The impact of delayed diagnosis and treatment due to COVID-19 on Australian thyroid cancer patients: a qualitative interview study

OBJECTIVES

The study aims to investigate the perceptions of patients with thyroid cancer on the potential impact of diagnosis and treatment delays during the COVID-19 pandemic.

DESIGN

This study involved qualitative semi-structured telephone interviews. The interviews were transcribed verbatim, analysed using the thematic framework analysis method and reported using the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research.

SETTING

Participants in the study were treated and/or managed at hospital sites across New South Wales and Victoria, Australia.

PARTICIPANTS

17 patients with thyroid cancer were interviewed and included in the analysis (14 females and 3 males).

RESULTS

The delays experienced by patients ranged from <3 months to >12 months. The patients reported about delays to diagnostic tests, delays to surgery and radioactive iodine treatment, perceived disease progression and, for some, the financial burden of choosing to go through private treatment to minimise the delay. Most patients also reported not wanting to experience delays any longer than they did, due to unease and anxiety.

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlights an increased psychological burden in patients with thyroid cancer who experienced delayed diagnosis and/or treatment during COVID-19. The impacts experienced by patients during this time may be similar in the case of other unexpected delays and highlight the need for regular clinical review during delays to diagnosis or treatment.

Transverse Colon Primary Tumor Location as a Biomarker in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Pooled Analysis of CCTG/AGITG CO.17 and CO.20 Randomized Clinical Trials

PURPOSE

Sidedness is prognostic and predictive of anti-EGFR efficacy in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Transverse colon has been historically excluded from several analyses of sidedness and the optimal division between left- and right-sided colorectal cancer is unclear. We investigated transverse colon primary tumor location as a biomarker in mCRC.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

Pooled analysis of CCTG/AGITG CO.17 and CO.20 trials of cetuximab in chemotherapy-refractory mCRC. Outcomes of patients with RAS/BRAF wild-type (WT) mCRC from CO.17 and KRAS WT mCRC from CO.20 were analyzed according to location.

RESULTS

A total of 553 patients were analyzed, 32 (5.8%) with cancers from the transverse, 101 (18.3%) from right, and 420 from (75.9%) left colon. Transverse mCRC failed to reach significant benefit from cetuximab versus best supportive care (BSC) for overall survival [OS; median, 5.9 vs. 2.1 months; HR, 0.63; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.28-1.42; P=0.26] and progression-free survival (PFS; median, 1.8 vs. 1.3 months; HR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.26-1.28; P=0.16). Analyzing exclusively patients randomized to cetuximab, right-sided and transverse had comparable outcomes for OS (median, 5.6 vs. 5.9 months; HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.50-1.34; P=0.43) and PFS (median, 1.9 vs. 1.8 months; HR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.49-1.26; P=0.31). Patients with left-sided mCRC had superior outcomes with cetuximab compared with transverse for OS (median, 9.7 vs. 5.9 months; HR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.27-0.67; P=0.0002) and PFS (median, 3.8 vs. 1.8 months; HR, 0,49; 95% CI, 0.31-0.76; P=0.001). Location was not prognostic in patients treated with BSC alone.

CONCLUSIONS

Transverse mCRC has comparable prognostic and predictive features with right-sided mCRC.

Efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors for metastatic colorectal cancer with microsatellite instability in second or latter line using synthetic control arms: A non-randomised evaluation

PURPOSE

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) appeared active in single-arm trials for patients with chemoresistant metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) harboring microsatellite instability (MSI). Given the paucity of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in this setting, we evaluated the effect size of ICIs using intra-patients comparison and ARCAD database as historical controls.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Individual-patient data from NIPICOL and CheckMate 142 phase II trials that evaluated a combination of ICIs for MSI mCRC patients (N = 176) and from five non-ICI mCRC historical RCTs in second-line or latter (N = 4026) were analyzed. Firstly, promising of ICIs was identified using intra-patient comparison based on growth modulation index (GMI) defined the ratio of progression-free survivals (PFS) on ICIs and previous line of therapy. Survival outcomes of ICIs-treated patients were then compared with those matched non-ICIs treated from ARCAD database historical RCTs.

RESULTS

Among ICIs-treated patients, median PFS on ICIs was 32.66 (range 0.10-74.25) versus 4.07 months (range 0.7-49.87) on prior therapy, resulting on median GMI of 4.97 (range 0.07-59.51; hazard-ratio (HR)= 0.16 (95 %CI=0.11-0.22, P < 0.001)). Compared to matched non-ICI patients, in third-line, median overall survival (OS) was not reached with ICIs versus 3.52 months with placebo (HR=0.20, 95 %CI=0.10-0.41, P < 0.001), and 6.51 months with active drugs (HR=0.30, 95 %CI=0.15-0.60, P = 0.001). In second-line, median OS was not reached with ICIs versus 11.7 months with chemotherapy+placebo (HR=0.12, 95 %CI=0.07-0.22, P < 0.001), and 16.3 months with chemotherapy+targeted therapy (HR=0.10, 95 %CI=0.05-0.19, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

ICIs demonstrates high effect size for MSI mCRC patients in second-line and later. This work might be useful as an example of methodology to avoid RCTs when benefit from experimental therapy is likely to be high.

Cross-trial comparisons for the adjuvant treatment of MSI colorectal cancer: dare to dream the future scenarios

The remarkable outcomes achieved with neoadjuvant checkpoint inhibitors for patients diagnosed with MSI colorectal cancer hold the potential to revolutionize the treatment landscape in this context. Specifically, the combination of nivolumab plus ipilimumab in colon cancer and dostarlimab in rectal cancer has led to an unprecedented rate of complete pathological and clinical responses. Notably, these responses have been further substantiated by the absence of relapses, with a 0% relapse rate observed during the first year of follow-up. The significance of these achievements becomes even more apparent when compared to the relatively high relapse rates, ranging from 11% to 28%, observed in MSI colorectal cancer cases treated neoadjuvantly with chemo(radio)therapy. However, it is crucial to exercise caution when interpreting such exceptional responses in oncology, especially within a short follow-up period. The future implications of these findings will depend on how the data mature over time. In this manuscript, we attempt to explore the potential scenarios that may unfold in the near future.

Ripretinib versus sunitinib in gastrointestinal stromal tumor: ctDNA biomarker analysis of the phase 3 INTRIGUE trial

INTRIGUE was an open-label, phase 3 study in adult patients with advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumor who had disease progression on or intolerance to imatinib and who were randomized to once-daily ripretinib 150 mg or sunitinib 50 mg. In the primary analysis, progression-free survival (PFS) with ripretinib was not superior to sunitinib. In clinical and nonclinical studies, ripretinib and sunitinib have demonstrated differential activity based on the exon location of KIT mutations. Therefore, we hypothesized that mutational analysis using circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) might provide further insight. In this exploratory analysis (N = 362), baseline peripheral whole blood was analyzed by a 74-gene ctDNA next-generation sequencing-based assay. ctDNA was detected in 280/362 (77%) samples with KIT mutations in 213/362 patients (59%). Imatinib-resistant mutations were found in the KIT ATP-binding pocket (exons 13/14) and activation loop (exons 17/18). Mutational subgroup assessment showed 2 mutually exclusive populations with differential treatment effects. Patients with only KIT exon 11 + 13/14 mutations (ripretinib, n = 21; sunitinib, n = 20) had better PFS with sunitinib versus ripretinib (median, 15.0 versus 4.0 months). Patients with only KIT exon 11 + 17/18 mutations (ripretinib, n = 27; sunitinib, n = 25) had better PFS with ripretinib versus sunitinib (median, 14.2 versus 1.5 months). The results of this exploratory analysis suggest ctDNA sequencing may improve the prediction of the efficacy of single-drug therapies and support further evaluation of ripretinib in patients with KIT exon 11 + 17/18 mutations. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03673501.

Determination of "borderline resectable" pancreatic cancer - A global assessment of 30 shades of grey

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is an aggressive cancer with a poor prognosis. Accurate preoperative assessment using computed tomography (CT) to determine resectability is crucial in ensuring patients are offered the most appropriate therapeutic strategy. Despite the use of classification guidelines, any interobserver variability between reviewing surgeons and radiologists may confound decisions influencing patient treatment pathways.

METHODS

In this multicentre observational study, an international group of 96 clinicians (42 hepatopancreatobiliary surgeons and 54 radiologists) were surveyed and asked to report 30 pancreatic CT scans of pancreatic cancer deemed borderline at respective multidisciplinary meetings (MDM). The degree of interobserver agreement in resectability among radiologists and surgeons was assessed and subgroup regression analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Interobserver variability between reviewers was high with no unanimous agreement. Overall interobserver agreement was fair with a kappa value of 0.32 with a higher rate of agreement among radiologists over surgeons.

CONCLUSION

Interobserver variability among radiologists and surgeons globally is high, calling into question the consistency of clinical decision making for patients with PDAC and suggesting that central review may be required for studies of neoadjuvant or adjuvant approaches in future as well as ongoing quality control initiatives, even amongst experts in the field.

Patient-reported outcomes and tolerability in patients receiving ripretinib versus sunitinib after treatment with imatinib in INTRIGUE, a phase 3, open-label study

PURPOSE

In the INTRIGUE trial, ripretinib showed no significant difference versus sunitinib in progression-free survival for patients with advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumour (GIST) previously treated with imatinib. We compared the impact of these treatments on health-related quality of life (HRQoL).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients were randomised 1:1 to once-daily ripretinib 150 mg or once-daily sunitinib 50 mg (4 weeks on/2 weeks off). Patient-reported outcomes were assessed using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire for Cancer-30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) questionnaire at day (D)1, and D29 of all cycles until treatment discontinuation. Change from baseline was calculated. Time without symptoms or toxicity (TWiST) was estimated as the mean number of days without progression, death, or grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events per patient over 1 year of follow-up.

RESULTS

Questionnaire completion at baseline was 88.1% (199/226) for ripretinib and 87.7% (199/227) for sunitinib and remained high for enrolled patients throughout treatment. Patients receiving sunitinib demonstrated within-cycle variation in self-reported HRQoL, corresponding to the on/off dosing regimen. Patients receiving ripretinib reported better HRQoL at D29 assessments than patients receiving sunitinib on all scales except constipation. HRQoL was similar between treatments at D1 assessments, following 2 weeks without treatment for sunitinib patients. TWiST was greater for ripretinib patients (173 versus 126 days).

CONCLUSION

Patients receiving ripretinib experienced better HRQoL than patients receiving sunitinib during the dosing period and similar HRQoL to patients who had not received sunitinib for 2 weeks for all QLQ-C30 domains except constipation. Ripretinib may provide clinically meaningful benefit to patients with advanced GIST previously treated with imatinib.

Patterns of care for people with small cell lung cancer in Victoria, 2011-19: a retrospective, population-based registry data study

OBJECTIVES

To report stage-specific patterns of treatment and the influence of management and treatment type on survival rates for people newly diagnosed with small cell lung cancer (SCLC).

DESIGN

Cross-sectional patterns of care study; analysis of data prospectively collected for the Victorian Lung Cancer Registry (VLCR).

SETTING, PARTICIPANTS

All people diagnosed with SCLC in Victoria during 1 April 2011 - 18 December 2019.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Stage-specific management and treatment of people with SCLC; median survival time.

RESULTS

During 2011-19, 1006 people were diagnosed with SCLC (10.5% of all lung cancer diagnoses in Victoria); their median age was 69 years (interquartile range [IQR], 62-77 years), 429 were women (43%), and 921 were current or former smokers (92%). Clinical stage was defined for 896 people (89%; TNM stages I-III, 268 [30%]; TNM stage IV, 628 [70%]) and ECOG performance status at diagnosis for 663 (66%; 0 or 1, 489 [49%]; 2-4, 174 [17%]). The cases of 552 patients had been discussed at multidisciplinary meetings (55%), 377 people had received supportive care screening (37%), and 388 had been referred for palliative care (39%). Active treatment was received by 891 people (89%): chemotherapy, 843 (84%); radiotherapy, 460 (46%); chemotherapy and radiotherapy, 419 (42%); surgery, 23 (2%). Treatment had commenced within fourteen days of diagnosis for 632 of 875 patients (72%). Overall median survival time from diagnosis was 8.9 months (IQR, 4.2-16 months; stage I-III: 16.3 [IQR, 9.3-30] months; stage IV: 7.2 [IQR, 3.3-12] months). Multidisciplinary meeting presentation (hazard ratio [HR], 0.66; 95% CI, 0.58-0.77), multimodality treatment (HR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.36-0.49), and chemotherapy within fourteen days of diagnosis (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.48-0.94) were each associated with lower mortality during follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Rates of supportive care screening, multidisciplinary meeting evaluation, and palliative care referral for people with SCLC could be improved. A national registry of SCLC-specific management and outcomes data could improve the quality and safety of care.

How therapeutic advances have transformed the medical landscape: a primer for clinicians

Novel medicines are entering the market rapidly and are increasingly being used alone or in combination to treat illnesses of every sort. While transforming the lives of many patients, these new therapies have also forced us to reconsider the way we evaluate, use and fund medicines. This article offers a primer to help practitioners understand how the therapeutic landscape is changing and how this might impact the evidence generation, access to interventions, patient experience and quality of care.

Multi-omic features of oesophageal adenocarcinoma in patients treated with preoperative neoadjuvant therapy

Oesophageal adenocarcinoma is a poor prognosis cancer and the molecular features underpinning response to treatment remain unclear. We investigate whole genome, transcriptomic and methylation data from 115 oesophageal adenocarcinoma patients mostly from the DOCTOR phase II clinical trial (Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry-ACTRN12609000665235), with exploratory analysis pre-specified in the study protocol of the trial. We report genomic features associated with poorer overall survival, such as the APOBEC mutational and RS3-like rearrangement signatures. We also show that positron emission tomography non-responders have more sub-clonal genomic copy number alterations. Transcriptomic analysis categorises patients into four immune clusters correlated with survival. The immune suppressed cluster is associated with worse survival, enriched with myeloid-derived cells, and an epithelial-mesenchymal transition signature. The immune hot cluster is associated with better survival, enriched with lymphocytes, myeloid-derived cells, and an immune signature including CCL5, CD8A, and NKG7. The immune clusters highlight patients who may respond to immunotherapy and thus may guide future clinical trials.

Characteristics of patients diagnosed with pancreatic cancer who access palliative care: An observational study

PURPOSE

Despite the benefits of palliative care (PC) in pancreatic cancer, little is known about patients who access PC. This observational study examines the characteristics of patients with pancreatic cancer at their first episode of PC.

METHODS

First-time, specialist PC episodes captured through the Palliative Care Outcomes Collaboration (PCOC), in Victoria, Australia between 2014 and 2020, for pancreatic cancer, were identified. Multivariable logistic regression analyses examined the impact of patient- and service-level characteristics on symptom burden (measured through patient-reported outcome measures and clinician-rated scores) at first PC episode.

RESULTS

Of 2890 eligible episodes, 45% began when the patient was deteriorating and 32% ended in death. High fatigue and appetite-related distress were most common. Generally, increasing age, higher performance status and more recent year of diagnosis predicted lower symptom burden. No significant differences were noted between symptom burden of regional/remote versus major city dwellers; however, only 11% of episodes recorded the patient as a regional/remote resident. A greater proportion of first episodes for non-English-speaking patients began when the patient was unstable, deteriorating or terminal, ended in death and were more likely to be associated with high family/carer problems. Community PC setting predicted high symptom burden, with the exception of pain.

CONCLUSION

A large proportion of first-time specialist PC episodes in pancreatic cancer begin at a deteriorating phase and end in death, suggesting late access to PC. Timely referrals to community-based specialist PC, access in regional/remote areas, as well as development of culturally diverse support systems require further investigation.

Colon and rectal cancer treatment patterns and their associations with clinical, sociodemographic and lifestyle characteristics: analysis of the Australian 45 and Up Study cohort

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer is the third most diagnosed cancer globally and the second leading cause of cancer death. We examined colon and rectal cancer treatment patterns in Australia.

METHODS

From cancer registry records, we identified 1,236 and 542 people with incident colon and rectal cancer, respectively, diagnosed during 2006-2013 in the 45 and Up Study cohort (267,357 participants). Cancer treatment and deaths were determined via linkage to routinely collected data, including hospital and medical services records. For colon cancer, we examined treatment categories of "surgery only", "surgery plus chemotherapy", "other treatment" (i.e. other combinations of surgery/chemotherapy/radiotherapy), "no record of cancer-related treatment, died"; and, for rectal cancer, "surgery only", "surgery plus chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy", "other treatment", and "no record of cancer-related treatment, died". We analysed survival, time to first treatment, and characteristics associated with treatment receipt using competing risks regression.

RESULTS

86.4% and 86.5% of people with colon and rectal cancer, respectively, had a record of receiving any treatment ≤2 years post-diagnosis. Of those treated, 93.2% and 90.8% started treatment ≤2 months post-diagnosis, respectively. Characteristics significantly associated with treatment receipt were similar for colon and rectal cancer, with strongest associations for spread of disease and age at diagnosis (p<0.003). For colon cancer, the rate of "no record of cancer-related treatment, died" was higher for people with distant spread of disease (versus localised, subdistribution hazard ratio (SHR)=13.6, 95% confidence interval (CI):5.5-33.9), age ≥75 years (versus age 45-74, SHR=3.6, 95%CI:1.8-7.1), and visiting an emergency department ≤1 month pre-diagnosis (SHR=2.9, 95%CI:1.6-5.2). For rectal cancer, the rate of "surgery plus chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy" was higher for people with regional spread of disease (versus localised, SHR=5.2, 95%CI:3.6-7.7) and lower for people with poorer physical functioning (SHR=0.5, 95%CI:0.3-0.8) or no private health insurance (SHR=0.7, 95%CI:0.5-0.9).

CONCLUSION

Before the COVID-19 pandemic, most people with colon or rectal cancer received treatment ≤2 months post-diagnosis, however, treatment patterns varied by spread of disease and age. This work can be used to inform future healthcare requirements, to estimate the impact of cancer control interventions to improve prevention and early diagnosis, and serve as a benchmark to assess treatment delays/disruptions during the pandemic. Future work should examine associations with clinical factors (e.g. performance status at diagnosis) and interdependencies between characteristics such as age, comorbidities, and emergency department visits.

Updated cost-effectiveness analysis of lung cancer screening for Australia, capturing differences in the health economic impact of NELSON and NLST outcomes

BACKGROUND

A national, lung cancer screening programme is under consideration in Australia, and we assessed cost-effectiveness using updated data and assumptions.

METHODS

We estimated the cost-effectiveness of lung screening by applying screening parameters and outcomes from either the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) or the NEderlands-Leuvens Longkanker Screenings ONderzoek (NELSON) to Australian data on lung cancer risk, mortality, health-system costs, and smoking trends using a deterministic, multi-cohort model. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated for a lifetime horizon.

RESULTS

The ICER for lung screening compared to usual care in the NELSON-based scenario was AU$39,250 (95% CI $18,150-108,300) per quality-adjusted life year (QALY); lower than the NLST-based estimate (ICER = $76,300, 95% CI $41,750-236,500). In probabilistic sensitivity analyses, lung screening was cost-effective in 15%/60% of NELSON-like simulations, assuming a willingness-to-pay threshold of $30,000/$50,000 per QALY, respectively, compared to 0.5%/6.7% for the NLST. ICERs were most sensitive to assumptions regarding the screening-related lung cancer mortality benefit and duration of benefit over time. The cost of screening had a larger impact on ICERs than the cost of treatment, even after quadrupling the 2006-2016 healthcare costs of stage IV lung cancer.

DISCUSSION

Lung screening could be cost-effective in Australia, contingent on translating trial-like lung cancer mortality benefits to the clinic.

Patient-reported outcomes in individuals with advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumor treated with ripretinib in the fourth-line setting: analysis from the phase 3 INVICTUS trial

BACKGROUND

Ripretinib is a novel switch-control kinase inhibitor that inhibits KIT and PDGFRA signaling. In the INVICTUS phase 3 trial, ripretinib increased median progression-free survival and prolonged overall survival vs. placebo in ≥ fourth-line advanced GIST. Here, we report prespecified analysis of quality of life (QoL) as assessed by patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures and an exploratory analysis evaluating the impact of alopecia on QoL.

METHODS

In the INVICTUS trial (NCT03353753), QoL was assessed using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30; physical function, role function, overall health, and overall QoL) and the EuroQoL 5-Dimension 5-Level (EQ-5D-5 L; visual analogue scale). Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) models compared changes in scores from baseline to treatment cycle 2, day 1 within and between ripretinib and placebo. Within the ripretinib arm, repeated measures models assessed the impact of alopecia on QoL.

RESULTS

Patients receiving ripretinib maintained QoL (as assessed by the EORTC QLQ-C30 and EQ-5D-5 L PRO measures) from baseline to cycle 2, day 1 whereas QoL declined with placebo, resulting in clinically significant differences between treatments (nominal P < 0.01). The most common treatment-emergent adverse event with ripretinib was alopecia; however, QoL was similarly maintained out to treatment cycle 10, day 1 in patients receiving ripretinib who developed alopecia and those who did not.

CONCLUSION

PRO assessments in the INVICTUS trial suggest that patients on ripretinib maintain their QoL out to C2D1, unlike patients receiving placebo. Longitudinal QoL was maintained for patients receiving ripretinib out to cycle 10, day 1 (approximately 8 months; past the point of median progression-free survival with ripretinib [6.3 months]), even if the patients developed alopecia.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03353753 ; first posted: November 27, 2017.

Ripretinib Versus Sunitinib in Patients With Advanced Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumor After Treatment With Imatinib (INTRIGUE): A Randomized, Open-Label, Phase III Trial

PURPOSE

Sunitinib, a multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), is approved for advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) after imatinib failure. Ripretinib is a switch-control TKI approved for advanced GIST after prior treatment with three or more TKIs, including imatinib. We compared efficacy and safety of ripretinib versus sunitinib in patients with advanced GIST who were previously treated with imatinib (INTRIGUE, ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03673501).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Random assignment was 1:1 to once-daily ripretinib 150 mg or once-daily sunitinib 50 mg (4 weeks on/2 weeks off) and stratified by KIT/platelet-derived growth factor α mutation and imatinib intolerance. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) by independent radiologic review using modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. Secondary end points included objective response rate by independent radiologic review, safety, and patient-reported outcome measures.

RESULTS

Overall, 453 patients were randomly assigned to ripretinib (intention-to-treat [ITT], n = 226; KIT exon 11 ITT, n = 163) or sunitinib (ITT, n = 227; KIT exon 11 ITT, n = 164). Median PFS for ripretinib and sunitinib (KIT exon 11 ITT) was 8.3 and 7.0 months, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.66 to 1.16; P = .36); median PFS (ITT) was 8.0 and 8.3 months, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.82 to 1.33; nominal P = .72). Neither was statistically significant. Objective response rate was higher for ripretinib versus sunitinib in the KIT exon 11 ITT population (23.9% v 14.6%, nominal P = .03). Ripretinib was associated with a more favorable safety profile, fewer grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events (41.3% v 65.6%, nominal P < .0001), and better scores on patient-reported outcome measures of tolerability.

CONCLUSION

Ripretinib was not superior to sunitinib in terms of PFS. However, meaningful clinical activity, fewer grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events, and improved tolerability were observed with ripretinib.

Monitoring quality of care in hepatocellular carcinoma: A modified Delphi consensus

Although there are several established international guidelines on the management of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), there is limited information detailing specific indicators of good quality care. The aim of this study was to develop a core set of quality indicators (QIs) to underpin the management of HCC. We undertook a modified, two-round, Delphi consensus study comprising a working group and experts involved in the management of HCC as well as consumer representatives. QIs were derived from an extensive review of the literature. The role of the participants was to identify the most important and measurable QIs for inclusion in an HCC clinical quality registry. From an initial 94 QIs, 40 were proposed to the participants. Of these, 23 QIs ultimately met the inclusion criteria and were included in the final set. This included (a) nine related to the initial diagnosis and staging, including timing to diagnosis, required baseline clinical and laboratory assessments, prior surveillance for HCC, diagnostic imaging and pathology, tumor staging, and multidisciplinary care; (b) thirteen related to treatment and management, including role of antiviral therapy, timing to treatment, localized ablation and locoregional therapy, surgery, transplantation, systemic therapy, method of response assessment, and supportive care; and (c) one outcome assessment related to surgical mortality. Conclusion: We identified a core set of nationally agreed measurable QIs for the diagnosis, staging, and management of HCC. The adherence to these best practice QIs may lead to system-level improvement in quality of care and, ultimately, improvement in patient outcomes, including survival.

Prognostic models to predict survival in patients with pancreatic cancer: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has poor survival. Current treatments offer little likelihood of cure or long-term survival. This systematic review evaluates prognostic models predicting overall survival in patients diagnosed with PDAC.

METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive search of eight electronic databases from their date of inception through to December 2019. Studies that published models predicting survival in patients with PDAC were identified.

RESULTS

3297 studies were identified; 187 full-text articles were retrieved and 54 studies of 49 unique prognostic models were included. Of these, 28 (57.1%) were conducted in patients with advanced disease, 17 (34.7%) with resectable disease, and four (8.2%) in all patients. 34 (69.4%) models were validated, and 35 (71.4%) reported model discrimination, with only five models reporting values >0.70 in both derivation and validation cohorts. Many (n = 27) had a moderate to high risk of bias and most (n = 33) were developed using retrospective data. No variables were unanimously found to be predictive of survival when included in more than one study.

CONCLUSION

Most prognostic models were developed using retrospective data and performed poorly. Future research should validate instruments performing well locally in international cohorts and investigate other potential predictors of survival.

Aspirin and the Risk of Colorectal Cancer According to Genetic Susceptibility among Older Individuals

Although aspirin has been considered a promising agent for prevention of colorectal cancer, recent data suggest a lack of benefit among older individuals. Whether some individuals with higher risk of colorectal cancer may benefit from aspirin remains unknown. We used a 95-variant colorectal cancer polygenic risk score (PRS) to explore the association between genetic susceptibility to colorectal cancer and aspirin use in a prospective study of 12,609 individuals of European descent ages ≥70 years, enrolled in the ASPirin in Reducing Events in the Elderly (ASPREE) double-blinded, placebo-controlled randomized trial (randomized controlled trial; RCT). Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess the association of aspirin use on colorectal cancer, as well as the interaction between the PRS and aspirin treatment on colorectal cancer. Over a median of 4.7 years follow-up, 143 participants were diagnosed with incident colorectal cancer. Aspirin assignment was not associated with incidence of colorectal cancer overall [HR = 0.94; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.68-1.30] or within strata of PRS (P for interaction = 0.97). However, the PRS was associated with an increased risk of colorectal cancer (HR = 1.28 per SD; 95% CI, 1.09-1.51). Individuals in the top quintile of the PRS distribution had an 85% higher risk compared with individuals in the bottom quintile (HR = 1.85; 95% CI, 1.08-3.15). In a prospective RCT of older individuals, a PRS is associated with incident colorectal cancer risk, but aspirin use was not associated with a reduction of incident colorectal cancer, regardless of baseline genetic risk.

PREVENTION RELEVANCE

There is strong evidence to support prophylactic aspirin use for the prevention of colorectal cancer. However recent recommendations suggest the risk of bleeding in older individuals outweighs the benefit. We sought to determine whether some older individuals might still benefit from aspirin based on their genetic susceptibility.

Non-aspirin non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in colorectal cancer: a review of clinical studies

Colorectal cancer (CRC) chemoprevention is an area of interest. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are anti-inflammatory agents which have been identified as cancer chemoprevention agents given that inflammation is thought to contribute to tumorigenesis. Most studies have demonstrated that the NSAID, aspirin, plays a beneficial role in the prevention of CRC and colonic adenomas. Non-aspirin NSAIDs (NA-NSAIDs) have also been studied in CRC chemoprevention. There is increasing literature around their role in pre-cancerous polyp prevention and in decreasing CRC incidence and CRC-related outcomes in certain high-risk subgroups. However, the use of NA-NSAIDs may be accompanied by increased risks of toxicity. Further studies are required to establish the associations between concurrent aspirin and NA-NSAID use, and CRC-related outcomes.

The association between quality care and outcomes for a real-world population of Australian patients diagnosed with pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

This study: (i) assessed compliance with a consensus set of quality indicators (QIs) in pancreatic cancer (PC); and (ii) evaluated the association between compliance with these QIs and survival.

METHODS

Four years of data were collected for patients diagnosed with PC. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). A multivariable analysis tested the relationship between significant patient and hospital characteristics, patient cluster effects within hospitals and survival.

RESULTS

1061 patients were eligible for this study. Significant association with improved survival were: (i) in the potentially resectable group having adjuvant chemotherapy administered following surgery or a reason documented (HR, 0.29; 95 CI, 0.19-0.46); (ii) in the locally advanced group included having chemotherapy ± chemoradiation, or a reason documented for not undergoing treatment (HR, 0.38; 95 CI, 0.25-0.58); and (iii) in the metastatic disease group included having documented performance status at presentation (HR, 0.65; 95 CI, 0.47-0.89), being seen by an oncologist in the absence of treatment (HR, 0.48; 95 CI, 0.31-0.77), and disease management discussed at a multidisciplinary team meeting (HR, 0.79; 95 CI, 0.64-0.96).

CONCLUSION

Capture of a concise data set has enabled quality of care to be assessed.

A snapshot of consumer engagement in clinical trials in Australia: results of a national survey of clinical trial networks and research organisations

BACKGROUND

Little is known about the extent, perceptions or experiences of consumers involved in clinical trials across Australia. The purpose of this National study was to better understand the activity and perceptions of clinical trial networks (CTNs), research co-ordinating centres and their consumers, around consumer involvement in clinical trials.

METHODS

CTNs and research co-ordinating centres who were members of the Australian Clinical Trials Alliance (ACTA), and consumers involved in the activities of these organisations, were invited to participate in online surveys. Surveys were completed between April and September 2018.

RESULTS

80 respondents completed the surveys in full: 25 of 34 CTNs, 5 from 15 research co-ordinating centres, and included research investigators of 13 active trials, 10 completed trials. There were 27 consumer respondents. Consumers were involved in clinical trial activities across 19/25 (76%) of CTNs and 3/5 (60%) of research co-ordinating centres. Consumers were involved at all stages of the trial cycle. Despite this, only 8/30 (27%) of research organisations provided specific training to their employees or members on consumer involvement in research, and most did not have a specific policy or process relating to conducting consumer involvement in clinical trials. At the organisation level, barriers to consumer involvement in clinical trials included being unsure how to involve consumers effectively and systematically, difficulty in accessing consumers or lack of infrastructure and resources. At the consumer level, barriers included limited understanding of their roles, a lack of resources and training. Enablers included education, training and funding for both the research sector and for consumers. Almost all consumer respondents (25/27; 92%) would recommend the consumer role to other potential consumers, stating it was a valuable experience that led to knowledge exchange and learning about the research process.

CONCLUSIONS

Over the last few years, consumer involvement in clinical trials has increased in Australia, but the scope of involvement varies across different research organisations, and therapeutic areas. Consumer involvement in clinical trials is valued by most that do it, however, there are opportunities to further foster and strengthen ongoing partnerships, for example by providing practical advice for researchers on how to best engage and involve consumers.

What matters for people with brain cancer? Selecting clinical quality indicators for an Australian Brain Cancer Registry

BACKGROUND

The goal of a clinical quality registry is to deliver immediate gains in survival and quality of life by delivering timely feedback to practitioners, thereby ensuring every patient receives the best existing treatment. We are developing an Australian Brain Cancer Registry (ABCR) to identify, describe, and measure the impact of the variation and gaps in brain cancer care from the time of diagnosis to the end of life.

METHODS

To determine a set of clinical quality indicators (CQIs) for the ABCR, a database and internet search were used to identify relevant guidelines, which were then assessed for quality using the AGREE II Global Rating Scale. Potential indicators were extracted from 21 clinical guidelines, ranked using a modified Delphi process completed in 2 rounds by a panel of experts and other stakeholders, and refined by a multidisciplinary Working Group.

RESULTS

Nineteen key quality reporting domains were chosen, specified by 57 CQIs detailing the specific inclusion and outcome characteristics to be reported.

CONCLUSION

The selected CQIs will form the basis for the ABCR, provide a framework for achievable data collection, and specify best practices for patients and health care providers, with a view to improving care for brain cancer patients. To our knowledge, the systematic and comprehensive approach we have taken is a world first in selecting the reporting specifications for a brain cancer clinical registry.

Clinical Activity of Ripretinib in Patients with Advanced Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumor Harboring Heterogeneous KIT/PDGFRA Mutations in the Phase III INVICTUS Study

PURPOSE

Most patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) have activating mutations in KIT/PDGFRA and are initially responsive to tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI). The acquisition of secondary mutations leads to refractory/relapsed disease. This study reports the results of an analysis from the phase III INVICTUS study (NCT03353753) characterizing the genomic heterogeneity of tumors from patients with advanced GIST and evaluating ripretinib efficacy across KIT/PDGFRA mutation subgroups.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Tumor tissue and liquid biopsy samples that captured circulating tumor DNA were collected prior to study enrollment and sequenced using next-generation sequencing. Subgroups were determined by KIT/PDGFRA mutations and correlation of clinical outcomes and KIT/PDGFRA mutational status was assessed.

RESULTS

Overall, 129 patients enrolled (ripretinib 150 mg once daily, n = 85; placebo, n = 44). The most common primary mutation subgroup detected by combined tissue and liquid biopsies were in KIT exon 11 (ripretinib, 61.2%; placebo, 77.3%) and KIT exon 9 (ripretinib, 18.8%; placebo, 15.9%). Patients receiving ripretinib demonstrated progression-free survival (PFS) benefit versus placebo regardless of mutation status (HR 0.16) and in all assessed subgroups in Kaplan-Meier PFS analysis (exon 11, P < 0.0001; exon 9, P = 0.0023; exon 13, P < 0.0001; exon 17, P < 0.0001). Among patients with wild-type KIT/PDGFRA by tumor tissue, PFS ranged from 2 to 23 months for ripretinib versus 0.9 to 10.1 months for placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

Ripretinib provided clinically meaningful activity across mutation subgroups in patients with advanced GIST, demonstrating that ripretinib inhibits a broad range of KIT/PDGFRA mutations in patients with advanced GIST who were previously treated with three or more TKIs.

Opportunities and barriers for the use of Australian cancer registries as platforms for randomized clinical trials

It is well recognized that randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are a powerful tool to investigate causal relationships, and are considered the gold standard level of research evidence. However, RCTs can be expensive and time-consuming, and when they employ strict eligibility criteria, it results in an unrepresentative population and limited external validity. Recently, the registry-based randomized clinical trial (RRCT) has emerged as an alternative trial design. Utilizing registries to underpin such studies, RRCTs can have advantages including rapid recruitment, and enhanced generalizability. In Australia, legislated mandatory reporting of cancer diagnoses means that jurisdictional cancer registries are a rich source of systematically collected patient details, representing sound platforms for comprehensive data capture that can serve as a key tool for further research. We review the roles of cancer registries in Australia, discuss important considerations relevant to the design of RRCTs, and outline the opportunities provided by cancer registries to strengthen cancer research.

Clinical Benefit of Ripretinib Dose Escalation After Disease Progression in Advanced Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumor: An Analysis of the INVICTUS Study

Background

Ripretinib 150 mg once daily (QD) is indicated for advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) as at least fourth‐line therapy. In INVICTUS, ripretinib intrapatient dose escalation (IPDE) to 150 mg b.i.d. was allowed after progressive disease (PD) on 150 mg QD by blinded independent central review using modified RECIST 1.1. We report the efficacy and safety of ripretinib IPDE to 150 mg b.i.d. after PD among patients randomized to ripretinib 150 mg QD in the INVICTUS study.

Materials and Methods

Tumor imaging was performed every 28‐day cycle for the first four cycles in the ripretinib 150 mg QD period and then every other cycle, including the 150 mg b.i.d. period. Among the ripretinib IPDE patients, progression‐free survival (PFS)1 was the time from randomization until PD; PFS2 was the time from the first dose of ripretinib 150 mg b.i.d. to PD or death.

Results

Among 43 ripretinib IPDE patients, median PFS1 was 4.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.7–6.4) and median PFS2 was 3.7 months (95% CI, 3.1–5.3). Median overall survival was 18.4 months (95% CI, 14.5–not estimable). Ripretinib 150 mg b.i.d. (median duration of treatment 3.7 months) was well tolerated with new or worsening grade 3–4 treatment‐emergent adverse events (TEAEs) of anemia in six (14%) and abdominal pain in three (7%) patients. Ripretinib 150 mg b.i.d. was discontinued because of TEAEs in seven (16%) patients.

Conclusion

Ripretinib 150 mg b.i.d. after PD on 150 mg QD may provide additional clinically meaningful benefit with an acceptable safety profile in patients with at least fourth‐line GISTs.

Implications for Practice

Of the 85 patients with advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumor having received at least three prior anticancer therapies randomized to ripretinib 150 mg once daily (QD) in the phase III INVICTUS study, 43 underwent ripretinib intrapatient dose escalation (IPDE) to 150 mg b.i.d. after progressive disease (PD). Median progression‐free survival was 4.6 months before and 3.7 months after ripretinib IPDE. The safety profile of ripretinib 150 mg b.i.d. was acceptable. These findings indicate ripretinib IPDE to 150 mg b.i.d. may provide additional clinical benefit in patients with PD on ripretinib 150 mg QD, for whom limited treatment options exist.

This article presents further results from the INVICTUS study, focusing on patients who received ripretinib 150 mg QD who received intrapatient dose escalation to 150 mg b.i.d. after progressive disease.

Developing clinical indicators for oncology: the inaugural cancer care indicator set for the Australian Council on Healthcare Standards

INTRODUCTION

The Australian Council on Healthcare Standards (ACHS) sponsored an expert-led, consensus-driven, four-stage process, based on a modified Delphi methodology, to determine a set of clinical indicators as quality measures of cancer service provision in Australia. This was done in response to requests from institutional health care providers seeking accreditation, which were additional and complementary to the existing radiation oncology set. The steering group members comprised multidisciplinary key opinion leaders and a consumer representative. Five additional participants constituted the stakeholder group, who deliberated on the final indicator set.

METHODS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

An initial meeting of the steering group scoped the high level nature of the desired set. In stage 2, 65 candidate indicators were identified by a literature review and a search of international metrics. These were ranked by survey, based on ease of data accessibility and collectability and clinical relevance. The top 27 candidates were debated by the stakeholder group and culled to a final set of 16 indicators. A user manual was created with indicators mapped to clinical codes. The indicator set was ratified by the Clinical Oncology Society of Australia and is now available for use by health care organisations participating in the ACHS Clinical Indicator Program. This inaugural cancer clinical indicator set covers high level assessment of various critical processes in cancer service provision in Australia. Regular reviews and updates will ensure usability.

CHANGES IN MANAGEMENT AS A RESULT OF THIS STATEMENT

This is the inaugural indicator set for cancer care for use across Australia and internationally under the ACHS Clinical Indicator Program. Multidisciplinary involvement through a modified Delphi process selected indicators representing both generic and specific aspects of care across the cancer journey pathway and will provide a functional tool to compare health care delivery across multiple settings. It is anticipated that this will drive continual improvement in cancer care provision.

Ripretinib for the treatment of advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumor

Gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) are rare tumors of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract yet represent the most common GI sarcomas. Most GISTs are driven by activating mutations of the KIT and/or PDGFRA genes. Prior to the development of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), GISTs were associated with a poor prognosis because conventional cytotoxic chemotherapy was relatively ineffective. However, TKIs that inhibit the most common driver mutations in KIT or PDGFRA have revolutionized the treatment of GISTs over the past two decades. Notwithstanding, ongoing management challenges relate to the development of secondary mutations in these genes, resulting in tumor progression. Due to both the intra- and inter-patient heterogeneity of these secondary mutations in GISTs, optimal treatment requires an agent that blocks as many mutant genes as possible. Ripretinib - a novel switch-control TKI - inhibits many of the most common primary and secondary activating KIT and PDGFRA mutants involved in GIST progression through a dual mechanism of action. In the pivotal INVICTUS phase III trial, patients with advanced GIST that had progressed on at least imatinib, sunitinib, and regorafenib and who received ripretinib experienced significantly longer progression-free survival (primary endpoint) as well as prolongation of overall survival, compared with those receiving placebo. Treatment with ripretinib was associated with durable improvements in quality-of-life indices and a manageable toxicity profile. The most frequent side effects were common to the class of TKIs used in the management of GIST. These results led to the approval of ripretinib for treatment of advanced GIST in adults who have received three or more TKIs, including imatinib. Ripretinib is also under investigation in the second-line treatment of advanced GIST in a phase III trial (INTRIGUE) comparing ripretinib with sunitinib in patients with advanced GIST after treatment with imatinib.

PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY

Use of ripretinib for the treatment of gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) Gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) are a rare type of tumor most commonly located in the stomach and small intestine but can develop anywhere throughout the gastrointestinal tract. The symptoms of GISTs vary in extent depending on location of the primary tumor and include a feeling of fullness, abdominal pain, intestinal bleeding, and fatigue. Since these symptoms are nonspecific, making a diagnosis can be challenging. Most GISTs carry initial mutations in genes that control specific enzymes called tyrosine kinases. Historically, treatment of GISTs was limited because traditional chemotherapy is ineffective against these tumors. However, with the introduction of drugs that inhibit tyrosine kinases [i.e., tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs)], survival has been extended substantially. However, many GISTs go on to develop secondary mutations that render them resistant to a given TKI. Prior to the approval of ripretinib, four TKIs were available for the treatment of GIST: imatinib; sunitinib; regorafenib; and, recently, avapritinib. Each drug is used until resistance develops or patients are unable to tolerate the side effects of treatment, after which the next drug is started. Ripretinib was recently approved by the FDA as the fourth drug in the usual treatment sequence recommended for patients with advanced GIST who have progressed (or are treatment intolerant) after receiving three or more TKIs, including imatinib. Approval of ripretinib was based on the results of the INVICTUS trial, which demonstrated that the drug significantly improves the time patients have without progression of the disease or death compared with placebo. The most common side effects related to ripretinib were hair loss, muscle pain, nausea, fatigue, hand-foot syndrome, and diarrhea, although most events were not very severe. Ripretinib is being further studied as the second TKI used in patients with GIST who have progressed on or could not tolerate first-line treatment with imatinib.

Barriers and enablers to the implementation of multidisciplinary team meetings: a qualitative study using the theoretical domains framework

Background

Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines recommend discussion by a multidisciplinary team (MDT) to review and plan the management of patients for a variety of cancers. However, not all patients diagnosed with cancer are presented at an MDT.

Objectives

(1) To identify the factors (barriers and enablers) influencing presentation of all patients to, and the perceived value of, MDT meetings in the management of patients with pancreatic cancer and; (2) to identify potential interventions that could overcome modifiable barriers and enhance enablers using the theoretical domains framework (TDF).

Methods

Semistructured interviews were conducted with radiologists, surgeons, medical and radiation oncologists, gastroenterologists, palliative care specialists and nurse specialists based in New South Wales and Victoria, Australia. Interviews were conducted either in person or via videoconferencing. All interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim, deidentified and data were thematically coded according to the 12 domains explored within the TDF. Common belief statements were generated to compare the variation between participant responses.

Results

In total, 29 specialists were interviewed over a 4-month period. Twenty-two themes and 40 belief statements relevant to all the TDF domains were generated. Key enablers influencing MDT practices included a strong organisational focus (social/professional role and identity), beliefs about the benefits of an MDT discussion (beliefs about consequences), the use of technology, for example, videoconferencing (environmental context and resources), the motivation to provide good quality care (motivation and goals) and collegiality (social influences). Barriers included: absence of palliative care representation (skills), the number of MDT meetings (environmental context and resources), the cumulative cost of staff time (beliefs about consequences), the lack of capacity to discuss all patients within the allotted time (beliefs about capabilities) and reduced confidence to participate in discussions (social influences).

Conclusions

The internal and external organisational structures surrounding MDT meetings ideally need to be strengthened with the development of agreed evidence-based protocols and referral pathways, a focus on resource allocation and capabilities, and a culture that fosters widespread collaboration for all stages of pancreatic cancer.

Expanded Low Allele Frequency RAS and BRAF V600E Testing in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer as Predictive Biomarkers for Cetuximab in the Randomized CO.17 Trial

PURPOSE

Expanded RAS/BRAF mutations have not been assessed as predictive for single-agent cetuximab in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), and low mutant allele frequency (MAF) mutations are of unclear significance. We aimed to establish cetuximab efficacy in optimally selected patients using highly sensitive beads, emulsion, amplification, and magnetics (BEAMing) analysis, capable of detecting alterations below standard clinical assays.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

CO.17 trial compared cetuximab versus best supportive care (BSC) in RAS/BRAF-unselected mCRC. We performed RAS/BRAF analysis on microdissected tissue of 242 patients in CO.17 trial using BEAMing for KRAS/NRAS (codons 12/13/59/61/117/146) and BRAF V600E. Patients without BEAMing but with previous Sanger sequencing-detected mutations were included.

RESULTS

KRAS, NRAS, and BRAF mutations were present in 53%, 4%, and 3% of tumors, respectively. Cetuximab improved overall survival [OS; HR, 0.51; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.32-0.81; P = 0.004] and progression-free survival (PFS; HR, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.15-0.41; P < 0.0001) compared with BSC in RAS/BRAF wild-type patients. Cetuximab did not improve OS/PFS for KRAS-, NRAS-, or BRAF-mutated tumors, and tests of interaction confirmed expanded KRAS (P = 0.0002) and NRAS (P = 0.006) as predictive, while BRAF mutations were not (P = 0.089). BEAMing identified 14% more tumors as RAS mutant than Sanger sequencing, and cetuximab lacked activity in these patients. Mutations at MAF < 5% were noted in 6 of 242 patients (2%). One patient with a KRAS A59T mutation (MAF = 2%) responded to cetuximab. More NRAS than KRAS mutations were low MAF (OR, 20.50; 95% CI, 3.88-96.85; P = 0.0038).

CONCLUSIONS

We establish single-agent cetuximab efficacy in optimally selected patients and show that subclonal RAS/BRAF alterations are uncommon and remain of indeterminate significance.

Real-world treatment patterns, healthcare resource use and clinical outcomes of patients receiving second line therapy for advanced or metastatic gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

Second-line (2 L) chemotherapies for advanced or metastatic gastric cancer have shown improved survival but there is no commonly accepted standard of care. This study examines real-world patient characteristics, treatment patterns, healthcare resource use (HCRU) and clinical outcomes in this setting.

METHODS

Retrospective chart reviews were performed at participating institutions from Australia, Canada, Italy and UK for adult patients receiving 2 L treatment for advanced/metastatic disease from January 2013 to July 2015. Data were collected for 12 months or until death.

RESULTS

Two hundred eighty patients were included, mean age was 60.9 years and 68.9% were male. Half (51.8%) received monotherapy in 2 L, of whom 69.0% received taxanes. Irinotecan monotherapy was common in Australia (30.0% of monotherapy patients) and Canada (43.8%), but infrequent in Italy and UK. Doublet chemotherapy was used in 36.4% of 2 L patients, most commonly fluoropyrimidine + irinotecan. Use of targeted therapies (trastuzumab, ramucirumab) was infrequent except in Italy. Estimated median real-world progression-free survival (rwPFS) and real-world overall survival (rwOS) from the time of 2 L treatment initiation was 3.09 (95% CI: 2.76-3.68) and 6.54 (5.29-7.76) months, respectively, and estimated 12-month rwPFS and rwOS rate was 8 and 26%, respectively. Only a minority (26.8%) of patients were hospitalized during the follow-up period, with the lowest hospitalization in Italy (16.7%). Laboratory and imaging tests were performed for 93.2 and 70.4%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

About half of patients received monotherapy as 2 L chemotherapy for advanced/metastatic gastric cancer and a third received doublets. Real-world clinical outcomes for 2 L treatment are poor and HCRU is considerable.

Developing an Australian multi-module clinical quality registry for gynaecological cancers: a protocol paper

INTRODUCTION

Gynaecological cancers collectively account for almost 10% of cancer diagnoses made in Australian women. The extent of variation in gynaecological cancer survival rates and treatment outcomes across Australia is not well documented. The purpose of the clinical quality registry described in this paper is to systematically monitor and improve quality of care provided to these women, and facilitate clinical process improvements to ensure better patient outcomes and greater adherence to best practice care. The registry infrastructure has been developed in conjunction alongside the inaugural ovarian, tubal and peritoneal (OTP) module, allowing for concurrent piloting of the methodology and one module. Additional tumour modules will be developed in time to cover the other gynaecological tumour types.

METHOD AND ANALYSIS

The National Gynae-Oncology Registry (NGOR) aims to capture clinical data on all newly diagnosed cancers of the uterus, ovary, fallopian tubes, peritoneum, cervix, vulva and vagina in Australia with a view to using these data to support improved clinical care and increased adherence to 'best practice'. Data are sourced from existing clinical databases maintained by clinicians and/or hospital gynaecological cancer units. A pilot phase incorporating only OTP cancers has recently been conducted to assess the feasibility of the registry methodology and assess the support of a quality initiative of this nature among clinicians and other key stakeholders.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The NGOR has received National Mutual Acceptance (NMA) ethics approval from Monash Health Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC), NMA HREC Reference Number: HREC/17/MonH/198. We also have approval from Mercy Health HREC and University of Tasmania HREC. Data will be routinely reported back to participating sites illustrating their performance against measures of agreed best practice. It is through this feedback system that the registry will support changes to quality of care and improved patient outcomes.

The Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Registry (UGICR): a clinical quality registry to monitor and improve care in upper gastrointestinal cancers

PURPOSE

The Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Registry (UGICR) was developed to monitor and improve the quality of care provided to patients with upper gastrointestinal cancers in Australia.

PARTICIPANTS

It supports four cancer modules: pancreatic, oesophagogastric, biliary and primary liver cancer. The pancreatic cancer (PC) module was the first module to be implemented, with others being established in a staged approach. Individuals are recruited to the registry if they are aged 18 years or older, have received care for their cancer at a participating public/private hospital or private clinic in Australia and do not opt out of participation.

FINDINGS TO DATE

The UGICR is governed by a multidisciplinary steering committee that provides clinical governance and oversees clinical working parties. The role of the working parties is to develop quality indicators based on best practice for each registry module, develop the minimum datasets and provide guidance in analysing and reporting of results. Data are captured from existing data sources (population-based cancer incidence registries, pathology databases and hospital-coded data) and manually from clinical records. Data collectors directly enter information into a secure web-based Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap) data collection platform. The PC module began with a pilot phase, and subsequently, we used a formal modified Delphi consensus process to establish a core set of quality indicators for PC. The second module developed was the oesophagogastric cancer (OGC) module. Results of the 1 year pilot phases for PC and OGC modules are included in this cohort profile.

FUTURE PLANS

The UGICR will provide regular reports of risk-adjusted, benchmarked performance on a range of quality indicators that will highlight variations in care and clinical outcomes at a health service level. The registry has also been developed with the view to collect patient-reported outcomes (PROs), which will further add to our understanding of the care of patients with these cancers.

What matters most to patients following percutaneous coronary interventions? A new patient-reported outcome measure developed using Rasch analysis

INTRODUCTION

Measuring patient reported outcomes can improve the quality and effectiveness of healthcare interventions. The aim of this study was to identify the final set of items that can be included in a patient-reported outcome measure to assess recovery of patients following percutaneous coronary interventions.

METHODS

A consecutive sample of 200 patients registered in the Victorian Cardiac Outcomes Registry participated in a telephone survey 30 days following their percutaneous cardiac procedure. Rasch analysis was used to select the best set of items to form a concise and psychometrically sound patient-reported outcome measure. Key measurement properties assessed included overall fit to the Rasch measurement model, unidimensionality, response formats (thresholds), targeting, internal consistency and measurement invariance.

RESULTS

Five items were identified as being reliable and valid measures of patient-reported outcomes: pain or discomfort, shortness of breath, confidence in performing usual activities, feeling unhappy and having trouble sleeping. Data showed overall fit to a Rasch model of expected item functioning (χ2 16.99; p = 0.07) and all items demonstrated unidimensionality (t-test less than 0.05 threshold value). Internal consistency was acceptable (equivalent Cronbach's α 0.65) given there are only five items, but there was a ceiling effect (mean logit score -1.24) with compromised score precision for patients with better recovery.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified a succinct set of items that can be used in a patient-reported outcome measure following percutaneous coronary interventions. This patient-report outcome measure has good structural validity and acceptable internal consistency. While further psychometric evaluations are recommended, the items identified capture the patient's perspective of their recovery following a percutaneous coronary intervention.

Evaluation of Continuous Tumor-Size-Based End Points as Surrogates for Overall Survival in Randomized Clinical Trials in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

IMPORTANCE

Tumor measurements can be used to estimate time to nadir and depth of nadir as potential surrogates for overall survival (OS).

OBJECTIVE

To assess time to nadir and depth of nadir as surrogates for OS in metastatic colorectal cancer.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Pooled analysis of 20 randomized clinical trials within the Aide et Recherche en Cancerologie Digestive database, which contains academic and industry-sponsored trials, was conducted. Three sets of comparisons were performed: chemotherapy alone, antiangiogenic agents, and anti-epidermal growth factor receptor agents in first-line treatment for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Surrogacy of time to nadir and depth of nadir was assessed at the trial level based on joint modeling of relative tumor-size change vs baseline and OS. Treatment effects on time to nadir and on depth of nadir were defined in terms of between-arm differences in time to nadir and in depth of nadir, and both were assessed in linear regressions for their correlation with treatment effects (hazard ratios) on OS within each set. The strengths of association were quantified using sample-size-weighted coefficients of determination (R2), with values closer to 1.00 indicating stronger association. At the patient level, the correlation was assessed between modeled relative tumor-size change and OS.

RESULTS

For 14 chemotherapy comparisons in 4289 patients, the R2 value was 0.63 (95% CI, 0.30-0.96) for the association between treatment effects on time to nadir and OS and 0.08 (95% CI, 0-0.37) for depth of nadir and OS. For 11 antiangiogenic agent comparisons (4854 patients), corresponding values of R2 were 0.25 (95% CI, 0-0.72) and 0.06 (95% CI, 0-0.35). For 8 anti-epidermal growth factor receptor comparisons (2684 patients), corresponding values of R2 were 0.24 (95% CI, 0-0.83) and 0.21 (95% CI, 0-0.78).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In contrast with early reports favoring depth of response as a surrogate, these results suggest that neither time to nadir nor depth of nadir is an acceptable surrogate for OS in the first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer.

The 4th St. Gallen EORTC Gastrointestinal Cancer Conference: Controversial issues in the multimodal primary treatment of gastric, junctional and oesophageal adenocarcinoma

Multimodal primary treatment of localised adenocarcinoma of the stomach, the oesophagus and the oesophagogastric junction (AEG) was reviewed by a multidisciplinary expert panel in a moderated consensus session. Here, we report the key points of the discussion and the resulting recommendations. The exact definition of the tumour location and extent by white light endoscopy in conjunction with computed tomography scans is the backbone for any treatment decision. Their value is limited with respect to the infiltration depth, lymph node involvement and peritoneal involvement. Additional endoscopic ultrasound was recommended mainly for tumours of the lower oesophagogastric junction (i.e. AEG type II and III according to Siewert) and in early cancers before endoscopic resection. Laparoscopy to diagnose peritoneal involvement was thought to be necessary before the start of neoadjuvant treatment in all gastric cancers and in AEG type II and III. In general, perioperative multimodal treatment was suggested for all locally advanced oesophageal tumours and for gastric cancers with a clinical stage above T1N0. There was consensus that the combination of fluorouracil, folinic acid, oxaliplatin and docetaxel is now a new standard chemotherapy (CTx) regimen for fit patients. In contrast, the optimal choice of perioperative CTx versus neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy (neoRCTx), especially for AEG, was identified as an open question. Expert treatment recommendations depend on the tumour location, biology, the risk of incomplete (R1) resection, response to treatment, local or systemic recurrence risks, the predicted perioperative morbidity and patients' comorbidities. In summary, any treatment decision requires an interdisciplinary discussion in a comprehensive multidisciplinary setting.

Personalizing Survival Predictions in Advanced Colorectal Cancer: The ARCAD Nomogram Project

Background

Estimating prognosis on the basis of clinicopathologic factors can inform clinical practice and improve risk stratification for clinical trials. We constructed prognostic nomograms for one-year overall survival and six-month progression-free survival in metastatic colorectal carcinoma by using the ARCAD database.

Methods

Data from 22 674 patients in 26 randomized phase III clinical trials since 1997 were used to construct and validate Cox models, stratified by treatment arm within each study. Candidate variables included baseline age, sex, body mass index, performance status, colon vs rectal cancer, prior chemotherapy, number and location of metastatic sites, tumor mutation status (BRAF, KRAS), bilirubin, albumin, white blood cell count, hemoglobin, platelets, absolute neutrophil count, and derived neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio. Missing data (<11%) were imputed, continuous variables modeled with splines, and clinically relevant pairwise interactions tested if P values were less than .001. Final models were internally validated via bootstrapping to obtain optimism-corrected calibration and discrimination C-indices, and externally validated on a 10% holdout sample from each trial (n = 2257).

Results

In final models, all included variables were associated with overall survival except for lung metastases, and all but total white cell count associated with progression-free survival. No clinically relevant pairwise interactions were identified. Final nomogram calibration was good (C = 0.68 for overall and C = 0.62 for progression-free survival), as was external validity (concordance between predicted >50% vs < 50% probability) and actual (yes/no) survival (72.8% and 68.2% concordance, respectively, for one-year overall and six-month progression-free survival, between predicted [>50% vs < 50% probability] and actual [yes/no] overall and progression-free survival). Median survival predictions fell within the actual 95% Kaplan-Meier confidence intervals.

Conclusions

The nomograms are well calibrated and internally and externally valid. They have the potential to aid prognostication and patient-physician communication and balance risk in colorectal cancer trials.

Fc-γ Receptor Polymorphisms, Cetuximab Therapy, and Survival in the NCIC CTG CO.17 Trial of Colorectal Cancer

PURPOSE

Two germline Fc-γ receptor (FCGR) polymorphisms, rs1801274 [FCGR2A;His(H)131Arg(R)] and rs396991 [FCGR3A;Phe(F)158Val(V)] produce altered proteins through amino acid substitutions; both are reported to be associated with cetuximab-related outcomes. We performed a validation of these polymorphisms in NCIC CTG CO.17, a randomized trial of cetuximab monotherapy in refractory, metastatic colorectal cancer expressing EGFR.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

DNA extracted from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue was genotyped. In addition to log-rank tests, Cox proportional hazard models assessed their relationships with overall (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), adjusting for clinically important prognostic factors, along with a polymorphism-treatment arm interaction term.

RESULTS

Somatic KRAS status was wild-type for exon 2 in 153 (52%) of 293 patients, from whom tumor DNA was available. For FCGR2A H/H, a genotype-treatment interaction for KRAS wild-type patients was observed for OS (P = 0.03). In KRAS wild-type patients carrying FCGR2A H/H, cetuximab (vs. no cetuximab) improved survival substantially, with adjusted HRs (aHR) of 0.36 (OS) and 0.19 (PFS) and absolute benefits of 5.5 months (OS; P = 0.003) and 3.7 months (PFS; P = 0.02). In contrast, patients carrying FCGR2A R alleles (H/R or R/R) had aHRs of only 0.78 (OS; 2.8-month benefit) and 0.53 (PFS; 1.6-month benefit). No relationships were found for rs396991 (FCGR3A).

CONCLUSIONS

In the CO.17 trial, cetuximab worked best for patients with KRAS wild-type colorectal cancers carrying FCGR2A H/H genotypes. Significantly lower benefits were observed in patients carrying germline FCGR2A R alleles. Clin Cancer Res; 22(10); 2435-44. ©2016 AACR.