Tazemetostat for tumors harboring SMARCB1/SMARCA4 or EZH2 alterations: results from NCI-COG pediatric MATCH APEC1621C

BACKGROUND

National Cancer Institute-Children's Oncology Group Pediatric Molecular Analysis for Therapy Choice assigns patients aged 1-21 years with refractory solid tumors, brain tumors, lymphomas, and histiocytic disorders to phase II trials of molecularly targeted therapies based on detection of predefined genetic alterations. Patients whose tumors harbored EZH2 mutations or loss of SMARCB1 or SMARCA4 by immunohistochemistry were treated with EZH2 inhibitor tazemetostat.

METHODS

Patients received tazemetostat for 28-day cycles until disease progression or intolerable toxicity (max 26 cycles). The primary endpoint was objective response rate; secondary endpoints included progression-free survival and tolerability of tazemetostat.

RESULTS

Twenty patients (median age = 5 years) enrolled, all evaluable for response and toxicities. The most frequent diagnoses were atypical teratoid rhabdoid tumor (n = 8) and malignant rhabdoid tumor (n = 4). Actionable alterations consisted of SMARCB1 loss (n = 16), EZH2 mutation (n = 3), and SMARCA4 loss (n = 1). One objective response was observed in a patient with non-Langerhans cell histiocytosis with SMARCA4 loss (26 cycles, 1200 mg/m2/dose twice daily). Four patients with SMARCB1 loss had a best response of stable disease: epithelioid sarcoma (n = 2), atypical teratoid rhabdoid tumor (n = 1), and renal medullary carcinoma (n = 1). Six-month progression-free survival was 35% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 15.7% to 55.2%) and 6-month overall survival was 45% (95% CI = 23.1% to 64.7%). Treatment-related adverse events were consistent with prior tazemetostat reports.

CONCLUSIONS

Although tazemetostat did not meet its primary efficacy endpoint in this population of refractory pediatric tumors (objective response rate = 5%, 90% CI = 1% to 20%), 25% of patients with multiple histologic diagnoses experienced prolonged stable disease of 6 months and over (range = 9-26 cycles), suggesting a potential effect of tazemetostat on disease stabilization.

Implementing Modernized Eligibility Criteria in US National Cancer Institute Clinical Trials

In 2018, the Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program (CTEP) at the US National Cancer Institute published new protocol template language that focused on organ function and prior and concurrent cancers in an effort to modernize eligibility criteria for cancer treatment trials. We conducted an analysis of CTEP-supported trials to evaluate the uptake and incorporation of the new language. The analysis included evaluation of 122 protocols approved in the years 2018-2020 for inclusion of the modernized eligibility criteria and consistency with new protocol template language related to 7 major eligibility criteria. These were cardiac function, liver function, kidney function, HIV status, prior and/or concurrent malignancies, treated and/or stable brain metastasis, and new and/or progressive brain metastases. Overall, CTEP trials evaluated in this period demonstrated that eligibility criteria were implemented to a relatively high degree ranging from a low of 54.1% for prior and/or concurrent malignancies to a high of 93.4% for eligibility criteria related to HIV infection. The findings demonstrate that modernized eligibility criteria can be successfully implemented but that consistent implementation requires sustained focused effort. As a result of these findings, CTEP began a new initiative in January 2022 that incorporates a specific review of eligibility criteria for new protocols to promote and improve consistency with the modernization effort.

Phase II Study of Selumetinib in Children and Young Adults With Tumors Harboring Activating Mitogen-Activated Protein Kinase Pathway Genetic Alterations: Arm E of the NCI-COG Pediatric MATCH Trial

PURPOSE

The NCI-COG Pediatric MATCH trial assigns patients age 1-21 years with relapsed or refractory solid tumors, lymphomas, and histiocytic disorders to phase II studies of molecularly targeted therapies on the basis of detection of predefined genetic alterations. Patients with tumors harboring mutations or fusions driving activation of the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway were treated with the MEK inhibitor selumetinib.

METHODS

Patients received selumetinib twice daily for 28-day cycles until disease progression or intolerable toxicity. The primary end point was objective response rate; secondary end points included progression-free survival and tolerability of selumetinib.

RESULTS

Twenty patients (median age: 14 years) were treated. All were evaluable for response and toxicities. The most frequent diagnoses were high-grade glioma (HGG; n = 7) and rhabdomyosarcoma (n = 7). Twenty-one actionable mutations were detected: hotspot mutations in KRAS (n = 8), NRAS (n = 3), and HRAS (n = 1), inactivating mutations in NF1 (n = 7), and BRAF V600E (n = 2). No objective responses were observed. Three patients had a best response of stable disease including two patients with HGG (NF1 mutation, six cycles; KRAS mutation, 12 cycles). Six-month progression-free survival was 15% (95% CI, 4 to 34). Five patients (25%) experienced a grade 3 or higher adverse event that was possibly or probably attributable to study drug.

CONCLUSION

A national histology-agnostic molecular screening strategy was effective at identifying children and young adults eligible for treatment with selumetinib in the first Pediatric MATCH treatment arm to be completed. MEK inhibitors have demonstrated promising responses in some pediatric tumors (eg, low-grade glioma and plexiform neurofibroma). However, selumetinib in this cohort with treatment-refractory tumors harboring MAPK alterations demonstrated limited efficacy, indicating that pathway mutation status alone is insufficient to predict response to selumetinib monotherapy for pediatric cancers.

Ulixertinib in patients with tumors with MAPK pathway alterations: Results from NCI-COG Pediatric MATCH trial Arm J (APEC1621J)

3009

Background: The NCI-Children’s Oncology Group (COG) Pediatric Molecular Analysis for Therapy Choice (MATCH) trial assigns patients age 1 to 21 years with relapsed or refractory solid tumors, lymphomas, and histiocytic disorders to phase 2 treatment arms of molecularly-targeted therapies based on genetic alterations detected in their tumor. Arm J evaluated the ERK1/2 inhibitor ulixertinib (BVD-523FB) in patients whose tumors harbored activating alterations in the MAPK pathway ( ARAF, BRAF, HRAS, KRAS, NRAS, MAPK1, MAP2K1, GNA11, GNAQ hotspot mutations; NF1inactivating mutations; BRAF fusions). Methods: As there were no prior pediatric data, ulixertinib was initially tested in a dose escalation cohort using a rolling 6 design to establish the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) before proceeding with enrollment to the phase 2 cohort. Ulixertinib was administered at 260 mg/m2/dose PO BID (dose level 1, DL1, n = 15) or 350 mg/m2/dose PO BID (dose level 2, DL2, n = 5). Patients were treated on continuous 28-day cycles for up to 2 years, until disease progression or intolerable toxicity; response assessment occurred every 2-3 cycles. The primary endpoint was objective response rate; secondary endpoints included safety/tolerability and progression-free survival (PFS). Results: Twenty patients (median age 12 years; range 5-20) were enrolled between November 2018 and March 2021. All patients were evaluable for response. High-grade glioma (HGG, n = 7) was most common, with CNS tumors comprising 55% (11/20) of diagnoses; all CNS tumors except one (HGG with KRAS and NF1 mutations) harbored BRAF fusions or V600 mutations. Rhabdomyosarcoma (n = 5) was the most frequent non-CNS diagnosis, with NRAS mutations detected in 4 tumors. DL1 was declared the RP2D after first-cycle dose limiting toxicities (DLTs) occurred in 1/6 DLT-evaluable patients at DL1 and 2/5 patients at DL2 in the dose escalation cohort. Any-cycle DLTs in 8 patients in the dose escalation and primary cohorts included fatigue, anorexia, rash, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, dehydration, increased creatinine, hypoalbuminemia, hypernatremia, and hip fracture. No objective responses were observed. Six-month PFS was 37% (95% CI: 17%, 58%). Three patients with CNS tumors achieved stable disease > 6 months (HGG with BRAF fusion, 15 cycles; glioneuronal tumor with BRAF V600E, 9 cycles; low-grade glioma with BRAF fusion, 7 cycles). Analyses of correlative studies, including pharmacokinetics and circulating tumor DNA, are ongoing. Conclusions: The pediatric RP2D of ulixertinib was established as 260 mg/m2/dose PO BID. There were no objective responses in this cohort of children and young adults with treatment-refractory tumors with activating MAPK alterations. Clinical benefit of prolonged disease control was observed in 3 patients with BRAF-altered gliomas and glioneuronal tumors. Clinical trial information: NCT03698994.

Tazemetostat in patients with tumors with alterations in EZH2 or the SWI/SNF complex: Results from NCI-COG Pediatric MATCH trial Arm C (APEC1621C)

10009

Background: The NCI-Children’s Oncology Group (COG) Pediatric Molecular Analysis for Therapy Choice (MATCH) trial assigns patients, age 1-21 years, with relapsed or refractory solid tumors, lymphomas, and histiocytic disorders to phase 2 treatment arms based on genetic alterations detected in their tumor. Arm C evaluated the EZH2 inhibitor tazemetostat in patients whose tumors harbored EZH2 hotspot mutations or SMARCB1 or SMARCA4 loss by immunohistochemistry. Methods: Tazemetostat 1200 mg/m2/dose PO BID was administered to the first 13 patients; after study amendment due to second malignancy noted in the pediatric phase 1 trial, the dose for patients with non-CNS tumors was reduced to 520 mg/m2/dose PO BID. Patients were treated for 28-day cycles until PD or intolerable toxicity (max 26 cycles); response assessments occurred every 2-3 cycles. Primary and secondary endpoints were ORR and PFS, respectively. Results: Twenty eligible and evaluable patients (median age 5 years; range 1-21) were enrolled between Nov 2017 and Sept 2020. SMARCB1 loss was detected in 16/20 (80%) tumors: atypical teratoid rhabdoid tumor (ATRT, n = 8), malignant rhabdoid tumor (MRT, n = 4), epithelioid sarcoma (ES, n = 2), renal medullary carcinoma (RMC, n = 1) and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC, n = 1). EZH2 mutations were identified in 3/20 (15%) tumors: Ewing sarcoma (n = 2), ependymoma (n = 1). One patient with Langerhans cell histiocytosis (LCH) had SMARCA4 loss. Centrally reviewed, one objective response (PR) was observed (LCH [SMARCA4], 26 cycles at 1200 mg/m2/dose BID). Five other patients had a best response of stable disease (ES [SMARCB1], 26 cycles, 520 mg/m2/dose BID; ATRT [SMARCB1], 13 cycles,1200 mg/m2/dose BID; RMC [SMARCB1], 12 cycles, 520 mg/m2/dose BID; ES [SMARCB1], 9 cycles,1200 mg/m2/dose BID; ATRT [SMARCB1], 6 cycles, 1200 mg/m2/dose BID). No other patients received > 2 cycles. Six-month PFS was 35% (95% CI 15.7%, 55.2%); OS was 45% (95% CI 23.1%, 64.7%). Treatment-related adverse events were consistent with AEs previously reported with tazemetostat, including anemia, thrombocytopenia, elevated LFTs, abdominal pain, dyspnea, infection, and intracranial hemorrhage. Three patients had bromide elevations. Conclusions: In this cohort of children with relapsed tumors harboring EZH2 mutations or loss of SMARCB1 or SMARCA4, tazemetostat did not produce significant objective responses (ORR: 5%, 90% CI 1%, 20%). However, we observed prolonged stable disease of > 6 months (range: 6-26 cycles) in 33% of patients across different histologic diagnoses, including two patients who received the full two years of study therapysuggesting a potential effect of tazemetostat on disease stabilization. Future studies will incorporate tazemetostat in combination with chemotherapy or immunologic agents for patients with these aggressive and difficult to treat tumors. Clinical trial information: NCT03213665.

Bringing experimental therapeutics clinical trials network (ETCTN) to underrepresented population

6542

Background: Access to health care including clinical trials (CT) leading to paradigm-changing cancer treatments are critical for high quality cancer care and equity in society. In this report, we highlight methods in accruing to ETCTN wherein underrepresented rural, low-income, and racial minorities comprise >50% of enrollment. Methods: University of Kansas Cancer Center (KUCC) is one of eight National Cancer Institute (NCI) designated cancer centers awarded CATCH-UP.2020 (CATCH-UP), a congressionally mandated P30 supplement to enhance access for minority/underserved populations to ETCTN precision medicine CT. KUCC catchment area is 23% rural by Rural Urban Continuum Codes (RUCC); almost 90 % of counties are designated primary care HPSA’s (Health Professional Shortage Areas). KUCC Early Phase and Masonic Cancer Alliance (rural outreach network) partnered to operationalize CATCH-UP. We engaged disease-focused champion investigators in disease working groups and MCA physicians who selected scientifically sound CT that fit catchment area needs. Patient and Investigator Voices Organizing Together, a patient research advocacy group provided practical feedback. MCA navigator coordinated recruitment. Telehealth was used for rural patients that would have a significant distance to travel just to be screened. Results: CATCH-UP was initiated in September 2020. Twenty-eight CT were activated, many in community sites. Average activation time was 81 days. Delays were mainly from CT amendments. KUCC enrolled the first patient in the CATCH-UP program. In 6 months, we met accrual requirements (24/year, 50% minorities). During first year, we enrolled 47 (>50% minorities), an increase of 680% from our average accrual of 6/year (>50% minorities) in ETCTN through Early Drug Development Opportunity Program (2016-2020). To date, we have enrolled 61, 54% from rural, HPSA, race and other minorities. Although the proportion of minorities did not change but remained high, this funding allowed us to substantially increase the number of patients from a catchment area with high proportion of geographically and socioeconomically underserved minorities given access to early phase CT through ETCTN. Conclusions: Amid COVID-19 pandemic, the NCI CATCH-UP program and methods we used allowed access to novel therapies for rural, medically underserved, and other minority groups. Funded by NIH: 3P30CA168524-09S2.

Selumetinib in patients with tumors with MAPK pathway alterations: Results from Arm E of the NCI-COG pediatric MATCH trial

10008

Background: The NCI-Children’s Oncology Group (COG) Pediatric Molecular Analysis for Therapy Choice (MATCH) trial assigns patients age 1 to 21 years with relapsed or refractory solid tumors, lymphomas, and histiocytic disorders to phase 2 treatment arms of molecularly-targeted therapies based on genetic alterations detected in their tumor. Arm E evaluated the MEK inhibitor selumetinib (ARRY-142886) in patients whose tumors harbored activating alterations in the MAPK pathway ( ARAF, BRAF, HRAS, KRAS, NRAS, MAP2K1, GNA11, GNAQ hotspot mutations; NF1 inactivating mutations; BRAF fusions). Methods: Patients received selumetinib 25 mg/m2/dose (max 75 mg/dose) PO BID for 28-day cycles until disease progression or intolerable toxicity with response assessments obtained every 2-3 cycles. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR); secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS). Patients with low grade glioma were excluded. Results: A total of 21 patients (median age 14 years; range 5-21) were enrolled between 10/2017 and 8/2019, with 20 patients evaluable for response. Diagnoses were high grade glioma (HGG; n = 8), rhabdomyosarcoma (n = 7), adenocarcinoma (n = 2), and one each of MPNST, endodermal sinus/yolk sac tumor, plexiform neurofibroma (PN), and neuroblastoma. MAPK pathway alterations detected consisted of inactivating NF1 mutations (n = 8), hotspot mutations in KRAS (n = 8), NRAS (n = 3), and HRAS (n = 1), and BRAF V600E (n = 2). No objective responses were observed. Three patients had a best response of stable disease (HGG with NF1 mutation, 6 cycles; HGG with KRAS mutation, 12 cycles; PN with NF1 mutation, 13 cycles prior to removal for dose-limiting toxicity). Six-month PFS was 15% (95% CI: 4%, 34%). Adverse events that were deemed possibly, probably, or definitely attributable to study drug included one case each of grade 3 uveitis, lymphopenia, and thromboembolic event; one grade 4 CPK elevation; and one grade 5 thromboembolic event. Conclusions: Selumetinib did not result in tumor regression in this cohort of children and young adults with treatment-refractory tumors with activating MAPK pathway alterations. Of note, two patients with HGG initially had stable disease, but ultimately progressed after 6 and 12 cycles, respectively. Selumetinib has previously demonstrated activity in low grade glioma and PN and is now FDA-approved for PN. The results of our study indicate that MAPK pathway mutation status alone is insufficient to predict response to selumetinib monotherapy. It is likely that selumetinib and other MEK inhibitors will require combination with targeted or cytotoxic agents for optimal efficacy in children with persistent or progressive cancers after front-line chemotherapy. Clinical trial information: NCT03213691. Clinical trial information: NCT03155620.

National Cancer Institute (NCI) implementation of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) and Friends of Cancer Research (Friends) broadening clinical trials eligibility criteria

6518

Background: The 2017 ASCO/Friends eligibility criteria guidelines recommend inclusiveness to promote generalizable trial results and clear rationale for necessary exclusion. These guidelines focused on brain metastases, minimum age for enrollment, HIV infection, and organ dysfunction and prior and concurrent malignancies. In September 2018, the NCI Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program (CTEP) implemented modernized protocol template language to operationalize these criteria. We evaluated utilization of the new language among CTEP-sponsored treatment trials. Methods: We evaluated protocols first approved by CTEP between 11/01/2018 and 4/30/2020. The most recent approved protocol version was evaluated for consistency with the new template language for brain metastases, HIV infection, prior or concurrent malignancies, minimum age, and cardiac, liver and kidney function. If a particular criterion was not relevant for a trial, it was not included in the analysis. We did not score age in pediatric or adult-specific trials (e.g. prostate). Results: 122 trials (71% early and 29% late phase) were identified and included in the analysis. Compliance with the new criteria language ranged from a high of 87.7% for liver function to a low of 11.5% for “new or progressive brain metastases” (table). Modernized criteria language was lacking in nearly 46% of trials in the use of concurrent or prior malignancy criteria and 31% of trials for the cardiac criteria. Of the 87 trials for non-localized disease or non-brain tumor trials, 64.4% did not address brain metastases, leaving it to investigator discretion. Thus, 75.9% of trials could theoretically enroll patients with brain metastases. Only 6 trials were considered relevant for patients < 18 years old; 50% were consistent with the age criterion (not shown in table). Conclusions: Implementing ASCO/Friends eligibility criteria requires focused reviews during protocol development to ensure compliance. CTEP is using these findings to continue to improve its protocol review processes to broaden eligibility in clinical trials. Maximizing opportunities for diverse populations to participate in trials is a priority for the National Cancer Institute and CTEP will continue efforts to achieve this goal.[Table: see text]

Factors impacting enrollment on NCI-COG Pediatric MATCH trial treatment protocols

10007

Background: The NCI-Children’s Oncology Group (COG) Pediatric Molecular Analysis for Therapy Choice (MATCH) trial assigns patients age 1 to 21 years with relapsed or refractory solid tumors, lymphomas, and histiocytic disorders to phase 2 treatment arms of molecularly-targeted therapies based on the genetic alterations detected in their tumor. Treatment arm assignments and enrollment decisions have now been made for 1000 study participants: we report here match and enrollment data and factors affecting treatment protocol enrollment. Methods: Patients enrolled in the Pediatric MATCH screening protocol were assigned to an open treatment protocol if an actionable mutation (aMOI) was detected by tumor DNA and RNA-based cancer gene panel sequencing. After a match, treatment protocol enrollment must occur within 8-12 weeks. Patient demographic data, reasons for not enrolling on treatment protocol (if applicable), and prior history of molecular testing were reported by study sites. The Fisher exact test was used to compare protocol enrollment rates between groups. Results: Results were analyzed for the first 1000 patients with testing completed (enrolled between July 2017 and October 2020). At least one tumor aMOI was detected in 310 (31%) patients and treatment protocol slots were available for 284 patients (28%). A total of 131 patients (46% of those matched) enrolled on a treatment arm. No difference in treatment protocol match or enrollment rate was observed for gender, race, or ethnicity. Both treatment protocol match rate (105/275, 38% vs 86/394, 22%) and enrollment rate (56/275, 20% vs 33/394, 8%) were significantly more frequent in patients with a reported history of prior molecular testing (p<0.0001). The most common reasons provided for not enrolling on a treatment protocol were: patient receiving other treatment (32% of responses), poor clinical status (16%), lack of measurable disease (11%), or ineligible diagnosis for that treatment arm (10%). Ineligibility due to history of excluded prior targeted therapy (6%) or inability to swallow capsules (4%) was less frequent. Conclusions: The rate of Pediatric MATCH treatment protocol enrollment has exceeded pre-study projections, due to more frequent actionable mutation detection and treatment assignment than anticipated (28% observed, 10% projected). This may in part reflect an increased number of targetable events in recurrent or refractory pediatric cancers. Correlative studies analyzing pre-treatment tumors from MATCH study patients are underway and will address this hypothesis. Prior history of molecular testing was associated with higher match and enrollment rate and poor clinical status was a common reason for not enrolling on a treatment protocol, suggesting that early molecular screening of children with solid malignancies may facilitate enrollment to biomarker-selected trials of targeted therapies. Clinical trial information: NCT03155620.

NCI’s national treatment trial networks: Experience and adaptations during COVID-19

1562

Background: The National Cancer Institute supports several national trial networks which responded rapidly to the COVID-19 pandemic to overcome operational barriers to clinical cancer research. The National Clinical Trials Network (NCTN) focuses on late phase treatment trials, while the Experimental Therapeutics Clinical Trials Network (ETCTN) conducts early phase treatment trials. We report findings on the experience and adaptations of these networks during COVID-19. Methods: Using 2019 and 2020 accrual data, we analyzed changes in accrual levels and demographics. We also evaluated changes in trial activation numbers and timelines. In July 2020, we surveyed 255 investigators from academic and community sites to assess changes in research practices and get feedback on modified processes implemented by NCI to address trial conduct during the pandemic. Results: Accrual across the NCTN and ETCTN fell significantly in mid-March 2020, dropping from a weekly average of 307 patients in February to 169 the week of March 23-29. Accrual began to recover in June and July but did not return to pre-pandemic levels until September. Accrual in November and December 2020 followed the patterns seen in 2019, with short-term drops around major holidays. Non-White participants were enrolled to NCTN and ETCTN trials at similar monthly rates throughout 2019 and 2020, with slightly higher overall enrollment in 2020 (23.7% vs. 22.7%). New trials continued to be developed and activated throughout 2020. Between 2017 and 2019, an average of 71 trials were activated per year (NCTN = 46, ETCTN = 25), compared to 84 activated in 2020 (NCTN = 58, ETCTN = 26). The average time to trial activation was similar or slightly longer in 2020 compared to 2019. The investigator survey yielded 111 responses (43.5% response rate). 43% of respondents’ sites paused enrollment to phase 1 trials during the pandemic, compared to 18% for phase 3 trials. Many sites temporarily stopped opening new trials and processing specimens. Sites were more likely to keep enrolling to trials offering clear potential benefit and pause complex trials that required more patient contact. Respondents attributed some of the decline in accrual to a reduction in overall patient volume, increased patient concerns, and reduced research staff on site. Respondents were asked to rate the usefulness of modified trial processes NCI put in place during the pandemic. Telehealth was rated most useful (avg. 4.6/5), followed by shipping oral IND agents to enrolled patients (4.5/5), remote informed consent (4.2/5), coordinating care with local providers (3.9/5), and remote auditing (3.7/5). Conclusions: The cancer trials community has an opportunity to learn from working through the challenges of COVID-19. NCI will seek to continue and expand on modifications to clinical trial processes that have the potential to improve operational efficiency, reduce cost, and help bring trials to more patients.

Abstract PO-092: Expanded access trial of tocilizumab in COVID19+ hospitalized cancer patients

Introduction: Emerging data from the COVID-19 pandemic suggest that an IL6-mediated cytokine release syndrome (CRS) may contribute to disease severity. Tocilizumab (Toci), an anti-IL6 receptor antibody, is FDA approved for the treatment of chimeric antigen receptor T cell-associated CRS for patients (pts) as young as 2 years of age. Phase 3 randomized testing of toci in pts with severe COVID-19 disease is ongoing. Cancer pts infected with SARS-CoV-2 are at risk for life-threatening or fatal complications. Outcomes are particularly dismal for those with hematologic malignancies or lung cancer. Due to disease and treatment-related complications, cancer patients may not be eligible for enrollment on COVID-19 directed studies, including the aforementioned randomized phase 3 study of toci. Furthermore, access to clinical trials is frequently restricted to those who are adults; however, children with cancer may also be predisposed to developing more severe complications from COVID-19. Improving access to clinical trial enrollment for vulnerable, minority, and underserved populations at increased risk of complications from COVID-19 is imperative.

Methods: We developed a multicenter, single-arm, open-label, expanded-access treatment study to provide toci to cancer pts with COVID-19. Coordinated through the National Cancer Institute, Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program, and the Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, this expanded-access trial is being conducted to provide clinical trial access to this potentially beneficial therapy in cancer pts and to collect data on clinical outcomes. The primary objective is to enhance access to toci for cancer patients who cannot participate in the randomized phase 3 toci trial with a specific emphasis on enrollment of those who belong to high-risk and minority populations and children. Hospitalized cancer subjects &gt; 2 years of age with COVID-19 respiratory compromise may be eligible to receive toci. Treatment will allow for up to two doses of toci and will also evaluate the efficacy of a lower dose of toci in those who are not intubated. Concurrent receipt of investigational cancer and/or antiviral therapy and other supportive therapies is permitted. Exploratory objectives will include analysis of inflammatory cytokines, monitoring of SARS-CoV-2 viral load, and determination of pharmacokinetics of toci to facilitate exposure-response analysis.

Results: This trial was officially activated on May 28, 2020, and is being opened at multiple sites across the United States from the National Cancer Institute’s Community Oncology Research Program, the National Clinical Trials Network, and the Experimental Therapeutics Clinical Trials Network. Updates will be presented at the AACR Virtual Meeting: COVID-19 and Cancer.

Conclusions: Targeting an unmet need, this trial provides a prospective mechanism for tocilizumab access and clinical outcome collection in cancer patients with severe COVID-19 disease.

Citation Format: Nirali N. Shah, Percy Ivy, Rebecca Enos, Matthew J. Boron, Rodney Howells, Boris Freidlin, Carmen Allegra, Margaret M. Mooney, Worta McCaskill-Stevens, James H. Doroshow, Richard F. Little. Expanded access trial of tocilizumab in COVID19+ hospitalized cancer patients [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR Virtual Meeting: COVID-19 and Cancer; 2020 Jul 20-22. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Clin Cancer Res 2020;26(18_Suppl):Abstract nr PO-092.

Biostatistical and Logistical Considerations in the Development of Basket and Umbrella Clinical Trials

Oncology clinical trials are undergoing transformation to evaluate targeted therapies addressing a wider variety of biologically defined cancer subgroups. Multiarm basket and umbrella trials conducted under master protocols have become more prominent mechanisms for the clinical evaluation of promising new biologically driven anticancer therapies that are integral to precision oncology medicine. These new trial designs permit efficient clinical evaluation of multiple therapies in a variety of histologically and biologically defined cancers. These complex trials require extensive planning and attention to many factors, including choice of biomarker assay platform, mechanism for processing clinicopathologic and biomarker data to assign patients to substudies, and statistical design, monitoring, and analysis of substudies. Trial teams have expanded to include expertise in the interface between biology, clinical oncology, bioinformatics, and statistics. Strategies for the design, conduct, and analysis of these complex trials will continue to evolve to meet new challenges and opportunities in precision oncology medicine.

ALCHEMIST: Adjuvant targeted therapy or immunotherapy for high-risk resected NSCLC

TPS9077

Background: ALCHEMIST (Adjuvant Lung Cancer Enrichment Marker Identification and Sequencing Trial) is a clinical trial platform of the National Cancer Institute that offers biomarker analysis for high-risk resected non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) to support randomized trials of novel adjuvant therapies within the National Clinical Trials Network (NCTN). EA5142, a trial of adjuvant nivolumab for patients (pts) without EGFR / ALK alterations, has completed enrollment. Given the survival benefit seen with 1st-line chemo-immunotherapy (chemo-IO) for advanced NSCLC without EGFR / ALK alterations, there was compelling rationale for the launch of a trial offering concurrent immunotherapy with adjuvant chemo. Here we report updated enrollment to ALCHEMIST as of Jan 14, 2020. Methods: ALCHEMIST includes a screening trial (A151216, 5362 registered) that enrolls pts with completely resected clinical stage IB (≥4 cm)–IIIA (per AJCC 7) NSCLC. Tissue and blood are collected, biomarker testing includes EGFR sequencing, ALK FISH and PD-L1 IHC. 733 active sites are enrolling across the NCTN. Pts with EGFR mutations may enroll to adjuvant erlotinib vs observation (A081105, 352 randomized); those with ALK fusions may enroll to adjuvant crizotinib vs observation (E4512, 99 randomized). A trial offering adjuvant nivolumab vs observation regardless of PD-L1 status (EA5142, 935 randomized) recently completed enrollment. To support ongoing investigation of adjuvant immunotherapy, ALCHEMIST is adding A081801 (opens spring 2020). Pts will be randomized to one of 3 arms: chemo-IO with pembrolizumab during and after chemo vs sequential chemo followed by pembrolizumab vs chemo alone. Pts with pathological N2 nodes are eligible and can undergo postoperative radiotherapy after completing chemo. Pts are eligible if enrolled to A151216, negative for EGFR and ALK alterations, and with PD-L1 testing completed (required for stratification). Local testing for EGFR, ALK and PD-L1 will be accepted for enrollment; central testing will not delay randomization. Pts may not have received any therapy except surgery for the lung cancer and must be age >18, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-1, have no active autoimmune disease requiring systemic treatment within 2 years, must not be pregnant or nursing, have no active second malignancy within 3 years and meet standard organ function values. By building off the ongoing ALCHEMIST platform, we hope to facilitate rapid enrollment to A081801 across participating NCTN sites. Clinical trial information: NCT02194738.

Identification of targetable molecular alterations in the NCI-COG Pediatric MATCH trial

10011

Background: The screening protocol for the NCI-Children’s Oncology Group (COG) Pediatric Molecular Analysis for Therapy Choice (MATCH) trial detects tumor alterations that are used to assign patients with treatment-refractory or recurrent cancers to phase 2 treatment arms of molecularly-targeted therapies. Methods: Patients age 1 to 21 years old with treatment-refractory or recurrent solid tumors, non-Hodgkin lymphomas, or histiocytic disorders treated at U.S. based COG sites are eligible. DNA and RNA extracted from FFPE tumor samples are sequenced using an Oncomine cancer gene panel for detection of mutations, amplifications, and fusions. Loss of SMARCB1, SMARCA4, and PTEN expression is detected by immunohistochemistry. Lists of actionable mutations (aMOIs) based upon available clinical and pre-clinical data are used a priori to determine eligibility for treatment arms. Results: Between 7/24/17 and 12/31/18, 422 patients with a median age of 13 years (range 1-21) were enrolled from 93 COG sites. Solid tumors comprised 71% (n = 300) of diagnoses, CNS tumors 24% (n = 101) and lymphomas/histiocytoses 5% (n = 21). A tumor sample was submitted for 390 patients, sequencing was attempted for 370 (95%), and results were confirmed for 357 (92%). Median turn-around time was 15 days. An aMOI for at least one of the 10 current treatment arms was identified in 112 patients (29%, 95% CI 24%-33%); 95 patients (24%, 95% CI 20%-29%) were assigned to a treatment arm with 39 patients (10%, 95% CI 7%-13%) enrolled to date. The aMOI rate was similar in patients less than 12 years of age (35%) compared to patients 12 years and older (25%). Actionable MAPK pathway alterations were found in 11% of patients (n = 41), most often HRAS/ KRAS/ NRAS mutations (n = 16), BRAF mutations or fusions (n = 14), or NF1 mutations (n = 11). Other genes with recurrent aMOIs included SMARCB1 (n = 14), ALK (n = 8), CDK4 (n = 8), PIK3CA (n = 7), PTEN (n = 7), FGFR1 (n = 5), and BRCA1/BRCA2 (n = 5). Conclusions: Approximately one-quarter of patients with tumor submitted for Pediatric MATCH screening have been assigned to an investigational therapy, facilitating the evaluation of molecularly-targeted agents in biomarker-positive pediatric cohorts through a collaborative nationwide study. Clinical trial information: NCT03155620.

Leading the way: The National Cancer Institute’s (NCI) single IRB for multi-site research

e18259

Background: NCI instituted a Central IRB (CIRB) with voluntary participation in 2001 for its late-phase trials and demonstrated that efficiency could be improved and costs reduced (Wagner et al JCO, 2010; 28). As a forerunner to the new NIH policy for single IRBs for all NIH multi-site trials (Hudson et al. JAMA Oct 4, 2010), NCI implemented a new CIRB model in 2014 where the CIRB was the IRB of record. We report adoption data of the new model within NCI’s National Clinical Trials Network (NCTN) and lessons learned from the rollout. Methods: We reviewed: Annual CIRB participant data from 2013-2016; site/accrual data for late phase trials activated between 2013-2016 (N = 64) via CIRB or local IRBs; and data from CIRB reports to identify acceptance and lessons learned. We compared time required for CIRB protocol reviews via the new model to baseline measures in the literature. Results: Of the 2,300 U.S. NCTN sites, the percentage of participation went from 47% in 2013, to 74% (2014), 79% (2015), and 81% (2016). For activated trials, a median of 43% of sites used their local IRB in 2013, dropping to 18% in 2014, 5% in 2015, and only 1% in 2016; i.e., 99% of sites opening trials in 2016 did so using the CIRB. Annual accrual to NCTN trials remained steady through the CIRB adoption; CIRB sites represented a median of 56% of total accrual in 2013 increasing to 87% in 2016. Help-desk and survey data indicate increased acceptance and a reduction of concerns over the 3 years. Previous analyses prior to 2013 reported a median of 70-123 days required from protocol application receipt to final CIRB approval; the new model reports a median of 41 days in 2016. Conclusions: NCI has demonstrated that a single IRB for multi-site trials is not only viable but valuable. Its new CIRB model rollout over 3 years has resulted in a doubling of site adoption, high utilization rates, further efficiencies, and overall acceptance, with no noticeable effect on overall NCTN accrual. Our experiences provide important lessons learned and insights into the successful implementation of a single IRB at a national level, and support the feasibility of NIH’s recently finalized policy requiring all sites to use a single IRB for multi-site research.

National coverage analyses for NCI clinical trials: A pilot project to reduce participation barriers

6542

Background: Since the implementation of the ACA, many insurers have followed Medicare’s lead in covering routine care costs associated with clinical trials (CTs). However, questions remain on how to distinguish routine care from non-billable research costs, and this has important financial implications for both sites and patients. As a result, many sites individually conduct coverage analyses (CAs) prior to opening CTs to determine billable routine costs. This is a significant duplication of effort for NCI network CTs that are open at hundreds of sites. A 2015 ASCO-NCI initiative identified the centralized creation of CAs for national CTs as a potential solution to reduce site burden, increase CT transparency and billing compliance, and ultimately reduce barriers to CT participation. We provide initial findings from the resulting NCI pilot program. Methods: NCI set up a Coverage Analysis Working Group (CAWG) made up of representatives from NCI’s Cancer Trials Support Unit (CTSU), network groups, NCI, and billing compliance consultants. CAWG created a CA template and development process for NCI network trials. CAWG will survey site users in April 2017 to evaluate the first year of the pilot project. Results: CAs for 7 CTs were first posted to the CTSU website on 4/20/16. As of January 2017, CAs have been posted for 22 CTs: 17 NCTN and 5 NCORP. This represents 14.6% of the 150 large, later-phase network trials available on the CTSU. These CAs had been posted for a mean of 219 days (median 238) as of 1/31/17. In this time, CAs were downloaded an average of 319 times (median 301), for a total of 7,007 downloads. An additional 26 CAs have been posted for MATCH (n = 20) and LUNG-MAP (n = 6) sub-studies and downloaded 7,035 times. Survey results evaluating this CA pilot will be presented in June 2017. Conclusions: Providing centralized CAs to NCI’s national network trials is feasible and well received with sites reporting that this pilot is reducing the time and effort of opening CTs and improving CT funding transparency. Collaboration is needed with CMS and third party payers to enhance clarity around CT coverage policy and billing compliance, along with continued feedback to make further improvements to reduce trial barriers.

Analysis of potential disparities by race, ethnicity, and age in adult accruals to NCI National Clinical Trials Network (NCTN) breast, lung, prostate, and colorectal trials

e18072

Background: Previous studies have raised concerns about disparities in patient accrual to NCI cancer trials and how this could impact the generalizability of trial results. This study compared the demographics of patients enrolled in NCTN cancer trials to the incident US population. Methods: We analyzed US adult accruals aged 40 or older to NCTN breast, lung, prostate, and colorectal cancer treatment trials between the launch of the NCTN on 3/1/14 and 12/31/16. Accruals were compared to the proportion of patients with these cancers by race, ethnicity, and age in the US population estimated using census-adjusted SEER incidence data for 2010-2013. Results: There were 14,247 accruals across 56 NCTN group treatment trials in breast (39.7% of accruals), prostate (25.9%), lung (23.9%), and colorectal cancers (10.5%). Hispanic and black patients were underrepresented in prostate, lung, and colorectal trials, but overrepresented in breast trials (see table). American Indian/Alaska Native populations were slightly overrepresented in 3 of 4 disease areas, and Asian populations in 2 of 4. Elderly patients were underrepresented in breast, lung, and colorectal cancers, with the greatest disparities in colorectal cancer patients over age 70 (19% of accruals versus 48% of incident patients). However, prostate cancer patients aged 65 to 84 were overrepresented (46% versus 36%). Conclusions: Disparities in race and ethnicity between patients accrued to NCTN studies and the incident population were smaller than seen in previous studies. However, challenges remain in certain diseases, and particularly in enrollment of elderly patients. Improvement efforts should focus on key disparities. [Table: see text]

Implementation of timeline reforms speeds initiation of National Cancer Institute-sponsored trials

BACKGROUND

The National Cancer Institute (NCI) organized the Operational Efficiency Working Group in 2008 to develop recommendations for improving the speed with which NCI-sponsored clinical trials move from the idea stage to a protocol open to patient enrollment.

METHODS

Given the many stakeholders involved, the Operational Efficiency Working Group advised a multifaceted approach to mobilize the entire research community to improve their business processes. New staff positions to monitor progress, protocol-tracking Web sites, and strategically planned conference calls were implemented. NCI staff and clinical teams at Cooperative Groups and Cancer Centers strived to achieve new target timelines but, most important, agreed to abide by absolute deadlines. For phase I-II studies and phase III studies, the target timelines are 7 months and 10 months, whereas the absolute deadlines were set at 18 and 24 months, respectively. Trials not activated by the absolute deadline are automatically disapproved.

RESULTS

The initial experience is encouraging and indicates a reduction in development times for phase I-II studies from the historical median of 541 days to a median of 442 days, an 18.3% decrease. The experience with phase III studies to date, although more limited (n = 25), demonstrates a 45.7% decrease in median days.

CONCLUSIONS

Based upon this progress, the NCI and the investigator community have agreed to reduce the absolute deadlines to 15 and 18 months for phase I-II and III trials, respectively. Emphasis on initiating trials rapidly is likely to help reduce the time it takes for clinical trial results to reach patients in need of new treatments.

Blinded independent central review of progression-free survival in phase III clinical trials: important design element or unnecessary expense?

Progression-free survival is an important end point in advanced disease settings. Blinded independent central review (BICR) of progression in randomized clinical trials has been advocated to control bias that might result from errors in progression assessments. However, although BICR lessens some potential biases, it does not remove all biases from evaluations of treatment effectiveness. In fact, as typically conducted, BICRs may introduce bias because of informative censoring, which results from having to censor unconfirmed locally determined progressions. In this article, we discuss the rationale for BICR and different ways of implementing independent review. We discuss the limitations of these approaches and review published trials that report implementing BICR. We demonstrate the existence of informative censoring using data from a randomized phase II trial. We conclude that double-blinded trials with consistent application of measurement criteria are the best means of ensuring unbiased trial results. When such designs are not practical, BICR is not recommended as a general strategy for reducing bias. However, BICR may be useful as an auditing tool to assess the reliability of marginally positive results.

Treatment and survival in a population-based sample of patients diagnosed with gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma

AIM

To examine the extent of use of specific therapies in clinical practice, and their relationship to therapies validated in clinical trials.

METHODS

The US National Cancer Institutes' Patterns of Care study was used to examine therapies and survival of patients diagnosed in 2001 with histologically-confirmed gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma (n = 1356). The study re-abstracted data and verified therapy with treating physicians for a population-based stratified random sample.

RESULTS

Approximately 62% of patients had stomach adenocarcinoma (SAC), while 22% had gastric-cardia adenocarcinoma (GCA), and 16% lower esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). Stage IV/unstaged esophageal cancer patients were most likely and stage I-III stomach cancer patients least likely to receive chemotherapy as all or part of their therapy; gastric-cardia patients received chemotherapy at a rate between these two. In multivariable analysis by anatomic site, patients 70 years and older were significantly less likely than younger patients to receive chemotherapy alone or chemoradiation for all three anatomic sites. Among esophageal and stomach cancer patients, receipt of chemotherapy was associated with lower mortality; but no association was found among gastric-cardia patients.

CONCLUSION

This study highlights the relatively low use of clinical trials-validated anti-cancer therapies in community practice. Use of chemotherapy-based treatment was associated with lower mortality, dependent on anatomic site. Findings suggest that physicians treat lower esophageal and SAC as two distinct entities, while gastric-cardia patients receive a mix of the treatment strategies employed for the two other sites.

Patterns of care for adjuvant therapy in a random population-based sample of patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer

OBJECTIVES

Over the past decade, clinical trials have proved the efficacy of treatments for colorectal cancer (CRC). This study tracks dissemination of these treatments for patients diagnosed with stage II and III disease and compares risk of death for those who received guideline therapy to those who did not.

METHODS

We conducted a stratified randomly sampled, population-based study of CRC treatment trends in the United States. Multivariate models were used to explore patient characteristics associated with receipt of treatments. We pooled data with a previous study-patients diagnosed in 1987-1991 and 1995. Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess observed cause-specific and all-cause mortality.

RESULTS

In 2000, guideline therapy receipt decreased among stage III rectal cancer patients, but increased for stage III colon and stage II rectal cancer patients. As age increased, likelihood of receiving guideline treatment decreased (p < 0.0001). Overall, race/ethnicity was significantly associated with guideline therapy (p = 0.04). Rectal patients were less likely to have received guideline treatment. Consistent with randomized clinical trial findings, all-cause mortality was lower in patients who received guideline therapy, regardless of Charlson comorbidity score.

CONCLUSIONS

Mortality was decreased in patients receiving guideline therapy. Although, rates of guideline-concordant therapy are low in community clinical practice, they are apparently increasing. Newer treatment (oxaliplatin, capecitabine) started to disseminate in 2000. Racial disparities, present in 1995, were not detected in 2000. Age disparities remain despite no evidence of greater chemotherapy-induced toxicity in the elderly. More equitable receipt of cancer treatment to all segments of the community will help to reduce mortality.

Neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy for esophageal adenocarcinoma

The poor outcome associated with surgical resection alone for most patients with locoregional esophageal cancer has generated intensive investigation of combined-modality treatment approaches that include systemic chemotherapy. This review discusses the current role of chemotherapy in the treatment of patients with adenocarcinoma of the esophagus, given in either the pre-operative (neoadjuvant) or post-operative (adjuvant) setting compared to surgery alone, highlighting the results of large, randomized clinical trials that included patients with adenocarcinoma of the esophagus as well as some of the approaches being evaluated with novel therapies in earlier phase clinical trials. Although no definitive recommendations for pre-operative or post-operative treatment can be made for patients with adenocarcinoma of the esophagus based on outcomes reported in randomized clinical trials performed to date, the results from these trials suggest chemotherapy or chemoradiation in the peri-operative period may have benefit, especially in certain sub-groups. Newer, more effective agents are needed as well as methods to identify which tumors will respond to therapy. Improvement in outcomes for patients with this disease will require rigorous evaluation of newer multi-modality regimens in well-designed and appropriately powered clinical trials.

Primary extremity sarcoma: what is the appropriate follow-up?

BACKGROUND

Our objective was to evaluate the effectiveness of follow-up tests for detecting first local and distant recurrences in patients with primary extremity soft tissue sarcoma.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed all adult cases of primary extremity soft tissue sarcoma (n = 174) treated between 1982 and 1992. Patients were observed every 3 months for 2 years, every 4 months the third year, every 6 months the next 2 years, and annually, thereafter. Each visit consisted of taking the patient's history, a physical examination, a complete blood count, a blood chemistry panel, and a chest x-ray. For high-grade tumors, the primary site was imaged annually when clinically appropriate.

RESULTS

Of 141 patients who were assessable, 29 patients developed local recurrence and 57 developed distant recurrence. All but one of the local recurrences was detected on the basis of an abnormal physical examination. Of the 29 patients who developed local recurrence, 25 were resected. Distant metastases were detected because of symptoms in 21 cases. Of the 36 asymptomatic lung recurrences, 30 were detected by follow-up chest x-ray. Of the 36 asymptomatic lung recurrences, 24 patients underwent metastasectomy. The positive and negative predictive values of surveillance chest x-ray were 92% and 97%, respectively. Laboratory testing never led to the detection of recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

Close surveillance by clinical assessment and chest x-ray is appropriate for follow-up observation of patients with primary extremity soft tissue sarcoma.

Effective follow-up strategies in soft tissue sarcoma

The value of surveillance for detection of recurrences in patients with soft tissue sarcoma (STS) after definitive surgical resection of the primary tumor is based on the premise that early recognition and treatment of local or distant recurrence can prolong survival. Surveillance strategies should meet the criteria of easy implementation, accuracy, and cost-effectiveness. Although guidelines have been proposed for follow-up of patients with STS, there are few data in the medical literature on the effectiveness of these recommendations. We reviewed the effectiveness of a surveillance program for primary extremity STS in an effort to provide an evidence-based rationale for follow-up of STS. We concluded that clinical assessment of patient symptoms, chest X-ray imaging, and physical examination are effective strategies for follow-up of extremity STS. Chest X-ray imaging also appears to be cost-effective, at least for high-grade extremity STS. Imaging of the primary extremity site by computed tomography (CT) scan or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) on an annual basis and routine laboratory blood tests were ineffective strategies for recurrence detection. However, certain patient characteristics such as body habitus, previous radiation therapy, and location of the primary tumor site may require the use of CT scans and MRI for adequate clinical assessment. The role of specific surveillance strategies for recurrence detection for sarcomas of the trunk, head and neck, retroperitoneum, and viscera has yet to be defined.

A point of view: why point-of-care places are not free marketplaces

Current wisdom holds that health care is a business and "as such must abide by market principles." Most nurses are not well enough versed in economic theories to credibly critique health care delivery decisions based on economic theories. The relationship of market principles to health care realities is described in basic terms to encourage nurses to "optimize patient care and influence health care policy." Physicians, who control all access points to the health care system, have enjoyed a 40-year market dominance that is "rapidly being replaced by insurance companies and for-profit investors." Providers' decisions to treat or not to treat are strongly influenced by whether the patient is in a fee-for-service or capitated payment environment.

Impact on survival by method of recurrence detection in stage I and II cutaneous melanoma

BACKGROUND

The impact on survival by components of a surveillance program (physical examination, blood tests, and chest radiograph) used to detect recurrences in patients with cutaneous melanoma was assessed.

METHODS

Data were collected from medical records and tumor registry information on a historical cohort of 1004 patients who presented with AJCC Stage I or II cutaneous melanoma at Roswell Park Cancer Institute from 1971 through 1995.

RESULTS

Information on method of detection was available on 154 out of 174 identified first recurrences (89%). Physical examination detected 72% of recurrences, constitutional symptoms indicated 17% of recurrences, and chest radiograph revealed 11% of recurrences. Blood tests did not predict any recurrence. Only 9 of 17 patients with recurrences detected by chest radiograph alone underwent curative surgical resection. These patients had a statistically significant prolonged survival after diagnosis of recurrence compared to those surgical candidates who did not undergo resection. There was no statistically significant difference in overall survival between patients with asymptomatic pulmonary recurrences and those whose pulmonary recurrences were detected after symptoms of metastatic disease had developed.

CONCLUSIONS

Most recurrences are detected on physical examination. Blood tests have no role in surveillance programs. Chest radiographs can detect pulmonary recurrences in a small number of asymptomatic patients at a stage when surgery may prolong survival.

Life-long screening of patients with intermediate-thickness cutaneous melanoma for asymptomatic pulmonary recurrences: a cost-effectiveness analysis

BACKGROUND

Costs and potential benefits of an intensive chest X-ray (CXR) screening program to detect asymptomatic pulmonary metastases in patients with intermediate-thickness, local, cutaneous melanoma were assessed.

METHODS

Cost-effectiveness analysis from a societal perspective was performed using data on recurrence detection from an historic cohort at Roswell Park Cancer Institute and other published studies, estimates of new cases of melanoma in 1996 from the National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program, and estimates of cost and treatment benefits from published articles retrieved through MEDLINE. Net costs were calculated as the added cost of CXR screening to regular follow-up and the costs incurred in the surgical treatment of lung recurrences. Net benefits were calculated as potential savings in nonquality-adjusted life years (NQALY) and quality-adjusted life years (QALY) resulting from surgical treatment. Cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated as the present value of net costs divided by net benefits, with benefits presented in discounted and undiscounted forms.

RESULTS

For the base case, cost of screening per NQALY was $150,000 and was $165,000 for QALY in 1996 dollars using undiscounted health benefits. Screening accounted for approximately 80% of program costs and treatment accounted for 20%. Annual cost-effectiveness ratios were lowest in Years 3-10 of screening. The total cost of a 20-year screening program for patients diagnosed in 1996 was estimated to be between $27-$32 million.

CONCLUSIONS

Even in the absence of certain benefits, the model demonstrates that significant cost savings may be possible by decreasing screening frequency in the first 2 years and limiting screening to the first 5-10 years after diagnosis.