RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are a better tool for evaluating the experiences of patients who have symptomatic, treatment-associated adverse events (AEs) compared with clinician-rated AEs. The authors present PROs assessing health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and treatment-related neurotoxicity for adjuvant capecitabine versus platinum on the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group-American College of Radiology Imaging Network (ECOG-ACRIN) EA1131 trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02445391). METHODS: Participants completed the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast Cancer Symptom Index (NFBSI-16) and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Gynecologic Oncology Group neurotoxicity subscale (platinum arm only) at baseline, cycle 3 day 1 (C3D1), 6 months, and 15 months. Because of early termination, power was insufficient to test the hypothesis that HRQoL, as assessed by the NFBSI-16 treatment side-effect (TSE) subscale, would be better at 6 and 15 months in the capecitabine arm; all analyses were exploratory. Means were compared by using t-tests or the Wilcoxon rank-sum test, and proportions were compared by using the χ2 test. RESULTS: Two hundred ninety-six of 330 eligible patients provided PROs. The mean NFBSI-16 TSE subscale score was lower for the platinum arm at baseline (p = .02; absolute difference, 0.6 points) and for the capecitabine arm at C3D1 (p = .04; absolute difference, 0.5 points), but it did not differ at other times. The mean change in TSE subscale scores differed between the arms from baseline to C3D1 (platinum arm, 0.15; capecitabine arm, -0.72; p = .03), but not from baseline to later time points. The mean decline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Gynecologic Oncology Group neurotoxicity subscale scores exceeded the minimal meaningful change (1.38 points) from baseline to each subsequent time point (all p < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Despite the similar frequency of clinician-rated AEs, PROs identified greater on-treatment symptom burden with capecitabine and complemented clinician-rated AEs by characterizing patients' experiences during chemotherapy.
Asunto(s)
Capecitabina , Medición de Resultados Informados por el Paciente , Calidad de Vida , Neoplasias de la Mama Triple Negativas , Adulto , Anciano , Femenino , Humanos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Capecitabina/uso terapéutico , Capecitabina/efectos adversos , Quimioterapia Adyuvante/métodos , Neoplasia Residual , Platino (Metal)/uso terapéutico , Neoplasias de la Mama Triple Negativas/tratamiento farmacológicoRESUMEN
PURPOSE: Patients with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) and residual invasive disease (RD) after completion of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) have a high-risk for recurrence, which is reduced by adjuvant capecitabine. Preclinical models support the use of platinum agents in the TNBC basal subtype. The EA1131 trial hypothesized that invasive disease-free survival (iDFS) would not be inferior but improved in patients with basal subtype TNBC treated with adjuvant platinum compared with capecitabine. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with clinical stage II or III TNBC with ≥ 1 cm RD in the breast post-NAC were randomly assigned to receive platinum (carboplatin or cisplatin) once every 3 weeks for four cycles or capecitabine 14 out of 21 days every 3 weeks for six cycles. TNBC subtype (basal v nonbasal) was determined by PAM50 in the residual disease. A noninferiority design with superiority alternative was chosen, assuming a 4-year iDFS of 67% with capecitabine. RESULTS: Four hundred ten of planned 775 participants were randomly assigned to platinum or capecitabine between 2015 and 2021. After median follow-up of 20 months and 120 iDFS events (61% of full information) in the 308 (78%) patients with basal subtype TNBC, the 3-year iDFS for platinum was 42% (95% CI, 30 to 53) versus 49% (95% CI, 39 to 59) for capecitabine. Grade 3 and 4 toxicities were more common with platinum agents. The Data and Safety Monitoring Committee recommended stopping the trial as it was unlikely that further follow-up would show noninferiority or superiority of platinum. CONCLUSION: Platinum agents do not improve outcomes in patients with basal subtype TNBC RD post-NAC and are associated with more severe toxicity when compared with capecitabine. Participants had a lower than expected 3-year iDFS regardless of study treatment, highlighting the need for better therapies in this high-risk population.
Asunto(s)
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Capecitabina/uso terapéutico , Platino (Metal)/uso terapéutico , Neoplasias de la Mama Triple Negativas/tratamiento farmacológico , Adulto , Anciano , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/farmacología , Capecitabina/farmacología , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Terapia Neoadyuvante , Platino (Metal)/farmacologíaRESUMEN
There is conflicting evidence from the small number of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that have assessed the benefit of survivorship care plans (SCPs) on improving patient outcomes. Yet, published quasi-experimental and descriptive studies provide preliminary evidence suggesting that using survivorship care plans in practice may improve patient knowledge, decrease worry and anxiety, and lead to patient and primary care physician satisfaction. Given the conflicting evidence and the paucity of RCTs, further research is needed to more fully explore the effect of SCP on patient outcomes. To address this knowledge gap, an SCP program was implemented in a community-based oncology clinic and used quality improvement methodology to assess the effect on patient knowledge of diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up, and to understand patients' satisfaction with the current SCP program. A total of 30 cancer patients were recruited in Southeast Michigan to participate in an SCP quality improvement project and completed surveys to evaluate the SCP program. Data were collected between December 2017 and March 2018. We observed a statistically significant (p = .028) difference between pre- and postintervention (survivorship care plan visit) knowledge scores about cancer diagnosis, treatment received, and follow-up recommendations. Moreover, participants were satisfied with the survivorship care plan and visit.