Perspectives on Patient-Reported Outcome Data After Treatment Discontinuation in Cancer Clinical Trials.

OBJECTIVES: Patient-reported outcome (PRO) data are critical in understanding treatments from the patient perspective in cancer clinical trials. The potential benefits and methodological approaches to the collection of PRO data after treatment discontinuation (eg, because of progressive disease or unacceptable drug toxicity) are less clear. The purpose of this article is to describe the Food and Drug Administration's Oncology Center of Excellence and the Critical Path Institute cosponsored 2-hour virtual roundtable, held in 2020, to discuss this specific issue. METHODS: We summarize key points from this discussion with 16 stakeholders representing academia, clinical practice, patients, international regulatory agencies, health technology assessment bodies/payers, industry, and PRO instrument development. RESULTS: Stakeholders recognized that any PRO data collection after treatment discontinuation should have clearly defined objectives to ensure that data can be analyzed and reported. CONCLUSIONS: Data collection after discontinuation without a justification for its use wastes patients' time and effort and is unethical.

Psychometrics of patient-reported bother from side effects of treatment single-items in industry-sponsored oncology trials.

BACKGROUND: Improvements in cancer treatment have increased the number of cancer survivors, but also increased the long-term and late effects from cancer therapy. Patient reported "side effect bother" could be used to measure the burden of treatment, and the risk for negative outcomes such as dose reduction, treatment delay or discontinuation. The current study addresses the psychometric properties of a single item, determines what represents a "meaningful change", and evaluates the correlation to safety endpoints and functioning. METHODS: Results from 5911 patients enrolled in 8 clinical trials representing 5 disease types in oncology and hematology who completed either the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT) GP5 item or a modified bother item (MBI) were assessed. RESULTS: Patients ranged in age from 18 to 93 years, with all cancer stages represented and approximately equal numbers of males and females. Test-retest reliability was acceptable, as were convergent and known groups validity. The GP5 and MBI effectively demonstrated sensitivity to change over time and established meaningful thresholds. CONCLUSIONS: The results indicate that these single-items are psychometrically sound, capable of distinguishing known groups, responsive to change and can identify meaningful change over time in terms of treatment-related symptoms. It extends the findings of recent scientific groups by providing analyses not included in prior studies, and further supports the FDA's recommendation to include a single item question in clinical trials.

Safety and efficacy of obinutuzumab alone or with chemotherapy in previously untreated or relapsed/refractory chronic lymphocytic leukaemia patients: Final analysis of the Phase IIIb GREEN study.

The manageable toxicity profile of obinutuzumab (GA101; G) alone or with chemotherapy in first-line (1L; fit and non-fit) and relapsed/refractory (R/R) patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL) was established in the primary analysis of the Phase IIIb GREEN trial (Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01905943). The final analysis (cut-off, 31 January 2019) is reported here. Patients received G (1000 mg) alone (G-mono; fit and non-fit patients) or with chemotherapy [fludarabine and cyclophosphamide (FC; fit patients); chlorambucil (non-fit patients); bendamustine (any patient)]. Study endpoints were safety (primary) and efficacy (secondary). Subgroup analyses were performed on prognostic biomarkers in 1L CLL. Overall, 630 patients received 1L and 341 received R/R CLL treatment. At the final analysis, no new safety signals were observed [Grade ≥ 3 adverse events (AEs): 1L 82·7%, R/R 84·5%; serious AEs: 1L 58·1%, R/R 62·5%]. Neutropenia (1L 50·5%, R/R 53·4%) and thrombocytopenia (1L 14·6%, R/R 19·1%) were the most common Grade 3-5 AEs. G-mono-, G-bendamustine and G-FC-treated patients with unmutated immunoglobulin heavy chain trended towards shorter progression-free survival. Achievement of minimal residual disease negativity was greatest in 1L patients treated with G-FC. In this final analysis of the GREEN trial, the safety profile of G was consistent with current risk management strategies. Biomarker analyses supported efficacy in the specific subgroups.

Health-related quality of life and health status in adolescent and adult people with haemophilia A without factor VIII inhibitors-A non-interventional study.

INTRODUCTION: Real-world data on health-related outcomes in persons with haemophilia A (PwHA) can provide useful information for improving patient care. The global, non-interventional study (NIS; NCT02476942) prospectively collected high-quality data in PwHA, including those without factor VIII (FVIII) inhibitors treated according to local routine clinical practice. AIM: To report health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and health status of adult/adolescent PwHA without FVIII inhibitors. METHODS: Participants were PwHA without FVIII inhibitors age ≥12 years; they remained on existing episodic treatment or prophylaxis. HRQoL was assessed by Haemophilia Quality of Life Questionnaire for Adults (Haem-A-QoL) or Haemophilia-Specific Quality of Life Assessment for Children and Adolescents Short Form (Haemo-QoL-SF II). Health status was assessed through EuroQol 5-Dimensions 5-Levels (EQ-5D-5L) index utility score and visual analogue scale (EQ-VAS). RESULTS: Ninety-four participants enrolled; median age was 34.0 years (range 12-76). Forty-five received episodic treatment and 49 received prophylaxis for a median time of 27.7 weeks and 30.4 weeks, respectively. Mean (standard deviation) baseline Haem-A-QoL total scores were 40.1 (17.0) for the episodic group and 26.6 (14.6) for the prophylaxis group, indicating impairments in HRQoL, which remained consistent over time. Mean EQ-5D-5L IUS scores were similar between treatment regimens (0.8 episodic; 0.9 prophylaxis) and consistent over time. The mean EQ-VAS scores were similar between treatment regimens, and lower on days when bleeding occurred (79.0 vs 85.0 for episodic treatment; 77.0 vs 82.0 for prophylaxis, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Adult and adolescent PwHA without FVIII inhibitors had HRQoL impairments regardless of whether they were treated with episodic or prophylactic standard care with FVIII.

Development and testing of the Satisfaction Questionnaire with Intravenous or Subcutaneous Hemophilia Injection and results from the Phase 3 HAVEN 3 study of emicizumab prophylaxis in persons with haemophilia A without FVIII inhibitors.

INTRODUCTION: Emicizumab is a subcutaneously (SC) administered prophylactic agent for persons with haemophilia A (PwHA). As part of its clinical development, a new instrument was required to measure treatment satisfaction. AIM: Describe development of the Satisfaction Questionnaire with Intravenous or Subcutaneous Hemophilia Injection (SQ-ISHI) and its subsequent testing with HAVEN 3 study participants to measure patient satisfaction with emicizumab. METHODS: To develop the SQ-ISHI, we conducted four rounds of in-person interviews at five qualitative research facilities. Participants aged ≥12 years with moderate or severe haemophilia A, receiving intravenous factor VIII (FVIII) prophylaxis, provided feedback to optimize content understanding, ease of completion and item relevance. The final SQ-ISHI was completed by HAVEN 3 participants who previously received FVIII prophylaxis; baseline scores were compared with those at Week 21 or 25 of emicizumab prophylaxis. RESULTS: Sixty-three HAVEN 3 participants were eligible to complete the questionnaire and rate their satisfaction on a scale of 0 ('not at all satisfied') to 10 ('extremely satisfied'). Mean 'overall satisfaction' with previous FVIII prophylaxis at baseline was 6.9 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 6.2 to 7.7) increasing to 8.8 (95% CI: 8.4 to 9.3) at follow-up (Week 21/25 of treatment with emicizumab). The greatest improvement was observed in satisfaction with treatment half-life (mean score at baseline: 5.8 [95% CI: 4.9 to 6.6] vs 8.6 [95% CI: 8.0 to 9.2] at follow-up). CONCLUSION: These results demonstrate that emicizumab prophylaxis leads to greater treatment satisfaction compared with FVIII prophylaxis, reflecting in part the low treatment burden of emicizumab associated with its infrequent, SC administration.

Patient-reported outcomes from KATHERINE: A phase 3 study of adjuvant trastuzumab emtansine versus trastuzumab in patients with residual invasive disease after neoadjuvant therapy for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: The phase 3 KATHERINE trial demonstrated significantly improved invasive disease-free survival with adjuvant trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) versus trastuzumab in patients with HER2-positive early breast cancer and residual invasive disease after neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus HER2-targeted therapy. METHODS: Patients who received taxane- and trastuzumab-containing neoadjuvant therapy (with/without anthracyclines) and had residual invasive disease (breast and/or axillary nodes) at surgery were randomly assigned to 14 cycles of adjuvant T-DM1 (3.6 mg/kg intravenously every 3 weeks) or trastuzumab (6 mg/kg intravenously every 3 weeks). The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30 (QLQ-C30) and breast cancer module (QLQ-BR23) were completed at screening, at day 1 of cycles 5 and 11, within 30 days after study drug completion, and at 6- and 12-month follow-up visits. RESULTS: Of patients who were randomly assigned to T-DM1 (n = 743) and trastuzumab (n = 743), 612 (82%) and 640 (86%), respectively, had valid baseline and ≥1 postbaseline assessments. No clinically meaningful changes (≥10 points) from baseline in mean QLQ-C30 and QLQ-BR23 scores occurred in either arm. More patients receiving T-DM1 reported clinically meaningful deterioration at any assessment point in role functioning (49% vs 41%), appetite loss (38% vs 28%), constipation (47% vs 38%), fatigue (66% vs 60%), nausea/vomiting (39% vs 30%), and systemic therapy side effects (49% vs 36%). These differences were no longer apparent at the 6-month follow-up assessment, except for role functioning (23% vs 16%). CONCLUSION: These data suggest that health-related quality of life was generally maintained in both study arms over the course of treatment.

Health-related quality of life in the phase III GALLIUM study of obinutuzumab- or rituximab-based chemotherapy in patients with previously untreated advanced follicular lymphoma.

Health-related quality of life was a secondary endpoint in the phase III GALLIUM study in previously untreated patients with follicular lymphoma who were treated with rituximab- or obinutuzumab-chemotherapy. Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive induction therapy with obinutuzumab- or rituximab-chemotherapy and maintenance in responders. Health-related quality of life was assessed using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Treatment-Lymphoma questionnaire, incorporating well-being and lymphoma-specific subscales. Assessments were performed at baseline, and during induction, maintenance, and follow-up (maximum 84 months). Clinically meaningful responses were defined by minimally important difference values. Of 1202 randomized patients (median follow-up 57.4 months), 557/601 (92.7%; obinutuzumab-chemotherapy) and 548/601 (91.2%; rituximab-chemotherapy) completed all Functional Assessment of Cancer Treatment-Lymphoma scales at baseline. Mean baseline health-related quality of life scores were similar between both arms, with all patients having some functional impairment and lymphoma symptoms. Over the course of treatment, mean health-related quality of life remained similar in both arms. Equal proportions of patients in both arms achieved minimally important difference by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Treatment-Lymphoma lymphoma-specific subscale and summary scales throughout induction, maintenance, and follow-up. On each summary scale, ~ 50% of patients in each arm achieved minimally important difference by maintenance month 2. In GALLIUM, similar improvements in health-related quality of life were seen with obinutuzumab- and rituximab-chemotherapy, suggesting that both treatments reduced lymphoma-related symptoms, and treatment-related side effects did not abrogate these improvements in well-being. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01332968.

Determining meaningful health-related quality-of-life improvement in persons with haemophilia A using the Haemophilia Quality of Life Questionnaire for Adults (Haem-A-QoL).

INTRODUCTION: The Haem-A-QoL is frequently utilized in haemophilia clinical trials and captures relevant aspects of disease impact. Thresholds for some domains 'Physical Health' (PH), 'Sports & Leisure' (S&L) and 'Total Score' (TS) have previously been identified to benchmark the amount of change that is meaningful to patients, but not been independently confirmed. AIM: The objective of this analysis was to determine the clinically important responder (CIR) thresholds for these three domains. METHODS: CIR thresholds in adult persons with haemophilia A (PwHA) enrolled in HAVEN 1, 3 and 4 studies were determined for improvements from baseline to 24 weeks of emicizumab prophylaxis using anchor-based methodology with the EQ-5D-5L as the validated anchor, cumulative distribution functions (CDF) and distribution-based methodology. The results were compared with previously published thresholds. RESULTS: At baseline and after 24 weeks of emicizumab prophylaxis, Haem-A-QoL data from 241/258 patients were available. Concordance was observed between the Haem-A-QoL and EQ-5D-5L in patterns of improvement, deterioration or lack of change. CDF estimates of the Haem-A-QoL PH and TS grouped by response categories on the Mobility, Pain/Discomfort and Usual Activities EQ-5D-5L domains demonstrated the same pattern of responses to each scale; distribution-based estimates were 11.9 for PH, 13.9 for S&L, and 8.3 for TS. CONCLUSION: Our responder thresholds are mostly consistent with those proposed by Wyrwich et al (cut-offs of -10 and -7 for PH and TS, respectively). The majority of responders to emicizumab prophylaxis had improvements greater than the previously reported 10-point reduction in PH and 7-point reduction in TS.

Health-related quality of life and caregiver burden of emicizumab in children with haemophilia A and factor VIII inhibitors-Results from the HAVEN 2 study.

INTRODUCTION: Persons with haemophilia A (PwHA) with factor (F)VIII inhibitors, including children, have impaired health-related quality of life (HRQoL). The HAVEN 2 study (NCT027955767) of paediatric PwHA with FVIII inhibitors demonstrated that subcutaneous emicizumab prophylaxis resulted in low annualizedbleed rates. AIM: We assessed the impact of emicizumab prophylaxis on the HRQoL of children and their caregivers participating in HAVEN 2. METHODS: Children aged 8-11 years self-reported HRQoL using the Haemophilia-Specific Quality of Life Assessment Instrument for Children and Adolescents Short Form (Haemo-QoL SF II). Caregivers of children aged 0-11 years completed the Adapted Inhibitor-Specific Quality of Life Assessment with Aspects of Caregiver Burden. All scores were transformed to a 0-100 scale, where lower scores reflect a better HRQoL. The number of missed days from school/day care and hospitalizations was also recorded. RESULTS: In HAVEN 2 (n = 88), the median age was 6.5 years (range: 1-15 years); 85 participants were aged < 12 years and included in this analysis, and 34 participants were aged 8-11 years, thereby eligible to complete the Haemo-QoL SF II questionnaire. The mean (standard deviation, n) baseline Haemo-QoL SF II 'Total' score was 30.2 (14.9, 30), indicating moderate impairment; with emicizumab, mean score decreased by -9.62 (7.73, 17) points to 23.0 (13.93, 20) by Week 49. The most improved domains were 'Sports & School' and 'Physical Health'. Caregivers reported similar improvements. CONCLUSION: Prophylactic emicizumab is accompanied by substantial and sustained improvements in HRQoL of paediatric PwHA with FVIII inhibitors and their caregivers.

Outcomes in children with hemophilia A with inhibitors: Results from a noninterventional study.

BACKGROUND: Data regarding management of pediatric persons with hemophilia A (PwHA) with factor VIII (FVIII) inhibitors are limited. This prospective noninterventional study (NCT02476942) evaluated annualized bleeding rates (ABRs), safety, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in pediatric PwHA with FVIII inhibitors. PROCEDURE: PwHA aged <12 years with current FVIII inhibitors and high-titer inhibitor history were enrolled. Participants remained on usual treatment; no interventions were applied. Outcomes included ABR, safety, and HRQoL. RESULTS: Twenty-four PwHA aged 2-11 years (median 7.5) were enrolled and monitored for 8.7-44.1 weeks (median 23.4). In the episodic (n = 10) and prophylactic (n = 14) groups, respectively, 121 of 185 (65.4%) and 101 of 186 (54.3%) bleeds were treated using activated prothrombin complex concentrate (aPCC) and/or recombinant activated FVII (rFVIIa). ABRs (95% confidence interval) were 19.4 (13.2-28.4) and 18.5 (14.2-24.0) for treated bleeds, and 32.7 (20.5-52.2) and 33.1 (22.4-48.9) for all bleeds, respectively. Most prophylactic group participants (92.9%) were prescribed aPCC; 50% adhered to their prescribed treatment regimen. Adherence to prophylactic rFVIIa was not assessed. Serious adverse events included hemarthrosis (12.5%) and mouth hemorrhage (12.5%); the most common nonserious adverse event was viral upper respiratory tract infection (12.5%). HRQoL showed functional impairment at baseline; scores remained stable throughout, with little intergroup variation. CONCLUSIONS: ABRs remained high in pediatric PwHA with inhibitors receiving standard treatment. This study demonstrates the need for more effective treatments, with reduced treatment burden, to prevent bleeds, increase prophylaxis adherence, and improve patient outcomes.

Health-related quality of life and health status in persons with haemophilia A with inhibitors: A prospective, multicentre, non-interventional study (NIS).

INTRODUCTION: Real-world data (RWD) on health-related outcomes in persons with haemophilia A (PwHA) provide insights into patient needs and can guide clinical study design. A global, prospective, non-interventional study (NIS; NCT02476942) collected detailed RWD on bleeding outcomes, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and health status in PwHA treated per local routine clinical practice. AIM: To report HRQoL and health status in the adult/adolescent PwHA with inhibitors cohort in the NIS. METHODS: This cohort enrolled PwHA aged ≥12 years with high-titre factor VIII inhibitor history. Participants remained on their usual treatment (no protocol-specified interventions). Health-related outcomes: Haemophilia Quality of Life Questionnaire for Adults (Haem-A-QoL), Haemophilia-specific Quality of Life Questionnaire for Children Short Form (Haemo-QoL SF), EuroQol 5-Dimensions 5-Levels (EQ-5D-5L) index utility score (IUS) and visual analogue scale (EQ-VAS). RESULTS: One hundred three participants were enrolled on episodic (n = 75) or prophylactic treatment (n = 28); median (range) age, 31 (12-75) years; median (range) observation time, 26 (4-70) weeks. Haem-A-QoL scores indicated impairments in HRQoL aspects; comparable between episodic/prophylactic regimens and relatively consistent over time. Haemo-QoL SF scores with both regimens varied over time, and appeared poorer with episodic than prophylactic treatment. IUS and EQ-VAS were comparable between regimens, stable over time and lower on bleeding days. Mean proportions of missed work and school days were 16% and 23%, respectively; mean (standard deviation) number of days hospitalized was 3.2 (8.8) (comparable between groups). CONCLUSIONS: These RWD demonstrate that PwHA with inhibitors have impaired HRQoL, despite standard treatment, and that more effective treatment options are needed.

The effect of emicizumab prophylaxis on health-related outcomes in persons with haemophilia A with inhibitors: HAVEN 1 Study.

INTRODUCTION: Persons with haemophilia A (PwHA) with inhibitors to factor VIII often experience decreased health-related outcomes. In HAVEN 1 (NCT02622321), there was a statistically significant reduction in bleeding with emicizumab prophylaxis versus no prophylaxis. AIM: Describe health-related outcomes in PwHA with inhibitors in HAVEN 1. METHODS: PwHA with inhibitors aged ≥12 years previously on episodic bypassing agents (BPAs) were randomized to emicizumab prophylaxis (Arm A; n = 35) or no prophylaxis (Arm B; n = 18); participants previously on BPA prophylaxis received emicizumab prophylaxis (Arm C; n = 49). Health-related outcomes assessed at baseline and monthly thereafter: Haemophilia Quality of Life Questionnaire for Adults (Haem-A-QoL), Haemophilia-specific Quality of Life Questionnaire for Children Short Form (Haemo-QoL SF), EuroQol 5-Dimensions 5-Levels (EQ-5D-5L) index utility score (IUS) and visual analogue scale (EQ-VAS) and work/school days. Days hospitalized also recorded. RESULTS: At week 25, differences (ANCOVA) in adjusted mean scores (95% confidence interval) favoured Arm A versus B for Haem-A-QoL "Total" score (14.0 [5.6, 22.5]; P = 0.002) and "Physical Health" (21.6 [7.9, 35.2]; P = 0.003); EQ-VAS (-9.7 [-17.6, -1.82]; P = 0.017); and IUS (-0.16 [-0.25, -0.07]; P = 0.001); mean scores are comparable in Arms A and C. Throughout the study, a greater proportion of participants on emicizumab prophylaxis than no prophylaxis exceeded questionnaire-specific responder thresholds. Mean proportion of missed work days and number of days hospitalized were lower with emicizumab prophylaxis than no prophylaxis. CONCLUSIONS: In PwHA with inhibitors, emicizumab prophylaxis was associated with substantial and meaningful improvements in health-related outcomes.

Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events: Methods for item selection in industry-sponsored oncology clinical trials.

As new cancer treatment regimens demonstrate increased potential to improve patients' survival, more focus is directed toward the quality of that extension of life and to obtaining additional information from patients regarding their experience with treatment. The utility of capturing patient-reported treatment-related symptoms to complement traditional clinician-rated symptomatic adverse event reporting is well-documented. The National Cancer Institute's Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events is an item library aimed at capturing patient-reported symptoms to inform the patient perspective on a treatment's tolerability. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has recommended using the Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events in clinical trials. A practical guideline is needed to inform a priori selection of specific Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events items for use in any given industry-sponsored oncology clinical trial. Standardizing this selection process will foster systematic and consistent data collection as part of drug development and enhance our knowledge on how to use patient-relevant information as part of a treatment's risk/benefit assessment. This article presents methods and consensus recommendations for selecting specific Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events items to include in early-phase and late-phase oncology clinical trials.

Health-related quality of life and symptoms in patients with rituximab-refractory indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma treated in the phase III GADOLIN study with obinutuzumab plus bendamustine versus bendamustine alone.

We present health-related quality of life (HRQoL) data from GADOLIN, comparing bendamustine (B) alone or combined with obinutuzumab (G-B) in rituximab-refractory indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma patients. The Functional Assessment of Cancer Treatment-Lymphoma (FACT-Lym) questionnaire was administered on day 1 of cycles 1, 3, and 5 during treatment, at end of induction (EOI), bi-monthly for 2 years during maintenance/follow-up, and annually during extended follow-up until progression/death. Time to first ≥6-point worsening from baseline in the FACT-Lym trial outcome index (TOI) was estimated. Minimally important differences at individual subscale and total score level were used to define the proportion of patients reporting improvement on the FACT-Lym lymphoma-specific subscale (≥3 points), FACT-Lym TOI (≥6 points), and FACT-Lym total score (≥7 points). Overall, 396 patients were randomized. Analysis was conducted when 175 Independent Review Committee-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) events were observed. Questionnaire completion rates were generally balanced between arms at baseline, EOI, and final follow-up. Median time to ≥6-point worsening from baseline on the FACT-Lym TOI was 8.0 months in the G-B arm and 4.6 months in the B arm (HR 0.74; 95% CI 0.56-0.98). More G-B patients reported meaningful improvements on the FACT-Lym questionnaire subscales. Results were similar when follicular lymphoma patients were analyzed separately. The delayed time to worsening and greater proportion of patients reporting meaningful improvement in HRQoL in the G-B arm suggest that benefit in PFS is not at the expense of an increase in treatment-related toxicity that could lead to reduced HRQoL.

Randomized controlled trials in relapsed/refractory follicular lymphoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

This systematic literature review evaluated the clinical efficacy and safety of interventions used in relapsed/refractory follicular lymphoma. Primary efficacy outcomes were objective response rate, progression-free survival and overall survival. Safety endpoints were grade 3/4 toxicities, serious adverse events and withdrawals or deaths due to toxicity. Studies were selected if they were randomized controlled trials reporting on the efficacy or safety of treatments for relapsed or refractory follicular lymphoma, and if outcomes were reported separately from trials that included other lymphoid neoplasms. We used the Bucher method for conducting adjusted indirect comparisons within a meta-analysis. We identified 10 randomized controlled trials of treatments for relapsed/refractory follicular lymphoma. The most prominent drug investigated (alone or in combination) was rituximab. Most trials did not report median overall survival. Two trials reported median event-free survival (range, 1.2-23.2 months). Six of ten trials reported objective response rate (range, 9-93%). Meta-analysis showed only one statistically significant result: rituximab + bortezomib yielded a significantly higher objective response rate than rituximab monotherapy (relative risk, 1.28; 95% confidence interval, 1.11-1.47). Otherwise, there were no discernable differences in overall survival or progression-free survival, partly due to insufficient reporting of results in the clinical trials. The relatively small number of randomized controlled trials, few overlapping treatment arms, and variability in the randomized controlled trial features and in the endpoints studied complicate the formal comparison of therapies for relapsed/refractory follicular lymphoma. Additional well-designed randomized controlled trials are needed to fully understand the relative outcomes of older and more recently developed therapies.

Are changes in patient-reported outcomes prognostic for diffuse large B-Cell lymphoma survival? Results from the GOYA trial.

In this hypothesis-generating analysis, we examined whether longitudinal changes in patient-reported outcomes (PROs), such as symptoms, over time would be prognostic for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) who were newly treated with obinutuzumab (G) in combination with CHOP (G-CHOP) or rituximab (R) with CHOP (R-CHOP), in the GOYA Phase 3 trial (NCT01287741). Our results show that from the study baseline to cycle 3 day 1, every 1-point increase (worsening) in fever symptoms was associated with a 41% higher risk of death (hazard ratio [HR], 1.41; P = 0.01). Every 1-point increase (worsening) in lumps or swelling symptoms was associated with a 27% higher risk of disease progression or death (PFS events) (HR, 1.27; P = 0.01) and a 29% higher risk of death (OS events) (HR, 1.29; P = 0.02). No significant associations were observed between survival and changes in other symptoms, such as itching. Our study suggests that changes in some PROs are related to survival in DLBCL patients.

Pralsetinib in Patients with Advanced/Metastatic Rearranged During Transfection (RET)-Altered Thyroid Cancer: Updated Efficacy and Safety Data from the ARROW Study.

Background: Rearranged during transfection (RET) alterations are targetable oncogenic drivers in thyroid cancer. Primary data from the open-label, phase 1/2 ARROW study demonstrated clinical activity and manageable safety with pralsetinib, a selective RET inhibitor, in patients with advanced/metastatic RET-altered thyroid cancer. We present an updated analysis with more patients and longer follow-up. Methods: Adult patients with advanced/metastatic RET-mutant medullary thyroid cancer (MTC) or RET fusion-positive thyroid cancer who initiated oral pralsetinib at 400 mg once daily were included. Primary endpoints were overall response rate (ORR) by blinded independent central review (per RECIST v1.1) and safety. Secondary endpoints included duration of response (DoR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival. Responses were assessed in three cohorts of patients with baseline measurable disease: patients with RET-mutant MTC who had received prior cabozantinib and/or vandetanib (C/V), treatment-naïve patients with RET-mutant MTC, and patients with previously treated RET fusion-positive thyroid cancer. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were an exploratory endpoint. Results: As of October 18, 2021, the measurable disease population comprised of 61 patients with RET-mutant MTC and prior C/V, 62 treatment-naïve patients with RET-mutant MTC, and 22 patients with RET fusion-positive thyroid cancer who had received prior systemic therapy, including radioactive iodine. The ORR was 55.7% [confidence interval; 95% CI: 42.4-68.5] in patients with RET-mutant MTC and prior C/V, 77.4% [95% CI: 65.0-87.1] in treatment-naïve patients with RET-mutant MTC, and 90.9% [95% CI: 70.8-98.9] in patients with previously treated RET fusion-positive thyroid cancer. Median DoR and median PFS were both 25.8 months in patients with RET-mutant MTC and prior C/V, not reached in treatment-naïve patients with RET-mutant MTC, and 23.6 and 25.4 months, respectively, in patients with previously treated RET fusion-positive thyroid cancer. In the RET-altered thyroid cancer safety population (N = 175), 97.1% of patients reported a treatment-related adverse event (TRAE); these led to discontinuation in 5.7% and dose reduction in 52.6% of patients. There was one death (0.6%) due to a TRAE. PROs improved or remained stable after pralsetinib treatment. Conclusions: In this updated analysis of the ARROW study, pralsetinib continued to show deep and durable clinical activity and a manageable safety profile in patients with advanced/metastatic RET-altered thyroid cancer. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT03037385.

Randomized clinical trial of a brief and extensive dyadic intervention for advanced cancer patients and their family caregivers.

BACKGROUND: Few intervention programs assist patients and their family caregivers to manage advanced cancer and maintain their quality of life (QOL). This study examined (i) whether patient-caregiver dyads (i.e., pairs) randomly assigned to a brief or extensive dyadic intervention (the FOCUS Program) had better outcomes than dyads randomly assigned to usual care and (ii) whether patients' risk for distress and other factors moderated the effect of the brief or extensive program on outcomes. METHODS: Advanced cancer patients and their caregivers (N = 484 dyads) were stratified by patients' baseline risk for distress (high versus low), cancer type (lung, colorectal, breast, or prostate), and research site and then randomly assigned to a brief (three-session) or extensive (six-session) intervention or control. The interventions offered dyads information and support. Intermediary outcomes were appraisals (i.e., appraisal of illness/caregiving, uncertainty, and hopelessness) and resources (i.e., coping, interpersonal relationships, and self-efficacy). The primary outcome was QOL. Data were collected prior to intervention and post-intervention (3 and 6 months from baseline). The final sample was 302 dyads. Repeated measures MANCOVA was used to evaluate outcomes. RESULTS: Significant group by time interactions showed that there was an improvement in dyads' coping (p < 0.05), self-efficacy (p < 0.05), and social QOL (p < 0.01) and in caregivers' emotional QOL (p < 0.05). Effects varied by intervention dose. Most effects were found at 3 months only. Risk for distress accounted for very few moderation effects. CONCLUSIONS: Both brief and extensive programs had positive outcomes for patient-caregiver dyads, but few sustained effects. Patient-caregiver dyads benefit when viewed as the 'unit of care'.

Axitinib plus gemcitabine versus placebo plus gemcitabine in patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a double-blind randomised phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: Axitinib is a potent, selective inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) receptors 1, 2, and 3. A randomised phase 2 trial of gemcitabine with or without axitinib in advanced pancreatic cancer suggested increased overall survival in axitinib-treated patients. On the basis of these results, we aimed to assess the effect of treatment with gemcitabine plus axitinib on overall survival in a phase 3 trial. METHODS: In this double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study, eligible patients had metastatic or locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma, no uncontrolled hypertension or venous thrombosis, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 or 1. Patients, stratified by disease extent (metastatic vs locally advanced), were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive gemcitabine 1000 mg/m(2) intravenously on days 1, 8, and 15 every 28 days plus either axitinib or placebo. Axitinib or placebo were administered orally with food at a starting dose of 5 mg twice a day, which could be dose-titrated up to 10 mg twice daily if well tolerated. A centralised randomisation procedure was used to assign patients to each treatment group, with randomised permuted blocks within strata. Patients, investigators, and the trial sponsor were masked to treatment assignments. The primary endpoint was overall survival. All efficacy analyses were done in all patients assigned to treatment groups for whom data were available; safety and treatment administration and compliance assessments were based on treatment received. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00471146. FINDINGS: Between July 27, 2007, and Oct 31, 2008, 632 patients were enrolled and assigned to treatment groups (316 axitinib, 316 placebo). At an interim analysis in January, 2009, the independent data monitoring committee concluded that the futility boundary had been crossed. Median overall survival was 8·5 months (95% CI 6·9-9·5) for gemcitabine plus axitinib (n=314, data missing for two patients) and 8·3 months (6·9-10·3) for gemcitabine plus placebo (n=316; hazard ratio 1·014, 95% CI 0·786-1·309; one-sided p=0·5436). The most common grade 3 or higher adverse events for gemcitabine plus axitinib and gemcitabine plus placebo were hypertension (20 [7%] and 5 [2%] events, respectively), abdominal pain (20 [7%] and 17 [6%]), fatigue (27 [9%] and 21 [7%]), and anorexia (19 [6%] and 11 [4%]). INTERPRETATION: The addition of axitinib to gemcitabine does not improve overall survival in advanced pancreatic cancer. These results add to increasing evidence that targeting of VEGF signalling is an ineffective strategy in this disease. FUNDING: Pfizer.