Patient communication and experiences in cancer clinical drug trials: a mixed-method study at a specialist clinical trials unit.

BACKGROUND: As cancer therapies increase in their complexity, effective communication among patients, physicians, and research staff is critical for optimal clinical trial management. Currently, we understand little about on-trial communication practices and patient trial experiences over time. This mixed-method study explored patient experiences of participating in a clinical drug trial at different time points, focussing on patient communication with trial staff. METHODS: Patients enrolled in clinical drug trials conducted at the Parkville Cancer Clinical Trials Unit were invited to complete a tailored online survey and/or a qualitative interview. Patients were recruited to three cohorts based on time since the first trial treatment: new (≥ 1 to ≤ 13 weeks), mid- (≥ 14 to ≤ 26 weeks), and long-term (≥ 52 weeks) trial patients. Descriptive statistics were calculated for survey responses. Interview data were analysed thematically with a team-based approach. Survey and interview data were integrated at the intepretation stage. RESULTS: From May to June 2021, 210 patients completed a survey (response rate 64%, 60% male), 20 completed interviews (60% male), and 18 completed both. More long-term trial patients (46%) participated than new (29%) and mid-trial patients (26%). Survey data showed high (> 90%) patient satisfaction with the provision of trial information and communication with trial staff across trial stages, and many reported trial experiences as above and beyond standard care. Interview data indicated that written trial information could be overwhelming, and verbal communication with the staff and physicians was highly valued, especially for enrolment and side effect management among long-term patients. Patients described the key points along the clinical trial trajectory that merit close attention: clear and well-communicated randomisation practices, reliable pathways for side effect reporting and prompt response from the trial staff, and end-of-trial transition management to avoid a sense of abandonment. CONCLUSION: Patients reported high overall satisfaction with trial management but outlined key pinch points requiring improved communication practices. Establishing a range of effective communication practices among trial staff and physicians with patients in cancer clinical trials may have a wide range of positive effects on patient accrual, retention, and satisfaction.

Exploring Australian regional cancer patients' experiences of clinical trial participation via telehealth.

INTRODUCTION: Regional cancer patients face various barriers in accessing specialist cancer services. Teletrials are a new model of care that utilise communications technologies to enable access to and participation in clinical trials close to home. The present study aimed to explore the experiences of regional cancer patients and their carers while participating in a teletrial, and those of regional patients who travelled to a metropolitan centre for trial participation. METHODS: A concurrent, mixed methods study design was used to address the study aim. Patient quality of life data were gathered for both groups and an audio-recorded semi-structured interview undertaken to explore patients' and carers' experiences of the two modes of trial participation. Greater weighting was given to the qualitative data. RESULTS: Participants described teletrials as an acceptable and valuable initiative that reduced overall burden of trial participation. Irrespective of mode of delivery, patients and carers identified access to trials and specialist cancer services as an important equity issue for regional cancer patients. DISCUSSION: From the perspective of regional cancer patients and carers, a teletrial offers convenient, acceptable access to a clinical trial. Although not all patients may want to engage in a teletrial, patients and carers agree that it offers equity of opportunity for trial participation, irrespective of where people live.

Outcomes of women at high familial risk for breast cancer: An 8-year single-center experience.

OBJECTIVES: The value of a high-risk surveillance program for mutation carriers and women at high familial breast cancer risk has not been extensively studied. A Breast and Ovarian Cancer Risk Management Clinic (BOCRMC) was established at the Royal Melbourne Hospital in 2010 to provide multimodality screening and risk management strategies for this group of women. The aims of this study were to evaluate the program and describe breast cancer diagnoses for BRCA1, BRCA2, and other germline mutation carriers as well as high-risk noncarriers attending the BOCRMC. METHODS: Clinical data from mutation carriers and noncarriers with a ≥25% lifetime risk of developing breast cancer who attended between 2010 and 2018 were extracted from clinic records and compared. The pattern and mode of detection of cancer were determined. RESULTS: A total of 206 mutation carriers and 305 noncarriers attended the BOCRMC and underwent screening on at least one occasion. Median age was 37 years. After a median follow-up of 34 months, 15 (seven invasive) breast cancers were identified in mutation carriers, with seven (six invasive) breast cancers identified in noncarriers. Of these, 20 (90.9%) were detected by annual screening, whereas two (9.1%) were detected as interval cancers (both in BRCA1 mutation carriers). Median size of the invasive breast cancers was 11 mm (range: 1.5-30 mm). The majority (76.9%) were axillary node negative. In women aged 25-49 years, the annualized cancer incidence was 1.6% in BRCA1, 1.4% in BRCA2 mutation carriers, and 0.5% in noncarriers. This compares to 0.06% annualized cancer incidence in the general Australian population. CONCLUSIONS: Screening was effective at detecting early-stage cancers. The incidence of events in young noncarriers was substantially higher than in the general population. This potentially justifies ongoing management through a specialty clinic, although further research to better personalize risk assessment in noncarriers is required.

A Phase Ib Dose-Escalation and Expansion Study of the BCL2 Inhibitor Venetoclax Combined with Tamoxifen in ER and BCL2-Positive Metastatic Breast Cancer.

Venetoclax, a potent and selective BCL2 inhibitor, synergizes with endocrine therapy in preclinical models of ER-positive breast cancer. Using a phase Ib 3 + 3 dose-escalation and expansion study design, 33 patients with ER and BCL2-positive metastatic disease (mean prior regimens, 2; range, 0-8) were treated with daily tamoxifen (20 mg) and venetoclax (200-800 mg). Apart from uncomplicated "on-target" lymphopenia, no dose-limiting toxicities or high-grade adverse events were observed in the escalation phase (15 patients), and 800 mg was selected as the recommended phase II dose (RP2D). In the expansion phase (18 patients), few high-grade treatment-related adverse events were observed. For 24 patients treated at the RP2D, the confirmed radiologic response rate was 54% and the clinical benefit rate was 75%. Treatment responses were preempted by metabolic responses (FDG-PET) at 4 weeks and correlated with serial changes in circulating tumor DNA. Radiologic responses (40%) and clinical benefit (70%) were observed in 10 patients with plasma-detected ESR1 mutations. SIGNIFICANCE: In the first clinical study to evaluate venetoclax in a solid tumor, we demonstrate that combining venetoclax with endocrine therapy has a tolerable safety profile and elicits notable activity in ER and BCL2-positive metastatic breast cancer. These findings support further investigation of combination therapy for patients with BCL2-positive tumors.See related commentary by Drago et al., p. 323.This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 305.

Patient and medical barriers preclude uptake of tamoxifen preventative therapy in women with a strong family history.

AIMS: To assess the eligibility, uptake and impediments to tamoxifen use in high-risk women attending a risk management clinic due to family history. PATIENTS AND METHODS: All patients with a germline mutation in a cancer predisposing gene or at high genetic risk (based on family history) attending a Breast and Ovarian cancer risk management clinic from February 2014 to May 2015 received both verbal and written evidence-based information on preventive therapy and were recommended to consider endocrine prevention if not contraindicated. Endocrine therapy initiation, use and cessation were captured. Patient eligibility was analysed and reasons for declining, ceasing or contraindications for medication use were recorded. RESULTS: During the study period, 237 women were seen over 305 consultations for breast surveillance and preventative therapy discussion. They comprised 38 BRCA1 and 42 BRCA2 mutation carriers, 4 with Peutz-Jegher syndrome, 153 with a strong family history. Their median age was 39.4 years. Endocrine preventative was considered and discussed with all but 19 women. Of the remaining 218, 34 chose bilateral prophylactic mastectomy, while endocrine preventative was not recommended in 50 women due to contraindications and 25 women declined treatment due to their intention to fall pregnant. In 118 patients who remained eligible, 18.6% (22) tried prevention and 9.4% (14) remained on therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Physician-reluctance is not a dominant reason for poor uptake of endocrine prevention even by high-risk premenopausal women in a specialised risk management clinic. Many women are not eligible, and most elect for alternative options.

The incidence of PALB2 c.3113G>A in women with a strong family history of breast and ovarian cancer attending familial cancer centres in Australia.

The familial aggregation of breast cancer has been well-described with approximately 25% of breast cancers attributable to inherited mutations in currently known breast cancer susceptibility genes. PALB2 c.3113G>A (p.Trp1038*) is a protein-truncating mutation which has been associated with high estimated risk of breast cancer in Australian women (91%; 95% CI = 44-100) to age 70 years. This study screened for PALB2 c.3113G>A in germline DNA representing 871 unrelated individuals from "high-risk" breast and/or ovarian cancer families evaluated in the setting of a Familial Cancer Centre in Australia. The PALB2 c.3113G>A mutation was identified in eight of 871 probands (0.92%) from these families. Median age of diagnosis was 42 years. Five of these eight women had contra-lateral breast cancers. Available data suggests that PALB2 c.3113G>A is a rare mutation with estimated breast cancer risks similar in magnitude to that associated with BRCA2 mutations. Although the proportion of high-risk women carrying this PALB2 mutation is low, research efforts should continue in order to effect its translation into clinical genetic testing practice.