Virtual Trials: Causally-validated treatment effects efficiently learned from an observational cancer registry.

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) offer a clear causal interpretation of treatment effects, but are inefficient in terms of information gain per patient. Moreover, because they are intended to test cohort-level effects, RCTs rarely provide information to support precision medicine, which strives to choose the best treatment for an individual patient. If causal information could be efficiently extracted from widely available real-world data, the rapidity of treatment validation could be increased, and its costs reduced. Moreover, inferences could be made across larger, more diverse patient populations. We created a "virtual trial" by fitting a multilevel Bayesian survival model to treatment and outcome records self-reported by 451 brain cancer patients. The model recovers group-level treatment effects comparable to RCTs representing over 3200 patients. The model additionally discovers the feature-treatment interactions needed to make individual-level predictions for precision medicine. By learning from heterogeneous real-world data, virtual trials can generate more causal estimates with fewer patients than RCTs, and they can do so without artificially limiting the patient population. This demonstrates the value of virtual trials as a complement to large randomized controlled trials, especially in highly heterogeneous or rare diseases.

The Importance of Shared Decision-Making for Patients with Glioblastoma.

Navigating care for patients with cancer can be overwhelming considering the multiple specialists they encounter and the numerous decisions they must make. For patients with glioblastoma (GBM), management is further complicated by a poor prognosis, feelings of isolation, urgency to treat, and cognitive decline associated with this rare and progressive disease. For these reasons, it is imperative that shared decision-making (SDM) be integrated into standard practice to ensure that the risks and benefits of all treatments are discussed and weighed with the patient's expectations and goals in mind. In this manuscript, the importance of SDM in GBM and the potential benefits to the practice and patient are discussed from the unique perspective of advocacy leaders. Their insights from interactions with patients and caregivers provide a template for empowering patients, improving patient-physician communication and understanding, and reducing patient and caregiver anxieties. Ultimately, increased SDM may lead to a better quality of life and improved treatment outcomes.

Barriers to accrual and enrollment in brain tumor trials.

Many factors contribute to the poor survival of malignant brain tumor patients, some of which are not easily remedied. However, one contributor to the lack of progress that may be modifiable is poor clinical trial accrual. Surveys of brain tumor patients and neuro-oncology providers suggest that clinicians do a poor job of discussing clinical trials with patients and referring patients for clinical trials. Yet, data from the Cancer Action Network of the American Cancer Society suggest that most eligible oncology patients asked to enroll on a clinical trial will agree to do so. To this end, the Society for Neuro-Oncology (SNO) in collaboration with the Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) Working Group, patient advocacy groups, clinical trial cooperative groups, including the Adult Brain Tumor Consortium (ABTC), and other partners are working together with the intent to double clinical trial accrual over the next 5 years. Here we describe the factors contributing to poor clinical trial accrual in neuro-oncology and offer possible solutions.