly pre-specified PRO domains in MM RCTs and those most responsive to modern therapies, and (b) examine the association between PROs and progression-free survival (PFS)/overall survival (OS). We performed a systematic review of MM RCTs that used EORTC QLQ-C30 and published between 01/2014-06/2023. The association between PFS/OS and PRO was explored using Fisher's exact test or Pearson's Chi-squared test. Thirty-five RCTs were identified, with PROs as secondary or exploratory endpoints in all studies. About one-third of RCTs (n=11, 31.4%) pre-specified at least one EORTC QLQ-C30 domain, with the most common domains being Global health status/Quality of life (GHS/QoL) (n = 10, 90.9%), Physical Functioning (n = 6, 54.5%), Fatigue (n = 6, 54.5%), and Pain (n = 6, 54.5%). A statistically significant and/or clinically meaningful difference in at least one EORTC QLQ-C30 domain between arms was seen in 23/35 trials (65.7%), with the most common domains showing improvement being GHS/QoL (12/23 trials), Pain (11/23 trials), Fatigue (9/23 trials), and Physical Functioning (9/23 trials). PRO was noted to be concordant with PFS in 19/33 (57.6%) trials (p = 0.398), and with OS in 22/31 (71%) trials (p = 0.018). Our study identified key PRO domains that can be potentially used as primary endpoint in MM RCTs. Additionally, significant association between PROs and OS highlight the importance of integrating PROs to better capture treatment efficacy.

From the Formation of Conceptual Framework to Regulatory Decision-Making: Considerations for the Developments of Patient-Reported Outcome Instruments

In recent years, patient-focused drug development (PFDD) has received widespread attention as a new paradigm in clinical trials. The PFDD emphasizes patients are partners in research projects, where patients can participate in research design, implementation, and outcome measurement, rather than just providing data. PFDD has shown great value in the research and development of pharmaceutical products, such as in accelerating the process of patient enrollment and improving the success rate of drug approval. Many countries and regions, including the United States, China, and Europe, have issued relevant regulatory policies and guidelines related to PFDD, covering study design, implementation, and risk-benefit assessment. The core of PFDD implementation is clinical outcome assessment (COA), of which patient-reported outcome (PRO) is most common. As far as the US Food and Drug Administration is concerned, there are numerous COA tools waiting for qualification, but currently all qualified are PROs. This review focuses on PRO and explores the key elements of PRO instruments' development, application, and inclusion in regulatory decision-making.

The evolving value assessment of cancer therapies: Results from a modified Delphi study

The move toward early detection and treatment of cancer presents challenges for value assessment using traditional endpoints. Current cancer management rarely considers the full economic and societal benefits of therapies. Our study used a modified Delphi process to develop principles for defining and assessing value of cancer therapies that aligns with the current trajectory of oncology research and reflects broader notions of value. 24 experts participated in consensus-building activities across 5 months (16 took part in structured interactions, including a survey, plenary sessions, interviews, and off-line discussions, while 8 participated in interviews). Discussion focused on: 1) which oncology-relevant endpoints should be used for assessing treatments for early-stage cancer and access decisions for early-stage treatments, and 2) the importance of additional value components and how these can be integrated in value assessments. The expert group reached consensus on 4 principles in relation to the first area (consider oncology-relevant endpoints other than overall survival; build evidence for endpoints that provide earlier indication of efficacy; develop evidence for the next generation of predictive measures; use managed entry agreements supported by ongoing evidence collection to address decision-maker evidence needs) and 3 principles in relation to the second (routinely use patient reported outcomes in value assessments; assess broad economic impact of new medicines; consider other value aspects of relevance to patients and society).

Is health-related quality of life sufficiently addressed in trials for breast cancer treatments? An assessment based on reimbursement opinions from the French health technology assessment body, 2009-2023

BACKGROUND

Breast cancer treatments can impact the patients' health-related quality of life (HR-QoL). This criterion is relevant for drug reimbursement decisions. We wanted to assess the usage of HR-QoL in health technology assessments (HTA).

METHODS

All HAS (Haute Autorité de Santé, the French HTA body) opinions published between January 1, 2009 and March 31, 2023 for the reimbursement of breast cancer drugs were analysed.

RESULTS

51 distinct appraisals were found during the period, corresponding to 45 product-specific indications, of which 36 (80 %) including clinical studies in which HR-QoL was an endpoint. HAS explicitly rejected HR-QoL data in 25 out of 36 (69 %) indications with such data. Rejections are justified by methodological weaknesses, including lack of adjustment for type I error inflation (n=21 indications), open-label treatment (n=7), lack of a pre-specified clinically relevant HR-QoL threshold (n=6) or missing data (n=6). Regardless of rejection status, HR-QoL results were not mentioned as a determinant of value assessment in 3/36 (8 %) instances (2/25 for rejected data).

CONCLUSIONS

HR-QoL data are inconsistently present in HTA assessments of new breast cancer drugs. Their methodological quality often hinders their use in determining the drug's value.

POLICY SUMMARY

A rigorous and acceptable comparative experimental framework is expected for HR-QoL assessments. More detail on the precise impact of the absence or presence of HR-QoL data in the determination of the drug's added value could help understanding how this dimension is influential in the assessments.

Health-related quality of life outcomes in randomized controlled trials in metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer: a systematic review

Background

Since 2015 multiple combination treatments became available for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) without effectiveness cross-comparison. Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) could aid in decision-making.

Methods

We systematically reviewed HRQoL publications (January 2015-September 2024) of phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in mHSPC using PRISMA guidelines, cross-compared HRQoL results and assessed usefulness to support decision-making (PROSPERO: CRD42023470698). International Society for Quality-of-Life Research (ISOQOL) recommended standards were used to assess quality of Patient-reported Outcomes reporting.

Findings

We identified nine HRQoL publications from eight RCTs investigating an estradiol patch, or either radiotherapy, docetaxel, androgen-receptor-pathway-inhibitor (ARPI) abiraterone, apalutamide or enzalutamide added to androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) versus ADT ± placebo in ≥8000 patients. Only three studies were considered to have low overall risk of bias (RoB2). Eight HRQoL measures (1-4 per study) were used; 3/5 RCTs investigating an ARPI measured HRQoL using Brief Pain Inventory (BPI-SF), and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P). Overall, the quality of PRO reporting was high, but PRO-hypothesis was provided by only 25% and reasons for missing data explained in only 50% of RCTs.

Interpretation

Conceptual and methodological HRQoL heterogeneity, along with risk of biases, hampers cross-comparison and failed to robustly support decision-making underscoring the importance of harmonizing methodological approaches.

Funding

None.

Variability of quality-of-life measurements and reporting in randomised controlled trials of pancreatic cancer: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

This systematic review aims to evaluate the methodology used in pancreatic cancer (PC) randomised controlled trials (RCTs) measuring quality of life (QOL) and focuses on the type, frequency, survey compliance and duration of these assessments.

DESIGN

Systematic review of PC RCTs measuring QOL.

DATA SOURCES

A search of PubMed.gov and ClinicalTrials.gov was conducted for PC RCTs measuring QOL from inception to 21 March 2023. Only phase III RCTs were included. Studies were excluded if QOL was not measured, the study was phase I/II, in the second-line setting or unavailable in English. Data were independently extracted by two reviewers in a standardised fashion.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary outcomes included the type of QOL instrument used, the timing and frequency of assessments, methods of analysis and survey completion rates (SCRs) over time. Secondary outcomes included patient demographics, significant QOL improvements and the frequency of trials measuring QOL.

RESULTS

Out of 269 studies screened, 54 RCTs were identified, and 24 measured QOL (involving 11 229 patients). Instruments used included the EORTC QLQ-C30 (n=15), FACT-HEP (n=3), Spitzer-QOL-Index (n=2), EQ-5D (n=2), LASA (n=1) and FACT-PA (n=1). Most trials assessed QOL until disease progression or death (10/24), with 4-week intervals being the most common (7/24). SCRs were reported in 15/24 trials, with disease stage influencing SCRs over time. In trials with metastatic, locally advanced/metastatic, and resectable disease, the median times to reach a 50% response rate-defined as the point where the number of surveys completed was half of the enrolled participants-were 12.41 weeks (n=2), 14.14 weeks (n=10), and 54.2 weeks (n=3), respectively." Only 2/24 trials reported significant QOL improvements between treatment arms. Patient age was reported in all trials, while race/ethnicity was only reported in 4/24 trials.

CONCLUSIONS

Significant variability exists in the timing, methods and reporting of QOL assessments in PC trials. There is a need for further research to assess the implications of missing data and consider the temporality of QOL assessment in patients with advanced cancers and poor prognosis.

Patient-reported outcomes in neuro-oncology

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To provide up-to-date evidence on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in neuro-oncology, with a focus on the core constructs of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and the use of PROs in clinical trials and clinical practice.[Supplemental Digital Content: Video Abstract PROs in Neuro-Oncology.mov].

RECENT FINDINGS

PROs are gaining importance in brain tumor research and medical care. For patients with a brain tumor, core PRO constructs are pain, difficulty communicating, perceived cognition, seizures, symptomatic adverse events, physical functioning and role and social functioning, which are assessed through patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Initiatives have been taken to improve the reliability and robustness of PRO data, including standardization of items included in clinical trial protocols (the SPIRIT-PRO extension) and formulation of PRO priority objectives for use in clinical trials (the SISAQOL-Innovative Medicines Initiative). In brain tumor patients with cognitive impairment, caregiver-reported outcomes may complement or replace PROs to increase accuracy. The next key challenge will be to widely implement PROs and apply PRO data in clinical practice to benefit patients with brain tumors.

SUMMARY

PROs are clinically relevant endpoints providing information only known by the patient. Standardization of the use of PROs in clinical trials and wide implementation in clinical practice is needed to improve HRQoL of brain tumor patients.

The CONVINCE randomized trial found positive effects on quality of life for patients with chronic kidney disease treated with hemodiafiltration

In the CONVINCE trial, the primary analysis demonstrated a survival benefit for patients receiving high-dose hemodiafiltration (HDF) as compared with high-flux hemodialysis (HD). A secondary objective was to evaluate effects on health-related quality of life (HRQoL); assessed in eight domains (physical function, cognitive function, fatigue, sleep disturbance, anxiety, depression, pain interference, social participation) applying instruments from the Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) before randomization and every three months thereafter. In total 1360 adults with dialysis-dependent chronic kidney disease, eligible to receive high-flux HDF (23 liters or more), were randomized (1:1); 84% response rate to all questionnaires. Both groups reported a continuous deterioration in all HRQoL domains. Overall, raw score changes from baseline were more favorable in the HDF group, resulting in a significant omnibus test after a median observation period of 30 months. Most relevant single raw score differences were reported for cognitive function. Patients receiving HDF reported a decline of -0.95 units (95% confidence interval - 2.23 to +0.34) whereas HD treated patients declined by -3.90 units (-5.28 to - 2.52). A joint model, adjusted for mortality differences, utilizing all quarterly assessments, identified a significantly slower HRQoL decline in physical function, cognitive function, pain interference, and social participation for the HDF group. Their physical health summary score declined -0.46 units/year slower compared to the HD group. Thus, the CONVINCE trial showed a beneficial effect of high-dose hemodiafiltration for survival as well as a moderate positive effect on patients' quality of life, most pronounced with respect to their cognitive function. REGISTRATION: NTR7138 on the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform.

Comparison of statistical methods for the analysis of patient-reported outcomes in randomised controlled trials: A simulation study

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) that aim to measure patients' subjective attitudes towards their health or health-related conditions in various fields have been increasingly used in randomised controlled trials (RCTs). PRO data is likely to be bounded, discrete, and skewed. Although various statistical methods are available for the analysis of PROs in RCT settings, there is no consensus on what statistical methods are the most appropriate for use. This study aims to use simulation methods to compare the performance (in terms of bias, empirical standard error, coverage of the confidence interval, Type I error, and power) of three different statistical methods, multiple linear regression (MLR), Tobit regression (Tobit), and median regression (Median), to estimate a range of predefined treatment effects for a PRO in a two-arm balanced RCT. We assumed there was an underlying latent continuous outcome that the PRO was measuring, but the actual scores observed were equally spaced and discrete. This study found that MLR was associated with little bias of the estimated treatment effect, small standard errors, and appropriate coverage of the confidence interval under most scenarios. Tobit performed worse than MLR for analysing PROs with a small number of levels, but it had better performance when analysing PROs with more discrete values. Median showed extremely large bias and errors, associated with low power and coverage for most scenarios especially when the number of possible discrete values was small. We recommend MLR as a simple and universal statistical method for the analysis of PROs in RCT settings.

Improving completion rates of patient-reported outcome measures in cancer clinical trials: Scoping review investigating the implications for trial designs

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) play a crucial role in cancer clinical trials. Despite the availability of validated PRO measures (PROMs), challenges related to low completion rates and missing data remain, potentially affecting the trial results' validity. This review explored strategies to improve and maintain high PROM completion rates in cancer clinical trials.

METHODOLOGY

A scoping review was performed across Medline, Embase and Scopus and regulatory guidelines. Key recommendations were synthesized into categories such as stakeholder involvement, study design, PRO assessment, mode of assessment, participant support, and monitoring.

RESULTS

The review identified 114 recommendations from 18 papers (16 peer-reviewed articles and 2 policy documents). The recommendations included integrating comprehensive PRO information into the study protocol, enhancing patient involvement during the protocol development phase and in education, and collecting relevant PRO data at clinically meaningful time points. Electronic data collection, effective monitoring systems, and sufficient time, capacity, workforce and financial resources were highlighted.

DISCUSSION

Further research needs to evaluate the effectiveness of these strategies in various context and to tailor these recommendations into practical and effective strategies. This will enhance PRO completion rates and patient-centred care. However, obstacles such as patient burden, low health literacy, and conflicting recommendations may present challenges in application.

Longitudinal Health-Related Quality of Life Among Patients With High-Risk Pediatric Hodgkin Lymphoma Treated on the Children's Oncology Group AHOD 1331 Study

PURPOSEThere have been no previous longitudinal assessments of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) during treatment for pediatric Hodgkin lymphoma (HL). The addition of brentuximab vedotin (BV) to a multidrug chemotherapy backbone demonstrated superior efficacy to standard chemotherapy for patients with pediatric high-risk HL in the AHOD 1331 trial. However, the impact on HRQoL is unknown.PATIENTS AND METHODSAfter treatment random assignment, 268 participants older than 11 years were enrolled in a prespecified, longitudinal, patient-reported outcomes substudy. HRQoL was assessed using the seven-item Child Health Ratings Inventories (CHRIs)-Global scale before treatment (T1) and at cycle 2 (T2), cycle 5 (T3), and end of treatment (T4). A clinically meaningful increase in HRQoL was considered 7 points on the CHRIs-Global. Multivariable linear regression estimated associations between demographic/clinical variables and HRQoL at T1. Linear mixed models estimated changes in HRQoL across the treatment arm.RESULTSParticipant characteristics were balanced by treatment arm. Ninety-three percent of participants completed the CHRIs at T1, 92% at T2, 89% at T3, and 77% at T4. At T1, female sex and fever (P < .05) were each associated with worse HRQoL. By T2, participants in the BV arm experienced a statistically and clinically significant improvement in HRQoL (β = 7.3 [95% CI, 3.2 to 11.4]; P ≤ .001), which was greater than the change in the standard arm (difference in change β = 5.1 [95% CI, -0.2 to 10.3]; P = .057). The standard arm did not experience a statistically or clinically significant increase in HRQoL until T4 (β = 9.3 [95% CI, 4.7 to 11.5]; P < .001).CONCLUSIONThese data demonstrate successful collection of serial HRQoL from youth with high-risk pediatric HL and improvement in HRQoL over the course of initial therapy, sooner and to a greater extent in the group receiving the novel agent BV.

Establishing the minimal clinically important difference of the Brief Fatigue Inventory for brain or CNS cancer patients undergoing radiotherapy

Background

Minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) quantify the clinical relevance of quality of life results at the individual patient and group level. The aim of this study was to estimate the MCID for the Brief Fatigue Inventory (BFI) and the Worst and Usual Fatigue items in patients with brain or CNS cancer undergoing curative radiotherapy.

Methods

Data from a multi-site prospective registry was used. The MCID was calculated using distribution-based and anchor-based approaches. For the anchor-based approach, the fatigue item from the PROMIS-10 served as the anchor to determine if a patient improved, deteriorated, or had no change from baseline to end of treatment (EOT). We compared the unadjusted means on the BFI for the 3 groups to calculate the MCID. For the distribution-based approaches, we calculated the MCID as 0.5 SD of the scores and as 1.96 times the standard error of measurement.

Results

Three-hundred and fifty nine patients with brain or CNS tumors undergoing curative radiotherapy filled out the 9-item BFI at baseline and EOT. The MCID for the BFI was 1.33 (ranging from 0.99 to 1.70 across the approaches), 1.51 (ranging from 1.16 to 2.02) and 1.76 (ranging from 1.38 to 2.14) for the usual and worst fatigue items, respectively.

Conclusions

This study provides the MCID ranges for the BFI and Worst and Usual fatigue items, which will allow clinically meaningful conclusions to be drawn from BFI scores. These results can be used to select optimal treatments for patients with brain or CNS cancer or to interpret BFI scores from clinical trials.

Reporting of patient-reported outcomes amongst randomized clinical trials in plastic surgery: a systematic review using CONSORT-PRO

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are key to investigating patient perspectives in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Standardization of PRO reporting is critical for trial generalizability and the application of findings to clinical practice. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the reporting quality of RCTs published in the top plastic surgery journals according to the consolidated standards of reporting trials (CONSORT)-PRO extension.

METHODS

We completed a comprehensive search of MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. All RCTs with a validated PRO endpoint published in the top 10 plastic surgery journals (based on the 2021 Web of Science Impact Factor) from 2014 to 2023 were included. Two reviewers independently extracted data and scored the included studies using the CONSORT-PRO checklist. Univariate regression was applied to assess factors associated with reporting adherence. Studies were assessed for their risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool.

RESULTS

A total of 88 RCTs were included. PROs were the primary endpoint in 50 (57%) and the secondary endpoint of 38 (43%) studies. Mean overall reporting adherence was poor (39% (±12) and 36% (±13) in studies with PRO as primary and secondary endpoints, respectively). The presence of industry support was significantly associated with greater adherence.

CONCLUSIONS

There is low adherence to the CONSORT-PRO extension among plastic surgery RCTs published in the top 10 plastic surgery journals. We encourage journals and authors to endorse and apply the CONSORT-PRO extension. This may optimize the dissemination of clinical findings from RCTs and assist patient-centered care.

Androgen deprivation therapy in advanced prostate cancer: insights from a real-world patient survey on health-related quality of life and information and communication sources

PURPOSE

Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is a cornerstone treatment for advanced and metastatic prostate cancer. Real-world and patient-reported insights into ADT's impact on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and communication experiences in healthcare settings remain underexplored. This patient organisation-initiated online survey aimed to assess these aspects.

METHODS

Between December 2022 and August 2023, the patient organisation Think Blue Vlaanderen and the AZ Sint-Jan Hospital (Bruges, Belgium) invited ADT-treated patients to participate in a prospective, online, cross-sectional, patient-reported outcome survey. Demographic, clinical, HRQoL (FACT and EPIC-26), communication sources and information modality data were collected. Descriptive statistics and comparative analyses were applied.

RESULTS

A total of 276/312 (88.5%) participating patients were on ADT at time of survey administration and completion, with the majority receiving a 3-monthly regimen. Sexual HRQoL was low and narrowly distributed (median (IQR): 16.7 (16.7-16.7)), with 84% of patients having erectile dysfunction (ED). Patients finding their ED problematic were more likely to seek pharmaceutical treatment. Hormonal HRQoL was widely distributed (median (IQR): 65 (45-85)), which improved with prolonged ADT duration. Physically active patients reported less lack of energy, but increased hot flashes. Within consistent FACT-G summary scores (median (IQR): 64.50 (54.75-77.00)), improved emotional wellbeing with prolonged ADT was noted. Multidisciplinary communication and multimodal information provision improved patient satisfaction.

CONCLUSION

Patient organisation-initiated surveys offer real-world and patient-reported insights. Patient-tailored HRQoL assessments and longitudinal follow-up, physical activity, and multidisciplinary and multimodal communication approaches are warranted to improve patient-centred care in patients receiving ADT.

Relationship between reasons for intermittent missing patient-reported outcomes data and missing data mechanisms

PURPOSE

Non-response (NR) to patient-reported outcome (PRO) questionnaires may cause bias if not handled appropriately. Collecting reasons for NR is recommended, but how reasons for NR are related to missing data mechanisms remains unexplored. We aimed to explore this relationship for intermittent NRs.

METHODS

Patients with multiple myeloma completed validated PRO questionnaires at enrolment and 12 follow-up time-points. NR was defined as non-completion of a follow-up assessment within seven days, which triggered contact with the patient, recording the reason for missingness and an invitation to complete the questionnaire (denoted "salvage response"). Mean differences between salvage and previous on-time scores were estimated for groups defined by reasons for NR using linear regression with clustered standard errors. Statistically significant mean differences larger than minimal important difference thresholds were interpreted as "missing not at random" (MNAR) mechanism (i.e. assumed to be related to declining health), and the remainder interpreted as aligned with "missing completely at random" (MCAR) mechanism (i.e. assumed unrelated to changes in health).

RESULTS

Most (7228/7534 (96%)) follow-up questionnaires were completed; 11% (802/7534) were salvage responses. Mean salvage scores were compared to previous on-time scores by reason: those due to hospital admission, mental or physical reasons were worse in 10/22 PRO domains; those due to technical difficulties/procedural errors were no different in 21/22 PRO domains; and those due to overlooked/forgotten or other/unspecified reasons were no different in any domains.

CONCLUSION

Intermittent NRs due to hospital admission, mental or physical reasons were aligned with MNAR mechanism for nearly half of PRO domains, while intermittent NRs due to technical difficulties/procedural errors or other/unspecified reasons generally were aligned with MCAR mechanism.

Gothenburg Breast reconstruction (GoBreast) II protocol: a Swedish partially randomised patient preference, superiority trial comparing autologous and implant-based breast reconstruction

INTRODUCTION

Although breast reconstruction is an integral part of breast cancer treatment, there is little high-quality evidence to indicate which method is the most effective. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are generally thought to provide the most solid scientific evidence, but there are significant barriers to conducting RCTs in breast reconstruction, making both recruitment and achieving unbiased and generalisable results a challenge. The objective of this study is to compare implant-based and autologous breast reconstruction in non-irradiated patients. Moreover, the study aims to improve the evidence for trial decision-making in breast reconstruction.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The study design partially randomised patient preference trial might be a way to overcome the aforementioned challenges. In the present study, patients who consent to randomisation will be randomised to implant-based and autologous breast reconstruction, whereas patients with strong preferences will be able to choose the method. The study is designed as a superiority trial based on the patient-reported questionnaire BREAST-Q and 124 participants will be randomised. In the preference cohort, patients will be included until 62 participants have selected the least popular alternative. Follow-up will be 60 months. Embedded qualitative studies and within-trial economic evaluation will be performed. The primary outcome is patient-reported breast-specific quality of life/satisfaction, and the secondary outcomes are complications, factors affecting satisfaction and cost-effectiveness.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study has been approved by the Swedish Ethical Review Authority (2023-04754-01). Results will be published in peer-reviewed scientific journals and presented at peer-reviewed scientific meetings.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT06195865.

Adverse Event Reporting in Cancer Clinical Trials: Incorporating Patient-Reported Methods. A Systematic Scoping Review

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The history of clinical trials is fraught with unethical practices. Since 1945, robust frameworks have evolved to standardise the collection and reporting of safety data, most notably, the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) from the National Cancer Institute; used by investigators to report side effects experienced by participants. As medicine moves into the patient-centred model, interest has been growing to collect data on adverse events directly from participants (patient-reported adverse events). The aim of this systematic scoping review was to investigate the inclusion of patient-reported adverse event data within safety/tolerability analyses and explore the collection and reporting of patient-reported adverse event data.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A database search was undertaken and the Covidence platform was used to manage the review; results were analysed descriptively. Sixty-eight studies were included in the analysis. An increase in the number of studies that incorporate patient-reported adverse event data was seen by year. Seventy instruments were used for the collection of patient-reported adverse event data with recall period, mode, frequency and site of administration varying across studies; the duration of data collection ranged from 28 days to 6 years. Frequently, information on these details was omitted from publications. The number of instruments used by studies to collect patient-reported adverse event data ranged from one to seven instruments.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite growing calls for the inclusion of patient-reported adverse events, this has not yet translated into published reports. The collection and reporting of these data were variable and conducted using instruments that were not designed for purpose. To address these inconsistencies, standardisation of data collection and reporting using a purpose-built validated instrument is required.

Patient-reported outcomes for the phase 3 FURLONG study of furmonertinib versus gefitinib as first-line therapy for Chinese patients with locally advanced or metastatic EGFR mutation-positive non-small cell lung cancer

Background

Furmonertinib showed superior efficacy compared with gefitinib as first-line therapy in patients with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation-positive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in the FURLONG study. Here we present prespecified secondary endpoints of patient-reported outcomes (PRO).

Methods

In this multicentre, double-blind, double-dummy, randomised phase 3 study, patients were 1:1 randomly assigned to receive furmonertinib 80 mg once daily or gefitinib 250 mg once daily. PROs assessed by the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality-of-Life Questionnaire Core 30 and Quality-of-Life Questionnaire Lung Cancer 13 were analysed using a mixed model for repeated measures and time-to-event analyses. A difference in score of 10 points or more was deemed clinically relevant.

Findings

Three hundred and fifty-seven patients (furmonertinib group, n = 178; gefitinib group, n = 179) received at least one dose of the study drug, all of whom completed at least one PRO assessment. Statistically significant difference of overall score changes from baseline favoured furmonertinib in physical functioning (between-group difference 2.14 [95% CI 0.25-4.04], p = 0.027), nausea/vomiting (-1.56 [95% CI -2.62 to -0.49], p = 0.004), appetite loss (-2.24 [95% CI -4.26 to -0.23], p = 0.029), diarrhoea (-3.36 [95% CI -5.19 to -1.54], p < 0.001), alopecia (-2.62 [95% CI -4.54 to -0.71], p = 0.007), and pain in other parts (-4.55 [95% CI -7.37 to -1.74], p = 0.002), but not reached clinical relevance. Time to deterioration in physical functioning (hazard ratio 0.63 [95% CI 0.42-0.94], p = 0.021), cognitive functioning (0.73 [95% CI 0.54-0.98], p = 0.034), nausea/vomiting (0.64 [95% CI 0.41-0.99], p = 0.042), appetite loss (0.63 [95% CI 0.43-0.92], p = 0.016), diarrhoea (0.63 [95% CI 0.46-0.85], p = 0.002), dyspnoea (0.72 [95% CI 0.53-0.98], p = 0.034), cough (0.67 [95% CI 0.44-1.00], p = 0.049), dysphagia (0.54 [95% CI 0.35-0.83], p = 0.004), and alopecia (0.62 [95% CI 0.42-0.90], p = 0.012) was longer with furmonertinib versus gefitinib.

Interpretation

In patients with locally advanced or metastatic EGFR mutation-positive NSCLC, furmonertinib showed improved scores and delayed deterioration in several functioning and symptoms compared to gefitinib.

Funding

Shanghai Allist Pharmaceutical Technology Co., Ltd and the National Science and Technology Major Project for Key New Drug Development (2017ZX09304015).

Patient-driven research priorities for patient-centered measurement

BACKGROUND

Patient-centred measurement (PCM) emphasizes a holistic approach wherein the voices of patients are reflected in the standardized use of patient-reported outcome and experience measures and are represented throughout the continuum of measurement activities. Given the challenges of routinely integrating patient self-reports into clinical care decisions, the perspectives of all healthcare system stakeholders, especially patients, is necessary to advance the science of PCM. The purpose of the analysis we report on here was to identify patient-driven research priorities for advancing the science of PCM.

METHODS

We analyzed data from seven focus groups that were conducted across British Columbia, Canada and that included a total of 73 patients, using qualitative inductive analysis and constant comparative methods.

RESULTS

We found that the patients conveyed a desire for PCM to contribute to healthcare decisions, specifically that their individual healthcare needs and related priorities as they see them are always front and centre, guiding all healthcare interactions. The patients' commentaries highlighted intersecting priorities for research on advancing the science of PCM that would help transform care by (1) enhancing the patient-provider relationship, (2) giving voice to patients' stories, (3) addressing inclusivity, (4) ensuring psychological safety, (5) improving healthcare services and systems to better meet patient needs, and (6) bolstering healthcare system accountability.

CONCLUSIONS

These priorities provide direction for future research efforts that would be positioned to make progress towards better health, better care, and better use of resources for individuals and for society.

Translation, Cultural Adaptation, and Validation into Romanian of the Myeloproliferative Neoplasm Symptom Assessment Form-Total Symptom Score (MPN-SAF TSS or MPN-10) Questionnaire

Background: Patients with myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs) experience a high disease-related symptom burden. A specific instrument to evaluate quality of life (QoL), i.e., the MPN Symptom Assessment Form Total Symptom Score (MPN-SAF TSS; MPN-10), was developed. We conducted the translation, cultural adaptation, and validation into Romanian of the MPN-10. Methods: We translated the MPN-10 and tested its psychometric properties. Results: We recruited 180 MPN patients: 66 polycythemia vera (36.67%), 61 essential thrombocythemia (33.89%), 51 primary and secondary myelofibrosis (SMF) (28.33%), and 2 MPN-unclassifiable (1.11%). The mean TSS was 19.51 ± 16.51 points. Fatigue, inactivity, and concentration problems were the most cumbersome symptoms. We detected scoring differences between MPN subtypes regarding weight loss (p < 0.001), fatigue (p = 0.006), early satiety (p = 0.007), night sweats (p = 0.047), pruritus (p = 0.05), and TSS (p = 0.021). There were strong positive associations between TSS and inactivity, fatigue, and concentration problems, and moderate negative correlations between QoL scores and all MPN-10 items. Cronbach's α internal consistency coefficient was 0.855. The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin construct validity test result was 0.870 and the Bartlett Sphericity Test was significant (p < 0.001). Symptom scores were loaded into one single factor according to the exploratory factor analysis. Conclusions: The Romanian MPN-10 version displayed excellent psychometric properties and is a reliable instrument for assessing symptom burden and QoL in Romanian MPN patients.

Quality of life endpoints in cancer cachexia clinical trials: Systematic review 3 of the cachexia endpoints series

The use of patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) of quality of life (QOL) is common in cachexia trials. Patients' self-report on health, functioning, wellbeing, and perceptions of care, represent important measures of efficacy. This review describes the frequency, variety, and reporting of QOL endpoints used in cancer cachexia clinical trials. Electronic literature searches were performed in Medline, Embase, and Cochrane (1990-2023). Seven thousand four hundred thirty-five papers were retained for evaluation. Eligibility criteria included QOL as a study endpoint using validated measures, controlled design, adults (>18 years), ≥40 participants randomized, and intervention exceeding 2 weeks. The Covidence software was used for review procedures and data extractions. Four independent authors screened all records for consensus. Papers were screened by titles and abstracts, prior to full-text reading. PRISMA guidance for systematic reviews was followed. The protocol was prospectively registered via PROSPERO (CRD42022276710). Fifty papers focused on QOL. Twenty-four (48%) were double-blind randomized controlled trials. Sample sizes varied considerably (n = 42 to 469). Thirty-nine trials (78%) included multiple cancer types. Twenty-seven trials (54%) featured multimodal interventions with various drugs and dietary supplements, 11 (22%) used nutritional interventions alone and 12 (24%) used a single pharmacological intervention only. The median duration of the interventions was 12 weeks (4-96). The most frequent QOL measure was the EORTC QLQ-C30 (60%), followed by different FACIT questionnaires (34%). QOL was a primary, secondary, or exploratory endpoint in 15, 31 and 4 trials respectively, being the single primary in six. Statistically significant results on one or more QOL items favouring the intervention group were found in 18 trials. Eleven of these used a complete multidimensional measure. Adjustments for multiple testing when using multicomponent QOL measures were not reported. Nine trials (18%) defined a statistically or clinically significant difference for QOL, five with QOL as a primary outcome, and four with QOL as a secondary outcome. Correlation statistics with other study outcomes were rarely performed. PROMs including QOL are important endpoints in cachexia trials. We recommend using well-validated QOL measures, including cachexia-specific items such as weight history, appetite loss, and nutritional intake. Appropriate statistical methods with definitions of clinical significance, adjustment for multiple testing and few co-primary endpoints are encouraged, as is an understanding of how interventions may relate to changes in QOL endpoints. A strategic and scientific-based approach to PROM research in cachexia trials is warranted, to improve the research base in this field and avoid the use of QOL as supplementary measures.

Critical Comments by Food and Drug Administration Reviewers on Patient-Reported Outcomes in Food and Drug Administration Regulatory Submissions (2018-2021)

OBJECTIVES

This article examined the inclusion of patient-reported outcome (PRO) data in new drug applications (NDAs) submitted to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and approved from 2018 to 2021. The importance of assessing PROs, which capture patients' perspectives on the disease and treatment experience, has been underscored by many stakeholders, including regulatory authorities. Despite the increasing inclusion of PRO assessments in registration trials, inclusion of language related to PRO results in approved product labeling varies widely.

METHODS

This study examined FDA submission packages for NDAs approved by the FDA from 2018 to 2021 to identify critical reviewer comments related to PROs. Comments were identified and categorized by the type of criticism. Reviewers considered both oncology and nononcology indications.

RESULTS

Assessment of PROs was included in 66.2% of the 210 submissions reviewed. Critical comments were identified in 45.3% of these applications; comments most commonly related to statistical analysis considerations, fit for purpose, and study design. Other categories of critical comment included data quality, lack of treatment benefit, administrative considerations, and miscellaneous issues. Differences were observed between oncology and nononcology NDAs with regard to the number and type of comments included in each of these categories. The findings highlight the importance of planning statistical analyses, establishing content validity, carefully considering study design, maximizing data quality, and demonstrating treatment benefit, among other issues.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, this study offers insight into the landscape of PRO data included in recently approved NDAs, along with recommendations for improving the quality and reporting of PROs in clinical trials.

Leveraging patient experience data to guide medicines development, regulation, access decisions and clinical care in the EU

Patient experience data (PED), provided by patients/their carers without interpretation by clinicians, directly capture what matters more to patients on their medical condition, treatment and impact of healthcare. PED can be collected through different methodologies and these need to be robust and validated for its intended use. Medicine regulators are increasingly encouraging stakeholders to generate, collect and submit PED to support both scientific advice in development programs and regulatory decisions on the approval and use of these medicines. This article reviews the existing definitions and types of PED and demonstrate the potential for use in different settings of medicines' life cycle, focusing on Patient-Reported Outcomes (PRO) and Patient Preferences (PP). Furthermore, it addresses some challenges and opportunities, alluding to important regulatory guidance that has been published, methodological aspects and digitalization, highlighting the lack of guidance as a key hurdle to achieve more systematic inclusion of PED in regulatory submissions. In addition, the article discusses opportunities at European and global level that could be implemented to leverage PED use. New digital tools that allow patients to collect PED in real time could also contribute to these advances, but it is equally important not to overlook the challenges they entail. The numerous and relevant initiatives being developed by various stakeholders in this field, including regulators, show their confidence in PED's value and create an ideal moment to address challenges and consolidate PED use across medicines' life cycle.

Application of Patient-Reported Outcome Measurements in Adult Tumor Clinical Trials in China: Cross-Sectional Study

BACKGROUND

International health policies and researchers have emphasized the value of evaluating patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in clinical studies. However, the characteristics of PROs in adult tumor clinical trials in China remain insufficiently elucidated.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to assess the application and characteristics of PRO instruments as primary or secondary outcomes in adult randomized clinical trials related to tumors in China.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study identified tumor-focused randomized clinical trials conducted in China between January 1, 2010, and June 30, 2022. The ClinicalTrials.gov database and the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry were selected as the databases. Trials were classified into four groups based on the use of PRO instruments: (1) trials listing PRO instruments as primary outcomes, (2) trials listing PRO instruments as secondary outcomes, (3) trials listing PRO instruments as coprimary outcomes, and (4) trials without any mention of PRO instruments. Pertinent data, including study phase, settings, geographic regions, centers, participant demographics (age and sex), funding sources, intervention types, target diseases, and the names of PRO instruments, were extracted from these trials. The target diseases involved in the trials were grouped according to the American Joint Committee on Cancer Staging Manual, 8th Edition.

RESULTS

Among the 6445 trials examined, 2390 (37.08%) incorporated PRO instruments as part of their outcomes. Within this subset, 26.82% (641/2390) listed PRO instruments as primary outcomes, 52.72% (1260/2390) as secondary outcomes, and 20.46% (489/2390) as coprimary outcomes. Among the 2,155,306 participants included in these trials, PRO instruments were used to collect data from 613,648 (28.47%) patients as primary or secondary outcomes and from 74,287 (3.45%) patients as coprimary outcomes. The most common conditions explicitly using specified PRO instruments included thorax tumors (217/1280, 16.95%), breast tumors (176/1280, 13.75%), and lower gastrointestinal tract tumors (173/1280, 13.52%). Frequently used PRO instruments included the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Core Questionnaire-30, the visual analog scale, the numeric rating scale, the Traditional Chinese Medicine Symptom Scale, and the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index.

CONCLUSIONS

Over recent years, the incorporation of PROs has demonstrated an upward trajectory in adult randomized clinical trials on tumors in China. Nonetheless, the infrequent measurement of the patient's voice remains noteworthy. Disease-specific PRO instruments should be more effectively incorporated into various tumor disease categories in clinical trials, and there is room for improvement in the inclusion of PRO instruments as clinical trial end points.

Rational combination platform trial design for children and young adults with diffuse midline glioma: A report from PNOC

Background Diffuse midline glioma (DMG) is a devastating pediatric brain tumor unresponsive to hundreds of clinical trials. Approximately 80% of DMGs harbor H3K27M oncohistones, which reprogram the epigenome to increase the metabolic profile of the tumor cells. Methods We have previously shown preclinical efficacy of targeting both oxidative phosphorylation and glycolysis through treatment with ONC201, which activates the mitochondrial protease ClpP, and paxalisib, which inhibits PI3K/mTOR, respectively. Results ONC201 and paxalisib combination treatment aimed at inducing metabolic distress led to the design of the first DMG-specific platform trial PNOC022 (NCT05009992). Conclusions Here, we expand on the PNOC022 rationale and discuss various considerations, including liquid biome, microbiome, and genomic biomarkers, quality-of-life endpoints, and novel imaging modalities, such that we offer direction on future clinical trials in DMG.

Toward a more patient-centered drug development process in clinical trials for patients with myelodysplastic syndromes/neoplasms (MDS): Practical considerations from the International Consortium for MDS (icMDS)

Notable treatment advances have been made in recent years for patients with myelodysplastic syndromes/neoplasms (MDS), and several new drugs are under development. For example, the emerging availability of oral MDS therapies holds the promise of improving patients' health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Within this rapidly evolving landscape, the inclusion of HRQoL and other patient-reported outcomes (PROs) is critical to inform the benefit/risk assessment of new therapies or to assess whether patients live longer and better, for what will likely remain a largely incurable disease. We provide practical considerations to support investigators in generating high-quality PRO data in future MDS trials. We first describe several challenges that are to be thoughtfully considered when designing an MDS-focused clinical trial with a PRO endpoint. We then discuss aspects related to the design of the study, including PRO assessment strategies. We also discuss statistical approaches illustrating the potential value of time-to-event analyses and their implications within the estimand framework. Finally, based on a literature review of MDS randomized controlled trials with a PRO endpoint, we note the PRO items that deserve special attention when reporting future MDS trial results. We hope these practical considerations will facilitate the generation of rigorous PRO data that can robustly inform MDS patient care and support treatment decision-making for this patient population.

Statistical Analysis Methods and Reporting of Patient-Reported Outcomes in Randomized Controlled Trials for Cancer Conducted in Japan: A Systematic Review

The Setting International Standards in Analyzing Patient-Reported Outcomes and Quality of Life Endpoints Data (SISAQOL) initiative was established in 2016 to assess the quality and standardization of patient-reported outcomes (PRO) data analysis in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on advanced breast cancer. The initiative identified deficiencies in PRO data reporting, including nonstandardized methods for handling missing data. This study evaluated the reporting of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in Japanese cancer RCTs to provide insights into the state of PRO reporting in Japan. The study reviewed PubMed articles published from 2010 to 2018. Eligible studies included Japanese cancer RCTs with ≥50 adult patients (≥50% were Japanese) with solid tumors receiving anticancer treatments. The evaluation criteria included clarity of the HRQOL hypotheses, multiplicity testing, primary analysis methods, and reporting of clinically meaningful differences. Twenty-seven HRQOL trials were identified. Only 15% provided a clear HRQOL hypothesis, and 63% examined multiple HRQOL domains without adjusting for multiplicity. Model-based methods were the most common statistical methods for the primary HRQOL analysis. Only 22% of the trials explicitly reported clinically meaningful differences in HRQOL. Baseline assessments were reported in most trials, but only 26% reported comparisons between the treatment groups. HRQOL analysis was based on the intention-to-treat population in 19% of the trials, and 74% reported compliance at follow-up; however, 41% did not specify how missing values were handled. Although the rates of reporting clinical hypotheses and clinically meaningful differences were relatively low, the current state of HRQOL evaluation in the Japanese cancer RCT appears comparable to that of previous studies.

Patient-reported outcomes in randomized clinical trials of systemic therapy for advanced soft tissue sarcomas in adults: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

This systematic review evaluates reporting of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) within randomized clinical trials (RCTs) for advanced soft tissue sarcoma (STS) patients.

METHODS

A systematic literature search from January 2000 - August 2022 was conducted for phase II/III RCTs evaluating systemic treatments in adult patients with advanced STS. Quality of PRO reporting was assessed using the CONSORT PRO extension.

RESULTS

Out of 7294 abstracts, 59 articles were included; comprising 43 RCTs. Only 15 RCTs (35%) included PROs, none as primary endpoints. Only 10 of these RCTs reported PROs, either in the primary (6/10) or secondary publication (1/10) or in both (3/10), with a median time interval of 23 months. The median CONSORT PRO adherence score was 5.5/14, with higher scores in publications focusing exclusively on PROs.

CONCLUSION

These results highlight the need for improved and more consistent PRO reporting to inform patient care in the setting of advanced STS.