The use of patient-reported outcomes in advanced breast cancer clinical trials: a review of the published literature

The development of an archive of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in oncology: The Italian PRO4All project

BACKGROUND

Choosing the most adequate measure of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) for a specific medical condition is not straightforward. This study aimed to develop a comprehensive archive of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), observer-reported outcome measures (ObsROMs) and caregiver-reported outcome measures (CROMs) in oncology and identify their main characteristics and target outcome domains.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

As part of the Italian PRO4All Project, we retrieved questionnaires through an extensive search of online databases. We developed a data extraction form to collect information on cancer type, questionnaire variant(s), recall period, and scoring system. We performed a content analysis of the questionnaires to assign each item a specific outcome domain according to a predefined 38-item taxonomy.

RESULTS

A total of 386 PROMs (n = 356), ObsROMs (n = 13) and CROMs (n = 17) were identified and described; of these, 358 were also analyzed in their content. 47.3 % of the instruments were cancer type-specific, 45.1 % were generic for cancer and 7.9 % were developed for the general population but also recommended in oncology. The great majority (92.2 %) were patient-reported. In 50.3 % the recall period was "last week". The mean number of items per questionnaire was 22.0 (range: 1-130). 7794 items were assigned an outcome domain, the most frequent being emotional functioning/wellbeing (22 %), physical functioning (15.7 %), general outcomes (10.1 %) and delivery of care (8.9 %).

CONCLUSIONS

There are a variety of patient and caregiver-reported measures in oncology. This archive can guide researchers and practitioners in selecting the most suitable measures and fostering a patient-centered approach in clinical trials, clinical practice, and regulatory activities.

Selecting patient-reported outcome measures for a patient-facing technology

Objective

This article provides insight into our process and considerations for selecting patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) designed for self-reporting symptoms and quality-of-life among breast cancer (BCA) patients undergoing oral anticancer agent treatment via a patient-facing technology (PFT) platform.

Methods

Following established guidelines, we conducted a thorough assessment of a specific set of PROMs, comparing their content to identify the most suitable options for studying BCA patients.

Results

We recommend utilizing the combination of EORTC QLQ-C30 + EORTC QLQ-BR45 as the preferred instrument, especially when developing a dedicated "breast cancer-only" application.

Discussion

When developing and maintaining a dashboard for a PFT platform that includes multiple cancer types, it is important to consider the feasibility of interface design and workload. To achieve this, we recommend using PRO-CTCAE+PROMIS 10 GH for the PFT. Moreover, it is important to consider adding ad hoc items to complement the chosen PROM(s).

Conclusion

This article describes our efforts to identify PROMs for self-reported data while considering patient and developer burdens, providing guidance to PFT developers facing similar challenges in PROM selection.

Adherence to Mediterranean Diet and Nutritional Status in Women with Breast Cancer: What Is Their Impact on Disease Progression and Recurrence-Free Patients' Survival?

Introduction: Nutritional status impacts the survival of patients with cancer. There are few studies that investigate the role of nutritional status on breast cancer survival in women with breast cancer, and even fewer regarding the impact of adhering to the Mediterranean diet (MD). The present study aims to assess the nutritional status, MD adherence, physical activity levels and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in women diagnosed with breast cancer and evaluate these parameters regarding recurrence-free survival. Methods: A total of 114 women, aged 35-87 years old, diagnosed with breast cancer in Larissa, Greece, participated in the study. Tumor histopathology was reported, and anthropometric indices were measured by a trained nurse, while questionnaires regarding nutritional status (via mini nutritional assessment), HRQOL via EORTC QLQ-C30, physical activity levels via IPAQ and Mediterranean diet adherence via MedDietScore were administered. The participants were followed-up for a maximum time interval of 42 months or until recurrence occurred. Results: A total of 74% of patients were overweight or obese, while 4% of women were undernourished, and 28% were at risk of malnutrition. After 42 months of follow-up, 22 patients (19.3%) had relapsed. The median time to recurrence was 38 months (IQR: 33-40 months) and ranged between 23 to 42 months. Higher levels of MD adherence were significantly associated with lower body mass index (BMI) values, earlier disease stage, smaller tumor size, absence of lymph node metastases and better physical activity levels (p < 0.05). Normal nutritional status was significantly associated with higher BMI values and better health-related quality of life (p ≤ 0.05). In univariate analysis, patients with higher levels of MD adherence and well-nourished patients had significantly longer recurrence-free survival (p < 0.05). In multivariate analysis, MD adherence and nutritional status were independently associated with recurrence-free patients' survival after adjustment for several confounding factors (p < 0.05). Conclusions: The impact of MD on time to recurrence is still under investigation, and future interventional studies need to focus on the role of adhering to the MD before and after therapy in survival and breast cancer progression. Furthermore, the present study also highlights the importance of an adequate nutritional status on disease progression, and the need for nutritional assessment, education and intervention in women with breast cancer.

Progression-free survival and quality of life in metastatic breast cancer: The patient perspective

Introduction

Objective

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusion

•

Overall survival benefit combined with good QoL are the most important endpoints for mBC patients.

•

Time without disease progression is meaningful to patients when coupled with no worsening in or improvements in QoL.

•

Quality of life is highly individual and evolves throughout the treatment journey.

•

Surrogate endpoints are confusing; more patient-centered language is needed.

•

Healthcare professionals should account for disease and psychological well-being.

Comprehensive review of statistical methods for analysing patient-reported outcomes (PROs) used as primary outcomes in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published by the UK's Health Technology Assessment (HTA) journal (1997-2020)

OBJECTIVES

To identify how frequently patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are used as primary and/or secondary outcomes in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and to summarise what statistical methods are used for the analysis of PROs.

DESIGN

Comprehensive review.

SETTING

RCTs funded and published by the United Kingdom's (UK) National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Programme.

DATA SOURCES AND ELIGIBILITY

HTA reports of RCTs published between January 1997 and December 2020 were reviewed.

DATA EXTRACTION

Information relating to PRO use and analysis methods was extracted.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

The frequency of using PROs as primary and/or secondary outcomes; statistical methods that were used for the analysis of PROs as primary outcomes.

RESULTS

In this review, 37.6% (114/303) of trials used PROs as primary outcomes, and 82.8% (251/303) of trials used PROs as secondary outcomes from 303 NIHR HTA reports of RCTs. In the 114 RCTs where the PRO was the primary outcome, the most used PRO was the Short-Form 36 (8/114); the most popular methods for multivariable analysis were linear mixed model (45/114), linear regression (29/114) and analysis of covariance (13/114); logistic regression was applied for binary and ordinal outcomes in 14/114 trials; and the repeated measures analysis was used in 39/114 trials.

CONCLUSION

The majority of trials used PROs as primary and/or secondary outcomes. Conventional methods such as linear regression are widely used, despite the potential violation of their assumptions. In recent years, there is an increasing trend of using complex models (eg, with mixed effects). Statistical methods developed to address these violations when analysing PROs, such as beta-binomial regression, are not routinely used in practice. Future research will focus on evaluating available statistical methods for the analysis of PROs.

Measuring Quality of Life Using Patient-Reported Outcomes in Real-World Metastatic Breast Cancer Patients: The Need for a Standardized Approach

Simple Summary

Metastatic breast cancer (MBC) remains incurable despite treatment improvements. The health-related quality of life is a multidimensional entity which covers physical, psychological and social dimensions. It is an important outcome particularly in patients with metastatic disease, as the primary goal of therapy is no longer curation, but to provide the best possible quality of life weighted against treatment risks and adverse symptoms. Patient-reported outcomes reflecting the quality of life are usually measured with validated questionnaires to evaluate treatment strategies based on symptom burden and to improve care delivery. This review shares insights into the role of patient-reported outcome measurements in MBC patients and describes the heterogeneity of current questionnaires. We conclude that an up-to-date and standardized outcome set is needed, containing relevant domains referring to individual needs to improve the quality of life assessment among MBC patients. This is a prerequisite to learn about how they could impact the clinical care pathway.

Abstract

Metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients are almost always treated to minimize the symptom burden, and to prolong life without a curative intent. Although the prognosis of MBC patients has improved in recent years, the median survival after diagnosis is still only 3 years. Therefore, the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) should play a leading role in making treatment decisions. Heterogeneity in questionnaires used to evaluate the HRQoL in MBC patients complicates the interpretability and comparability of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) globally. In this review, we aimed to provide an overview of PRO instruments used in real-world MBC patients and to discuss important issues in measuring HRQoL. Routinely collecting symptom information using PROs could enhance treatment evaluation and shared decision-making. Standardizing these measures might help to improve the implementation of PROs, and facilitates collecting and sharing data to establish valid comparisons in research. This is a prerequisite to learn about how they could impact the clinical care pathway. In addition, the prognostic value of intensified PRO collection throughout therapy on survival and disease progression is promising. Future perspectives in the field of PROs and MBC are described.

Health-related quality of life in breast cancer patients: review of reviews from 2008 to 2018

BACKGROUND

Breast cancer still is a topic. This overview of the literature aimed to update the current knowledge on quality of life in breast cancer patients.

METHODS

A review of literature in MEDLINE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and Google Scholar were carried out to identify review papers on health-related quality of life in breast cancer during the 2008 to 2018. All publications were screened using the PRISMA guideline. The methodological quality of reviews was assessed using the AMSTAR. The findings were summarized and tabulated accordingly.

RESULTS

Within over a decade, a total of 974 review papers were identified which according to the study selection criteria finally we have evaluated 82 reviews. Of these about 85% had a reasonable methodological quality. The findings were mainly summarized on several headings including instruments used to measure quality of life, treatment, supportive care, psychological distress, and symptoms. Questionnaires had a good performance to quantify quality of life in breast cancer patients. Most reviews were focused on the impact of treatment including endocrine therapy as well as integrating complementary and alternative medicine into the current practice. According to the reviews, yoga was the most recommended exercise to improve quality of life in breast cancer patients.

CONCLUSION

Overall, the findings from this overview indicated that quality of life in breast cancer patients enhanced during the last decade. Several simple but effective interventions such as physical activity and psychosocial interventions proved to be effective in improving quality of life in this population. However, management of symptoms such as pain, and lymphedema, issues related to worry, sexual function especially for young patients, and the future outlooks all are among topics that deserve further consideration. Also, this overview indicated that methodological issues in measuring quality of life in breast cancer patients improved greatly, but still there is a long way to go to understand what really matter to patients.

Do reminder emails and past due notifications improve patient completion and institutional data submission for patient-reported outcome measures?

PURPOSE

NRG Oncology, part of the National Cancer Institute's National Clinical Trials Network, took efforts to increase patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) completion and institutional data submission rates within clinical trials. Lack of completion diminishes power to draw conclusions and can be a waste of resources. It is hypothesized that trials with automatic email reminders and past due notifications will have PROM forms submitted more timely with higher patient completion.

METHODS

Automatic emails sent to the research associate were added to selected NRG Oncology trials. Comparisons between trials with and without automatic emails were analyzed using Chi-square tests with respect to patient completion and timeliness of form submission rates. Multivariable analyses were conducted using repeated measures generalized estimating equations. If PROMs were not completed, a form providing the reason why was submitted and counted towards form submission.

RESULTS

For both disease sites, form submission was significantly higher within 1 month of the form's due date for the studies with automatic emails vs. those without (prostate: 79.7% vs. 75.7%, p < 0.001; breast: 59.2% vs. 31.3%, p < 0.001). No significant differences in patient completion were observed between the breast trials. The prostate trial with automatic emails had significantly higher patient completion but this result was not confirmed in the multivariable analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Although patient completion rates were higher on trials with automatic emails, there may be confounding factors requiring future study. The automatic emails appeared to have increased the timeliness of form submission, thus supporting their continued use on NRG Oncology trials.

Real-world patient-reported outcomes of women receiving initial endocrine-based therapy for HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer in five European countries

Background

Endocrine therapy (ET)-based regimens are the mainstay of treatment for patients with hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HR+/HER2−) advanced breast cancer. With the introduction of new treatment classes, it is important to examine patient symptoms and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) at the start of this changing therapeutic landscape. This real-world study describes the patient-reported outcomes (PROs) of women with HR+/HER2− advanced breast cancer receiving ET-based regimens who were naïve to systemic treatment in the advanced setting across five European countries (EU5).

Methods

Data were collected between March and July 2017 from surveyed oncologists and their patients at a single time point using the multinational Adelphi Advanced Breast Cancer Disease Specific Programme™. Patients completed PRO questionnaires on HRQoL (EORTC QLQ-C30), pain severity and interference, and work and activity impairment. A multiple linear regression model explored factors associated with HRQoL.

Results

Across EU5, 226 physicians provided data on 781 women with HR+/HER2− advanced breast cancer taking their first ET-based regimen for advanced disease, of whom 252 provided PRO data. This subset had a mean age of 67.1 years, 94% were postmenopausal, 89% were diagnosed with advanced breast cancer at initial presentation, 79% had stage IV disease (66% of these patients had bone metastases and 38% had visceral metastases, including 18% with liver metastases) and 77% were on endocrine-only therapy as their initial treatment for advanced disease. The mean EORTC QLQ-C30 global health score (50.9) was worse than the reference value for patients with advanced breast cancer (60.2). Fatigue, pain, and insomnia were the most severe symptoms, and mean functioning scores were also worse than reference values. “Worst pain” and “pain interference” were moderate/severe for 42 and 80% of patients. Mean activity impairment was 44%, and greater activity impairment was associated with poorer HRQoL.

Conclusions

Despite receiving first-line ET-based regimens for advanced disease, these women had a poor HRQoL and high levels of symptoms, pain, pain interference and activity impairment. New treatments that maintain a stable disease state and reduce activity impairment may have a positive effect on the HRQoL of those living with advanced breast cancer.

Associations between safety, tolerability, and toxicity and the reporting of health-related quality of life in phase III randomized trials in common solid tumors

Background

Anti‐cancer drugs are approved typically on the basis of efficacy and safety as evaluated in phase III randomized trials (RCTs). Health‐related quality of life (HRQoL) is a direct measure of patient benefit, but is under‐reported. Here we explore associations with reporting of HRQoL data in phase III RCTs in common solid tumors.

Methods

We searched ClinicalTrials.gov to identify phase III RCTs evaluating new drugs in adults with advanced cancers that completed accrual between January 2005 and October 2016. Data on HRQoL, safety, and tolerability comprising treatment‐related death, treatment discontinuation and commonly reported grade 3 or 4 adverse events (AEs) were extracted. Associations between these measures and reporting of HRQoL data were explored using logistic regression.

Results

Of 377 phase III RCTs identified initially, 143 studies were analysed and comprised 55% positive trials and 90% industry sponsored trials. HRQoL was listed as an endpoint in 59% trials; and of these, only 65% reported HRQoL data. There were higher odds of reporting HRQoL data for positive trials (OR 2.05, P = .04) and trials published in journals with higher impact factor (OR 1.35, P = .01). Reporting of HRQoL was not associated with treatment‐related death (OR 1.25, P = .40) or treatment discontinuation (OR 1.12, P = .61), but was positively associated with dyspnea and dermatological adverse events.

Conclusions

HRQoL is reported in only two‐thirds of RCTs that describe collecting such data. Reporting of HRQoL is associated with positive trial outcome and higher journal impact factor, but not associated with overall safety and tolerability of anti‐cancer drugs.

The Evolution of Clinical Trials in Metastatic Breast Cancer: Design Features and Endpoints That Matter

The evolution of thought in assessing benefit in clinical trials of systemic therapy for metastatic breast cancer (MBC) is well documented, with most agents garnering regulatory approval based either on an advantage in overall survival (OS), time to progression (TTP), or progression-free survival (PFS) over an existing standard of care or objective response rate (ORR). Previous guidance for industry on clinical trial endpoints for the approval of cancer drugs and biologics was provided by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 2007 and recently updated in 2018. The more recent FDA guidance recognizes that advances in science are facilitating the development of oncology products, which "may also result in the identification of additional endpoints that may be used to support approval of oncology products." This article critically addressed the evolution of thought on the advancement of clinical trials in MBC, from various stakeholder perspectives. Despite the term "stakeholder," the objective of all co-authors and parties concerned is to promote and inform the optimal design, conduct, and reporting of clinical trials for women with advanced breast cancer toward improving and extending lives. This article provides an overview of the evolving perspectives on this issue from the physician, regulatory agency, and patient and/or advocate points of view.

National Cancer Institute Breast Cancer Steering Committee Working Group Report on Meaningful and Appropriate End Points for Clinical Trials in Metastatic Breast Cancer

PURPOSE

To provide evidence-based consensus recommendations on choice of end points for clinical trials in metastatic breast cancer, with a focus on biologic subtype and line of therapy.

METHODS

The National Cancer Institute Breast Cancer Steering Committee convened a working group of breast medical oncologists, patient advocates, biostatisticians, and liaisons from the Food and Drug Administration to conduct a detailed curated systematic review of the literature, including original reports, reviews, and meta-analyses, to determine the current landscape of therapeutic options, recent clinical trial data, and natural history of four biologic subtypes of breast cancer. Ongoing clinical trials for metastatic breast cancer in each subtype also were reviewed from ClinicalTrials.gov for planned primary end points. External input was obtained from the pharmaceutic/biotechnology industry, real-world clinical data specialists, experts in quality of life and patient-reported outcomes, and combined metrics for assessing magnitude of clinical benefit.

RESULTS

The literature search yielded 146 publications to inform the recommendations from the working group.

CONCLUSION

Recommendations for appropriate end points for metastatic breast cancer clinical trials focus on biologic subtype and line of therapy and the magnitude of absolute and relative gains that would represent meaningful clinical benefit.

Talking About Breast Cancer: Which Symptoms and Treatment Side Effects are Important to Patients with Advanced Disease?

BACKGROUND

Patients' experience of symptoms and associated treatment is an increasingly important consideration in both regulatory and health technology assessments, and can inform treatment decisions.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to gain insight directly from patients with advanced breast cancer about which symptoms and treatment side effects are important to them.

METHODS

Women with locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer were interviewed individually by trained interviewers, using a semi-structured interview guide. Verbatim transcripts were analyzed qualitatively, including whether symptoms were mentioned spontaneously (indicating their importance to patients) or only when questioned directly.

RESULTS

Sixteen women (aged 38-74 years) participated. The most commonly reported symptom aspects were: pain (16/16 [all reported spontaneously]); feeling tired/fatigued (15/16 [12 spontaneously]); changes in weight (15/16 [2 spontaneously]); hair loss (15/16 [5 spontaneously]); changes in appetite (11/16 [8 spontaneously]); nausea (9/16 [all spontaneously]). Pain was attributed mostly to the disease or to its treatment. Tiredness, changes in weight/appetite, and hair loss were attributed mostly to the treatment. All women (14 spontaneously) reported that the cancer affected their emotional well-being and their ability to perform daily activities.

CONCLUSIONS

Further qualitative research is needed to understand how patients distinguish cancer-related symptoms from treatment-related side effects, to gain insight into which patient experiences should be measured and how best to measure them.

Survey of the Huntington's Disease Patient and Caregiver Community Reveals Most Impactful Symptoms and Treatment Needs

BACKGROUND

In preparation for a meeting with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on Patient-Focused Drug Development in Huntington's disease, the Huntington's Disease Society of America (HDSA) created and distributed two comprehensive surveys on the symptom experience and treatment approaches for Huntington's disease.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of these surveys was to identify the specific symptoms that most impact the daily lives of individuals with Huntington's disease/Juvenile Huntington's disease (HD/JHD) and their caregivers and to solicit input on the types of treatments desired by HD affected families. The data were shared with the FDA to offer background and insight in preparation for the patient-focused meeting, as well as to ensure representation by the community in a manner that would complement those who attended in person.

METHODS

Two distinct surveys were created using SurveyMonkey to capture patient and caregiver perspectives on HD symptoms and current treatments. HDSA distributed the surveys to the HD community in August and September 2014 and collected responses through January 2015.

RESULTS

More than 3,600 responses to the two surveys were received. The data showed that both caregivers and individuals with HD were severely impacted by the cognitive and behavioral symptoms of HD with HD patients reporting problems with executive functioning and cognitive decline as most impactful to them. However, 30 percent of caregivers reported that chorea was the most impactful symptom compared to 17 percent of people with HD. Across all the symptom categories, patients reported a lower occurrence of symptoms than were reported by their caregivers.

CONCLUSIONS

With only one drug approved for treatment of a symptom of Huntington's disease and no disease modifying treatments available, there is a critical need for new medicines to treat the cognitive, psychiatric and motor symptoms associated with HD. While the surveys did not capture risk/benefit data, the data collected do provide new insights around the different perspectives of patients and caregivers. We believe that industry development of treatments would be well-informed by incorporating the patient community, which is more knowledgeable and engaged than given credit, in consideration of treatment regimens, risk-benefit and priorities for therapeutic development.