Comparing effectiveness with efficacy: outcomes of palliative chemotherapy for non-small-cell lung cancer in routine practice

Efficacy-effectiveness gaps in oncology: Looking beyond survival

The efficacy-effectiveness (EE) gap describes the differences in survival seen in clinical trials and routine clinical practice, where patients in real-world practice often have inferior outcomes compared to trial populations. However, EE gaps may exist beyond survival outcomes, including gaps in quality of life, toxicity, cost-effectiveness, and patient time, and these EE gaps should also influence patient and clinician treatment decisions. Failure to clearly acknowledge these EE gaps may cause patients, clinicians, and health care systems to have unrealistic expectations of the benefits of therapy across a range of important clinical and economic domains. In this commentary, the authors review the evidence supporting the existence of EE gaps in quality of life, time toxicity, cost and toxicities, and urge for further research into this important topic.

Prognosis of advanced stage non-small-cell lung cancer patients receiving chemotherapy: adenocarcinoma <em>versus</em> squamous cell carcinoma

BACKGROUND In Indonesia, lung cancer is one of the most prevalent solid cancer with the highest mortality rate. However, studies to identify prognostic factors associated with mortality are lacking. Thus, this study was aimed to determine the association of histological subtypes and prognosis of advanced stage non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients receiving chemotherapy. METHODS This study focused on a retrospective cohort consisting of 60 patients with advanced stage NSCLC and treated with chemotherapy. Patients with NSCLC stage IIIB or stage IV, age ≥18 years, and good performance status were recruited. The outcomes were one-year mortality and treatment response. Gender, age, body mass index, staging, and performance status were evaluated. Chi-square and Fisher’s exact tests were used. RESULTS Two common histological subtypes, adenocarcinoma (68.3%) and squamous cell carcinoma (31.7%), were observed among all subjects. Four patients (6.7%) died during one-year observation period. Mortality rate was higher in squamous cell carcinoma (10.5%) patients than in adenocarcinoma (4.9%). Underweight patients had higher risk of death (relative risk [RR] = 1.09, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.00–1.19) and disease progression (RR = 1.30, 95% CI = 1.12–1.51). In adenocarcinoma, metastasis was a risk for progressive disease (RR = 1.35, 95% CI = 1.09–1.66). In squamous cell carcinoma, men had a lower risk of disease progression (RR = 0.11, 95% CI = 0.03–0.41). CONCLUSIONS Squamous cell carcinoma had comparable one-year mortality and disease progression rate with adenocarcinoma type in advanced stage NSCLC. However, underweight patients had a higher risk of mortality and disease progression.

Real-world data: towards achieving the achievable in cancer care

The use of data from the real world to address clinical and policy-relevant questions that cannot be answered using data from clinical trials is garnering increased interest. Indeed, data from cancer registries and linked treatment records can provide unique insights into patients, treatments and outcomes in routine oncology practice. In this Review, we explore the quality of real-world data (RWD), provide a framework for the use of RWD and draw attention to the methodological pitfalls inherent to using RWD in studies of comparative effectiveness. Randomized controlled trials and RWD remain complementary forms of medical evidence; studies using RWD should not be used as substitutes for clinical trials. The comparison of outcomes between nonrandomized groups of patients who have received different treatments in routine practice remains problematic. Accordingly, comparative effectiveness studies need to be designed and interpreted very carefully. With due diligence, RWD can be used to identify and close gaps in health care, offering the potential for short-term improvement in health-care systems by enabling them to achieve the achievable.

Mutual Destruction of Deep Lung Tumor Tissues by Nanodrug-Conjugated Stealth Mesenchymal Stem Cells

Lung cancer is a highly malignant tumor, and targeted delivery of anti-cancer drugs to deep lung tumor tissue remains a challenge in drug design. Here, it is demonstrated that bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells armed with nanodrugs are highly targeted and mutually destructive with malignant lung cancer cells and successfully eradicate lung tumors tissues. Using this approach, the current clinical dose of anti-cancer drugs for the treatment of malignant lung tumors can be decreased by more than 100-fold without triggering immunotoxicity.

The importance of greater speed in drug development for advanced malignancies

It takes on average 6-12 years to develop new anticancer drugs from discovery to approval. Effective new agents prolong survival. To demonstrate the importance of rapid drug approval, we calculated life-years potentially saved if selected agents were approved more rapidly. As illustrative examples, we used 27 trials documenting improvements in survival. We multiplied improvement in median survival by numbers of patients dying annually and multiplied this by number of years from drug discovery until approval. For every year by which time to drug approval could have been shortened, there would have been a median number of life-years potentially saved of 79,920 worldwide per drug. Median number of life-years lost between time of drug discovery and approval was 1,020,900 per example. If we were able to use available opportunities to decrease the time required to take a drug from discovery to approval to 5 years, the median number of life-years saved per example would have been 523,890 worldwide. Various publications have identified opportunities to speed drug development without sacrificing patient safety. While many investigational drugs prove to be ineffective, some significantly prolong survival and/or reduce suffering. These illustrative examples suggest that a substantial number of life-years could potentially be saved by increasing the efficiency of development of new drugs for advanced malignancies.

The Edmonton Symptom Assessment System 25 Years Later: Past, Present, and Future Developments

CONTEXT

Routine symptom assessment represents the cornerstone of symptom management. Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS) is one of the first quantitative symptom assessment batteries that allows for simple and rapid documentation of multiple patient-reported symptoms at the same time.

OBJECTIVES

To discuss the historical development of ESAS, its current uses in different settings, and future developments.

METHODS

Narrative review.

RESULTS

Since its development in 1991, ESAS has been psychometrically validated and translated into over 20 languages. We will discuss the variations, advantages, and limitations with ESAS. From the clinical perspective, ESAS is now commonly used for symptom screening and longitudinal monitoring in patients seen by palliative care, oncology, nephrology, and other disciplines in both inpatient and outpatient settings. From the research perspective, ESAS has offered important insights into the nature of symptom trajectory, symptom clusters, and symptom modulators. Furthermore, multiple clinical studies have incorporated ESAS as a study outcome and documented the impact of various interventions on symptom burden. On the horizon, multiple groups are actively investigating further refinements to ESAS, such as incorporating it in electronic health records, using ESAS as a trigger for palliative care referral, and coupling ESAS with personalized symptom goals to optimize symptom response assessment.

CONCLUSION

ESAS has evolved over the past 25 years to become an important symptom assessment instrument in both clinical practice and research. Future efforts are needed to standardize this tool and explore its full potential to support symptom management.

Integrating Palliative Care Into the Care of Patients With Advanced Lung Cancer

Lung cancer is the leading cause of death due to malignancy. Although lung cancer mortality has been decreasing in recent years, it remains substantially higher than other causes of cancer death. Median survival for patients with locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer, defined as lung cancer involving regional lymph nodes, is estimated to be approximately 10 to 17 months, and median survival for patients with metastatic disease is only 6 to 9 months. In addition, patients with advanced lung cancer often experience debilitating symptoms and poor quality of life. Pain, dyspnea, and fatigue are most frequently reported and affect at least 65% of patients with advanced lung cancer. Given this burden of symptoms and high mortality, patients and their families facing a diagnosis of advanced lung cancer are in need of support. Palliative care, with its focus on addressing the emotional, physical, and spiritual sources of suffering utilizing the expertise of an interdisciplinary team, can provide this comprehensive support. This review describes the role of supportive and palliative care integrated into the treatment of patients with a diagnosis of advanced lung cancer with sections focused on the evaluation and treatment of pain and dyspnea, approaches to challenging communication tasks, and the support of caregivers who care for patients with advanced lung cancer.