ZOom Delivered Intervention Against Cognitive decline (ZODIAC) COVID-19 pandemic adaptations to the Post-Ischaemic Stroke Cardiovascular Exercise Study (PISCES): protocol for a randomised controlled trial of remotely delivered fitness training for brain health.

BACKGROUND: Stroke increases subsequent dementia risk yet there are no specific post-stroke therapies to protect cognition. Cardiorespiratory exercise is recommended for secondary prevention of stroke and may be neuroprotective. The Post Ischaemic Stroke Cardiovascular Exercise Study (PISCES) aims to reduce post-stroke secondary neurodegeneration and cognitive decline. During the pandemic, we pivoted to a ZOom Delivered Intervention Against Cognitive decline (ZODIAC) protocol, reducing pandemic-amplified barriers to exercise. METHODS: We present pandemic adaptions for a multicentre phase IIb assessor-blinded randomised controlled trial of ischaemic stroke survivors testing the efficacy and feasibility of an 8-week home-based exercise intervention delivered at 2 months post-stroke. We compare cardiorespiratory exercise (intervention arm) versus balance and stretching (active control arm). Participants are assessed with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), fitness, blood, microbiome, and neuropsychological tests at three study visits: before and after the exercise intervention and at 12 months. Modifications to the original protocol include pre-exercise safety home visits, commercial delivery of exercise equipment to facilitate assessor blinding, and reconsideration of statistical plan to allow pooling of the studies. We have reduced in-person study visits from 27 to 3. Primary outcome remains between-group (intervention versus control) difference in brain volume change; secondary outcome is between-group difference in global cognitive ability to allow remote administration of a validated cognitive scale. DISCUSSION: Remotely delivered exercise interventions reduce participant burden and may reduce barriers to recruitment. A decrease in the number of in-person study visits can be supported by greater information capture via self-reported questionnaires and phone surveys. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Prospectively ACTRN12616000942459. Registered on July 2016.

i-Move, a personalised exercise intervention for patients with advanced melanoma receiving immunotherapy: a randomised feasibility trial protocol.

INTRODUCTION: There is increasing evidence demonstrating the benefits of exercise in counteracting cancer treatment-related fatigue. Immunotherapy is an established treatment for advanced melanoma, and is associated with fatigue in a third of patients. The safety and efficacy of exercise in counteracting treatment-related fatigue in patients with advanced melanoma receiving immunotherapy are yet to be determined. This study aims to assess the safety, adherence to and acceptability of a mixed-methods parallel-group, pilot randomised controlled trial of a personalised, 12-week semi-supervised exercise programme prescribed by an exercise physiologist (iMove) in 30 patients with stage IV melanoma scheduled to commence immunotherapy: single agent ipilimumab, nivolumab or pembrolizumab, or combination ipilimumab and nivolumab. The trial will be used to provide preliminary evidence of the potential efficacy of exercise for managing fatigue. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Thirty participants will be recruited from a specialist cancer centre between May and September, 2019. Participants will be randomised 1:1 to receive iMove, or usual care (an information booklet about exercise for people with cancer). Feasibility data comprise: eligibility; recruitment and retention rates; adherence to and acceptability of exercise consultations, personalised exercise programme and study measures; and exercise-related adverse events. Patient-reported outcome measures assess potential impact of the exercise intervention on: fatigue, role functioning, symptoms and quality of life. Follow-up will comprise five time points over 24 weeks. Physical assessments measure physical fitness and functioning. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study was reviewed and approved by the Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC/48927/PMCC-2019). The findings from this trial will be disseminated via conference presentations and publications in peer-reviewed journals, and by engagement with clinicians, media, government and consumers. In particular, we will promote the outcomes of this work among the oncology community should this pilot indicate benefit for patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12619000952145; Pre-results.

Exploring the Experiences of People Treated With Immunotherapies for Advanced Melanoma and Those Caring for Them: "Real-World" Data.

BACKGROUND: Recent advances in the development of immunotherapy drugs have resulted in durable responses and improved overall survival for a proportion of patients with advanced melanoma; however, toxicities can be potentially life-threatening. The patients' family and friends (carers) are relied upon to support patients at home post treatment; however, we know little about their experiences. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to understand the experiences of patients with advanced melanoma who received immunotherapy and their carers; and to explore the impact of immunotherapy treatment on patients' and carers' quality of life (QoL). METHODS: A cross-sectional, exploratory design was employed. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with patients: diagnosed with stage IV melanoma, attending an Australian public cancer hospital, had completed or were receiving treatment with immunotherapies; and the people caring for them at home. RESULTS: Patients (n = 22) described how immunotherapy impacted emotional health, functional ability; and had damaging economic consequences. Fatigue was reported consistently as having a considerable negative influence across all domains of QoL. Carers (n = 9) were anxious about their ability to correctly identify, report and manage side effects at home. CONCLUSIONS: Results demonstrate how immunotherapy can impact the QoL of both patients and carers, either directly through toxicities or indirectly through mechanisms such as stress, financial toxicity, or fatigue that limits participation in life activities. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Supportive care resources and interventions are needed for those receiving immunotherapy to minimise negative impacts on QoL. Carers likewise require better preparation and information to assist in identifying potential treatment toxicities and ensure patient safety.

Balancing the Hype with Reality: What Do Patients with Advanced Melanoma Consider When Making the Decision to Have Immunotherapy?

BACKGROUND: Immunotherapy has resulted in unprecedented improvements in survival and maintained quality of life for many patients with advanced melanoma. However, durable responses are observed in only a minority of patients, and severe treatment side effects are experienced by 5%-30%. There are no reliable tests that can differentiate between patients who are likely to respond to immunotherapy and those who will not. Hence, new challenges have arisen as clinicians try to facilitate patients in their decision-making regarding immunotherapy. Furthermore, little is known about the real-world patients' experience and understanding of immunotherapy outside the clinical trial setting. Here, we explore the perspectives of patients undergoing immunotherapy for melanoma and focus on factors that influenced their treatment decision-making. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-three in-depth semistructured interviews were conducted with patients receiving pembrolizumab for stage IV melanoma at an Australian public cancer hospital. Patients were recruited at a range of time points after commencing therapy, and their experience of treatment was explored. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, coded, and analyzed thematically. RESULTS: Immunotherapy is viewed as a symbol of hope, with high-profile anecdotes reinforcing this perception. Only a minority of patients expressed a good understanding of the likely efficacy and potential treatment side effects. Patients are reliant on their clinicians' recommendation regarding immunotherapy treatment decisions. CONCLUSION: Novel treatments such as immunotherapy provide significant hope for patients. This may influence their preference for immunotherapy over and above the usual considerations of the trade-off between efficacy and toxicity. Careful counsel and individualized patient resources may further facilitate treatment decision-making. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This study highlighted some of the misconceptions held by patients that need to be addressed when discussing the possibility of receiving treatment with immunotherapy for advanced melanoma. Patients placed a lot of importance on high-profile anecdotes rather than truly understanding likely outcomes of treatment based on personal circumstances. The majority of patients had a poor understanding of the potential side effects and long-term implications of treatment with immunotherapy. Careful counsel is required in order to facilitate informed decision-making about treatment and to ensure possible side effects are known and appreciated. Further research is needed to develop tools to aid decision-making in everyday clinical practice.