Feasibility of structuring electronic health record data to facilitate real-world data research: ICAREdata methods applied to multicenter cancer clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: The use of electronic health record (EHR) data for research is limited by a lack of structure and a standard data model. The objective of the ICAREdata (Integrating Clinical Trials and Real-World Endpoints Data) project was to structure key research data elements in EHRs using a minimal Common Oncology Data Elements (mCODE) data model to extract and transmit data. METHODS: The ICAREdata project captured two EHR data elements essential to clinical trials: cancer disease status and treatment plan change. The project was implemented in clinical sites participating in Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology trials. Data were extracted from EHRs and sent by secure Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resource messaging (a standard for exchanging EHRs) to a database. Selected elements were compared with corresponding data from the trial's electronic data capture (EDC) system, Medidata Rave. RESULTS: By December 2023, data were extracted and transmitted from 10 sites for 35 patients, involving 367 clinical encounters across 15 clinical trials. Data through March 2023 demonstrated that concordance for the elements treatment plan change and cancer disease status was 79% and 34%, respectively. When disease evaluation was reported by both EHR and EDC (n = 15), there was 87% agreement on cancer disease status. CONCLUSIONS: Documentation, extraction, and aggregation of structured data elements in EHRs using mCODE and ICAREdata methods is feasible in multi-institutional cancer clinical trials. EDC as a reference data set allowed assessment of the completeness of EHR data capture. Future initiatives will focus on elements with shared definitions in clinical and research environments and efficient workflows. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Clinical trials use electronic case report forms to report data, and data must be manually entered on these forms, which is costly and time consuming. ICAREdata methods use structured, organized data from clinical trials that can be more easily shared instead having to enter free text into electronic health records.

Improving Surgical Care and Outcomes in Older Cancer Patients Through Implementation of a Pre-Surgical Toolkit (OPTI-Surg)-Final Results of a Phase III Cluster Randomized Trial (Alliance A231601CD).

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of a practice-level preoperative frailty screening and optimization toolkit (OPTI-Surg) on postoperative functional recovery and complications in elderly cancer patients undergoing major surgery. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Frailty is common in older adults. it increases risk for poor postoperative functional recovery and complications. The potential for a practice-level screening/optimization intervention to improve outcomes is unknown. METHODS: Thoracic, gastrointestinal, and urologic oncological surgery practices within the NCI Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP) were randomized 1:1:1, to usual care (UC), OPTI-Surg, or OPTI-Surg with implementation coach. OPTI-Surg consisted of the Edmonton Frail Scale and guided recommendations for referral interventions. Patients ≥70 years old undergoing curative intent surgery were eligible. Primary outcome was 8 weeks postoperative function (kCal/week). Key secondary outcome was complications within 90 days. Mixed models were used to compare UC to the 2 OPTI-Surg arms combined. RESULTS: From 7/2019 to 9/2022, 325 patients were enrolled from 29 practices. 199 (64 UC, 135 OPTI-Surg) and 279 (78 UC, 201 OPTI-Surg) were evaluable for primary and secondary analysis, respectively. UC and OPTI-Surg patients did not significantly differ on total caloric expenditure (2.2 UC, 2.0 OPTI-Surg) after adjusting for baseline function (P=0.53). UC and OPTI-Surg patients did not significantly differ on postoperative complications (25.6% UC, 35.3% OPTI-Surg, P=0.5). CONCLUSIONS: Frailty assessment was successfully performed, but the OPTI-Surg intervention did not improve postoperative function nor reduce postoperative complications compared to UC. Future analysis will explore practice-level factors associated with toolkit implementation and differences between the coaching and non-coaching arms.

Olanzapine With or Without Fosaprepitant for Preventing Chemotherapy Induced Nausea and Vomiting in Patients Receiving Highly Emetogenic Chemotherapy: A Phase III Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial (ALLIANCE A221602).

PURPOSE: A protocol was developed to evaluate the value of an NK-1 receptor antagonist for preventing nausea and vomiting resulting from highly emetogenic chemotherapy when an olanzapine-based antiemetogenic regimen was used. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A221602, a prospective double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial, was developed to compare 2 -olanzapine-containing antiemetic regimens, one with an NK-1 receptor antagonist (aprepitant or fosaprepitant) and one without. Trial patients had a malignant disease for which they received intravenous highly emetogenic chemotherapy (single day cisplatin ≥ 70 mg/m2 or doxorubicin plus cyclophosphamide on 1 day). Patients on both arms received commonly administered doses of a 5-HT3 receptor antagonist, dexamethasone, and olanzapine. Additionally, patients were randomized to receive an NK-1 receptor antagonist (fosaprepitant 150 mg IV or aprepitant 130 mg IV) or a corresponding placebo. The primary objective was to compare the proportion of patients with no nausea for 5 days following chemotherapy between the 2 study arms. This trial was designed to test for the noninferiority of deleting the NK-1 receptor antagonist, with noninferiority defined as a decrease in freedom from nausea by less than 10%. RESULTS: A total of 690 patients were entered on this trial, 50% on each arm. The proportion of patients without nausea for the complete 5-day study period was 7.4% lower (upper limit of the one-sided 95% confidence interval was 13.5%) in the arm without an NK-1 receptor antagonist compared with the arm with an NK-1 receptor antagonist. CONCLUSION: This trial did not provide sufficient evidence to support that deletion of the NK-1 receptor antagonist was as good as keeping it, as a part of a 4-drug antiemetic regimen for highly emetogenic chemotherapy (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03578081).

Lessons learned from conducting the first cancer care delivery trial in the Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology (Alliance A191402CD).

INTRODUCTION: Testing healthcare delivery interventions in rigorous clinical trials is a critical step in improving patient care, but conducting multisite randomized clinical trials to test the effect of care delivery interventions has unique challenges and requires foresight and planning. METHODS: We conducted the first care delivery trial (A191402CD) in the Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology, a National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program research base, which tested the effectiveness of two different decision aids for supporting shared decision-making about prostate cancer treatment. Our experience illustrates the kind of challenges that confront care delivery researchers as they seek to test interventions to improve the experiences of patients. RESULTS: Lessons learned include the following: cluster-randomized designs introduce complexity; workflow disruption can discourage site participation; evidence-based methods may not always be sufficient. CONCLUSION: We conclude with the following recommendations: assessing feasibility requires special rigor; relationships and interpersonal dynamics must be leveraged. Our experiences may inform future care delivery research.

Patient-Reported Pain in Patients with Breast Cancer Who Receive Radiotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Patients who receive radiation treatment (RT) for breast cancer often report pain, which contributes negatively to quality of life (QoL). AIMS: To identify demographic, treatment, and disease characteristics associated with pain and changes in pain before and after RT using the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS). DESIGN: Retrospective study. SETTINGS: Odette Cancer Centre. PARTICIPANTS: Patients diagnosed with nonmetastatic breast cancer from January 2011-June 2017 with at least one ESAS completed pre-RT and one completed post-RT. METHODS: Data on systemic treatment, radiation, patient demographics, and disease stage were extracted. To identify factors associated with pain before and after RT and changes in pain, univariate and multivariate general linear regression analysis were conducted. p < .05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: This study included 1,222 female patients with a mean age of 59 years. ESAS was completed an average of 28 days before RT (baseline) and 142 days after RT, respectively. In multivariable analysis, higher baseline pain scores were associated with having recently completed adjuvant chemotherapy (p = .002) and eventual receipt of locoregional (p = .026) or chest wall (p = .003) radiation. Adjuvant chemotherapy (p = .002) and chest wall radiation (p = .03), were associated with a significant reduction in pain score after radiotherapy, while locoregional RT was associated with a higher pain score after RT (p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with locoregional RT had higher baseline pain that remained elevated after RT completion and should be screened for pain and provided with pain management and support when necessary.

Psychological morbidity in women diagnosed with ductal carcinoma in situ compared with women with early breast cancer receiving radiotherapy.

PURPOSE: Despite having an excellent prognosis, patients with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) report significant anxiety and depression following diagnosis. This study evaluated psychological morbidity using the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) in patients with DCIS compared with women with early-stage invasive breast cancer (EIBC) receiving radiotherapy (RT). METHODS: We identified patients diagnosed with DCIS or EIBC (stage I or II breast cancer) from 2011 to 2017 who had at least one ESAS completed pre- and post-RT. Data on systemic treatment, radiation, patient demographics, and disease stage were extracted from existing databases. Psychological morbidity was evaluated through measurement of depression, anxiety, and overall wellbeing within the ESAS. The Wilcoxon rank-sum test or chi-square test was performed for continuous or categorical variables. RESULTS: This study included 137 women with DCIS and 963 women with EIBC. ESAS was completed on average 28 days before RT (baseline) and 142 days after RT. Baseline ESAS scores showed significantly higher rates of depression among women with EIBC compared with those with DCIS (p = 0.006). Patients with EIBC also reported higher levels of anxiety and lower overall wellbeing than patients with DCIS, but this difference was not statistically significant. Post-RT ESAS scores showed significantly higher anxiety in patients with EIBC compared with DCIS (p = 0.049). Post-RT measures of anxiety and overall wellbeing were higher in patients with EIBC but differences were not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Women with DCIS experience relatively less psychological morbidity than women with EIBC, pre- and post-RT.

Seasonal fluctuations in psychological distress amongst women diagnosed with early breast cancer receiving radiotherapy.

OBJECTIVE: Seasonal effects on patients diagnosed with depression/anxiety-related psychological disorders have varying impacts on symptom severity. Seasonal changes in psychological distress may be due to decreased daylight exposure during the fall/winter seasons. Patients receiving radiation therapy (RT) for early-stage invasive breast cancer (EIBC) are at high risk for developing depressive symptoms. Of interest is whether seasonal factors influence the psychological symptoms of patients being treated for EIBC. METHODS: Patients treated with RT for EIBC between January 2011 and June 2017 were identified. Patients who completed at least one Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS-r) pre-RT and post-RT were included in our analysis. Patients receiving RT during the autumn and winter (November-March) were compared with patients receiving RT during the spring and summer (April-August). Psychological distress was evaluated based on patient-reported depression, anxiety, and overall wellbeing on the ESAS-r. Data on systemic treatment and radiation were extracted from existing databases. RESULTS: Eight-four patients treated with RT in spring/summer and 102 patients treated with RT in autumn/winter were included. Patients receiving RT during spring/summer had better wellness score prior to RT, compared with those receiving RT during winter/autumn (P = .03). However, patients receiving RT in the spring/summer had worse symptom trajectories across three domains of depression, anxiety, and wellbeing (P = .03, P = .008, and P < .0001, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Seasonality influenced the symptoms reported by patients with EIBC receiving RT. Future studies are needed to understand when during treatment patients are at highest risk for psychological distress and how seasonality may influence high-risk periods.

Challenges of conducting research in long-term care facilities: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this review is to describe the challenges and barriers to conducting research in long-term care facilities. METHODS: A literature search was conducted in Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central, PsycINFO and CINAHL. Keywords used included "long term care", "nursing home", "research", "trial", "challenge" and "barrier", etc. Resulting references were screened in order to identify relevant studies that reported on challenges derived from first-hand experience of empirical research studies. Challenges were summarized and synthesized. RESULTS: Of 1723 references, 39 articles were selected for inclusion. To facilitate understanding we proposed a classification framework of 8 main themes to categorize the research challenges presented in the 39 studies, relating to the characteristics of facility/owner/administrator, resident, staff caregiver, family caregiver, investigator, ethical or legal concerns, methodology, and budgetary considerations. CONCLUSIONS: Conducting research in long-term care facilities is full of challenges which can be categorized into 8 main themes. Investigators should be aware of all these challenges and specifically address them when planning their studies. Stakeholders should be involved from an early stage and flexibility should be built into both the methodology and research budget.

Suicide on the Toronto Transit Commission subway system in Canada (1998-2021): a time-series analysis.

Background: The Toronto Transit Commission (TTC) operates the public transit system in Toronto, Canada. From 1954 to 1980, there were 430 suicide deaths/attempts on the TTC subway system. In 2011, TTC implemented Crisis Link, a suicide helpline to connect subway passengers with counsellors. Upstream factors such as media reporting about suicide incidents may also influence suicidal behaviour. Our objectives were to investigate how Crisis Link and media reports about TTC suicide incidents influenced suicide rates. Methods: Suicide data were obtained from the TTC and Coroner, with Crisis Link data provided by Distress Centres of Greater Toronto (1998-2021). Media articles were identified through a database search of Toronto media publications. Interrupted time-series analysis investigated the association between Crisis Link calls, media articles, and quarterly suicide rates on the subway system. Findings: There were 302 suicides on TTC's subway system from 1998 to 2021. The introduction of Crisis Link was associated with a large but non-significant decrease in TTC-related suicide rate in the same quarter (IRR = 0.64, 95% CI = 0.36-1.12). Each subsequent post-Crisis-Link quarter experienced an average 2% increase in suicide rate (IRR = 1.02, 95% CI = 1.004-1.04). Furthermore, for each TTC-related media article in the previous quarter, the suicide rate on the TTC increased by 2% (IRR = 1.02, 95% CI = 1.004-1.04). Interpretation: The Crisis Link helpline was associated with a large but non-significant short-term decrease in suicide rates. However, this outcome was not sustained; this may, in part, be attributable to media reporting which was associated with increased suicides. This should inform suicide prevention policies in Canada and worldwide. Funding: No funding.

Palbociclib in adults aged 70 years and older with advanced breast cancer: A phase 2 multicenter trial (Alliance A171601).

INTRODUCTION: Palbociclib is a widely used treatment for advanced breast cancer in older adults. However, the existing evidence regarding its safety and tolerability in this age group is inconsistent and limited to retrospective subgroup or pooled analyses. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a prospective single-arm multicenter phase 2 study to evaluate the safety and tolerability of palbociclib in participants aged 70 years or older with advanced hormone receptor-positive breast cancer. Participants were given palbociclib in combination with their physician's choice of endocrine therapy (letrozole or fulvestrant). The primary endpoint was the incidence of grade 3+ adverse events (AEs) by six months. Secondary endpoints included AE-related dose delays, dose reductions, early discontinuations, and hospitalizations. Additionally, we compared these endpoints by age groups (70-74 and ≥ 75 years). RESULTS: Of the 90 participants (median age 74 years [70-87]) enrolled, 75.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 65.4-84.0) had grade 3+ AEs by six months. The most frequent grade 3+ AEs were neutropenia (61%), fatigue (4%), and nausea (3%). Febrile neutropenia was uncommon (1.1%). Due to AEs, 36% had dose delays, 34% had dose reductions, 10% had early discontinuations, and 10% had hospitalizations. Compared to those aged 70-74 years, participants aged ≥75 years had higher rates of early discontinuations (5.9% vs 15.9%, a difference of 9.5% [95% CI 3.5%-22.5%]). DISCUSSION: Palbociclib has an overall favorable safety profile in adults aged ≥70 with advanced breast cancer. However, adults ≥75 years had a trend toward higher rates of AE-related early discontinuations compared to those 70-74 years. Further research is needed to evaluate tolerability and improve the delivery of palbociclib in older adults. CLINICALTRIALS: gov:NCT03633331.

Improving patient-centered communication in breast cancer: a study protocol for a multilevel intervention of a shared treatment deliberation system (SharES) within the NCI community oncology research program (NCORP) (Alliance A231901CD).

BACKGROUND: Advances in precision medicine have given oncologists new evaluative tools to better individualize treatments for patients with curable breast cancer. These innovations have revealed a need to improve patient understanding of novel, often complex information related to breast cancer treatment decisions. Ensuring patients have the emotional support to face consequential treatment decisions, as well as the opportunity to engage and discuss with their clinicians, is key to improving patient-centered communication and patient understanding. METHODS/DESIGN: This study will implement a multilevel intervention with patient and clinician components as a NCORP Cancer Care Delivery Research (CCDR) trial within the Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology Research Base (Alliance). The two interventions in this study, the Shared Decision Engagement System (SharES), include (1) two versions of an evidence-based patient-facing breast cancer treatment decision tool (iCanDecide +/- an emotional support module) and (2) a clinician-facing dashboard (Clinician Dashboard) that is reviewed by surgeons/clinicians and summarizes ongoing patient needs. The design is a near minimax, hybrid stepped wedge trial of SharES where both interventions are being evaluated in a crossed design over six 12-week time periods. The primary outcome (knowledge) and key secondary outcomes (i.e., self-efficacy and cancer worry) are assessed via patient report at 5 weeks after surgery. Secondary outcomes are also assessed at 5 weeks after surgery, as well as in a second survey 9 months after registration. We anticipate recruiting a total of 700 breast cancer patients (600 evaluable after attrition) from 25 surgical practices affiliated with Alliance. DISCUSSION: Upon study completion, we will have better understanding of the impact of a multilevel intervention on patient-centered communication in breast cancer with a specific focus on whether the intervention components improve knowledge and self-efficacy and reduce cancer worry. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04549571 . Registered on 16 September 2020.

Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Data Collection Systems in Oncology Clinical Trials: A Survey of Clinical Research Professionals (an Alliance Study).

PURPOSE: To describe clinical research professionals (CRPs)' experiences with electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) data collection systems in oncology clinical trials and identify correlates of CRPs' attitude toward technology. METHODS: An online survey was conducted among 210 CRPs from 125 National Cancer Institute-funded research sites. Measures included CRPs' demographic characteristics, working years, employment locations, and previous experiences with various types of ePROs. Their attitude toward technology was measured by the Technology Attitude Scale-Adapted. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to compare two subdomains of attitude (perceived usefulness [PU] and perceived ease of use [PEU]). Multiple linear regression was used to explore correlates of (1) overall attitude, (2) PU, and (3) PEU. The significance level was 5%. RESULTS: Participants' median age was 41 years (range, 21-67). Most were female (90%) and White (82%). More than half of the participants had previous experiences with web-based ePROs using patients' own devices (72%) or site-/sponsor-provided on-site devices (eg, kiosks or tablets; 64%). CRPs who were 60 years or older (ß = -0.32, P < .05) or worked for 10-20 years (ß = -0.11, P < .05) had relatively negative attitudes, controlling for other factors. Previous experiences with more ePRO types were associated with more positive attitudes (ß = 0.08, P = .02). Similar correlates were found with PU but not with PEU. CONCLUSION: This study revealed that CRPs had various experiences with ePRO systems and attitudes toward technology. Age, working years, and previous experiences with ePROs were correlates of overall attitude toward technology and PU. These findings suggest necessary targeted training to facilitate ePRO use in oncology clinical trials by improving CRPs' awareness and attitude toward technology.

Randomized phase III trial evaluating motivational interviewing and text interventions to optimize adherence to breast cancer endocrine therapy (Alliance A191901): the GETSET protocol.

BACKGROUND: Hormone receptor-positive (HR +) breast cancer is the most common type of breast cancer in the USA but has excellent long-term outcomes in recent decades, in part due to effective oral endocrine therapy (ET). ET medications are typically prescribed for 5 to 10 years, depending on the risk of recurrence, and must be taken daily. One limiting factor to ET efficacy is nonadherence, with high-risk groups for nonadherence including younger women and Black women. METHODS: The Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology (Alliance) trial A191901 is an ongoing, four-arm (text message reminder (TMR), motivational interviewing (MI), TMR plus MI, or enhanced usual care) randomized clinical trial that tests the efficacy and effect of two interventions (TMR and/or MI) on improved ET adherence, patient-reported outcomes (PROs), and resource use requirements among HR + breast cancer survivors. Participants are randomized in a 1:1:1:1 ratio to the four arms. With an assumed loss to follow-up of approximately 11%, we plan to recruit 1180 participants. Randomization is stratified based on age and race to ensure balance between the arms, and we oversample younger and Black women, with each group representing 30% of the study population. Participants randomized to an intervention will actively participate in the intervention for 9 months, and all participants will be followed for adherence data and PRO endpoints, through the use of the Pillsy cap medication event monitoring system and Alliance ePRO survey app (i.e., Patient Cloud). The primary analysis will compare Pillsy-measured ET adherence among study arms at 12 months. DISCUSSION: This multisite study will not only define strategies to improve adherence to breast cancer oral therapies, but it will also potentially support strategies in large cooperative research groups that can increase delivery and tolerability of ET, involve diverse patient populations in clinical research, and engage patients effectively in interventional studies, using remote and cost-effective delivery methods. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT04379570 . Registered on 7 May 2020.

Dexamethasone to prevent everolimus-induced stomatitis (Alliance MIST Trial: A221701).

mTOR inhibitors such as everolimus may cause oral stomatitis, often a dose-limiting toxicity. Prior clinical research has suggested that a dexamethasone mouth rinse might help prevent and/or treat this. Alliance A221701 was a randomized phase III trial of patients initiating 10 mg daily oral everolimus that compared dexamethasone mouthwash taken preventively (initial dexamethasone group) versus therapeutically (initial placebo group) to assess two coprimary endpoints: the incidence of mTOR inhibitor-associated stomatitis (mIAS), and the area under the curve (AUC) of mIAS-associated pain over an 8-week treatment period. A Fisher's exact test was used to compare the incidences while a Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used to compare the AUCs. In addition, we performed an exploratory analysis of the association of everolimus trough concentrations and toxicity using a Mann-Whitney U test. Due to slow accrual, this study closed after 39 patients were randomized (19 to upfront placebo and 20 to upfront dexamethasone). There were no significant differences between groups seen in either of the coprimary endpoints; furthermore, we found no association between whole blood everolimus trough concentrations and toxicity. Although limited by poor enrollment, the results of this study do not suggest that prophylactic dexamethasone mouthwash is superior to therapeutic dexamethasone mouthwash (initiated at the first sign of mouth pain) for reducing the incidence or severity of mIAS from everolimus.

Outcomes of Older Adults With AML Treated in Community Versus Academic Centers: An Analysis of Alliance Trials.

PURPOSE: Clinical trials are important for managing older patients with AML. We investigated differences in outcomes of older patients with AML on the basis of whether patients participated in intensive chemotherapy trials at community versus academic cancer centers. METHODS: We used data from the Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology phase III trials that enrolled patients age ≥ 60 years with newly diagnosed AML between 1998 and 2002 in the Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB) 9720 trial and between 2004 and 2006 in the CALGB 10201 trial. Centers funded by the NCI Community Oncology Research Program were identified as community cancer centers; others were designated as academic cancer centers. Logistic regression models and Cox proportional hazards models were used to compare 1-month mortality and overall survival (OS) by center type. RESULTS: Seventeen percent of the 1,170 patients were enrolled in clinical trials in community cancer centers. The study results demonstrated comparable rates of grade ≥3 adverse events (97% v 93%), 1-month mortality (19.1% v 16.1%), and OS (43.9% v 35.7% at 1 year) between community versus academic cancer centers, respectively. After adjusting for covariates, 1-month mortality (odds ratio, 1.40; 95% CI, 0.92 to 2.12; P = .11) and OS (hazard ratio, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.88 to 1.22; P = .67) were not statistically different among patients treated in community versus academic cancer centers. CONCLUSION: An older patient population, who have complex health care needs, can be successfully treated on intensive chemotherapy trials in select community cancer centers with outcomes comparable with that achieved at academic cancer centers.

Low-Intensity Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Breast Cancer in Older Women: Results From the Prospective Multicenter HOPE Trial.

PURPOSE: Older women with high-risk early breast cancer (EBC) benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy, but their treatment is frequently complicated by toxic side effects, resulting in dose reductions and delays. This makes it challenging for oncologists to maintain a relative dose intensity (RDI) ≥ 85%, as recommended for optimal curative-intent treatment. Understanding which women are at risk of receiving suboptimal RDI may inform treatment discussions and guide early, targeted supportive care or geriatric comanagement interventions. METHODS: This was a prespecified secondary analysis of the HOPE trial, which enrolled women age ≥ 65 years with EBC initiating neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy. RDI was calculated as the ratio of delivered to planned chemotherapy dose intensity. The primary outcome was low RDI, defined as RDI < 85%. Multivariable logistic regression with stepwise selection was used to evaluate the association between baseline variables (demographic, clinical, and geriatric assessment) and low RDI. Survival probability was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and the log-rank test was used to compare overall survival. RESULTS: Three hundred twenty-two patients (median age at diagnosis, 70 years; range, 65-86 years) were included. The median follow-up was 4 years. Sixty-six patients (21%) had a low RDI. Age ≥ 76 years (odds ratio [OR], 2.57; 95% CI, 1.12 to 5.91; P = .03), lower performance status (OR, 4.32; 95% CI, 1.98 to 9.42; P < .001), and use of anthracycline-based or cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil regimens (OR, 3.47; 95% CI, 1.71 to 7.05; P < .001) were associated with low RDI. The 5-year overall survival probability was 0.80 versus 0.91 in patients with RDI < 85 versus ≥ 85%, respectively (log-rank P = .02). CONCLUSION: One in five older patients with EBC treated with standard chemotherapy received low RDI and had inferior survival outcomes. Older patients at risk for low RDI should be identified and targeted upfront before initiating chemotherapy.

Increasing socioeconomically disadvantaged patients' engagement in breast cancer surgery decision-making through a shared decision-making intervention (A231701CD): protocol for a cluster randomised clinical trial.

INTRODUCTION: Socioeconomic disparities for breast cancer surgical care exist. Although the aetiology of the observed socioeconomic disparities is likely multifactorial, patient engagement during the surgical consult is critical. Shared decision-making may reduce health disparities by addressing barriers to patient engagement in decision-making that disproportionately impact socioeconomically disadvantaged patients. In this trial, we test the impact of a decision aid on increasing socioeconomically disadvantaged patients' engagement in breast cancer surgery decision-making. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This multisite randomised trial is conducted through 10 surgical clinics within the National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP). We plan a stepped-wedge design with clinics randomised to the time of transition from usual care to the decision aid arm. Study participants are female patients, aged ≥18 years, with newly diagnosed stage 0-III breast cancer who are planning breast surgery. Data collection includes a baseline surgeon survey, baseline patient survey, audio-recording of the surgeon-patient consultation, a follow-up patient survey and medical record data review. Interviews and focus groups are conducted with a subset of patients, surgeons and clinic stakeholders. The effectiveness of the decision aid at increasing patient engagement (primary outcome) is evaluated using generalised linear mixed-effects models. The extent to which the effect of the decision aid intervention on patient engagement is mediated through the mitigation of barriers is tested in joint linear structural equation models. Qualitative interviews explore how barriers impact engagement, especially for socioeconomically disadvantaged women. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This protocol has been approved by the National Cancer Institute Central Institutional Review Board, and Certificate of Confidentiality has been obtained. We plan to disseminate the findings through journal publications and national meetings, including the NCORP network. Our findings will advance the science of medical decision-making with the potential to reduce socioeconomic health disparities. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT03766009).

Infrastructure to Support Accrual of Older Adults to National Cancer Institute Clinical Trials.

As part of ongoing efforts to meaningfully improve recruitment, enrollment, and accrual of older adults into cancer clinical trials, the National Cancer Institute (NCI) sponsored a workshop with experts across the country entitled Engaging Older Adults in the NCI Clinical Trials Network: Challenges and Opportunities. Three working groups, including Study Design, Infrastructure, and Stakeholders, were formed, who worked together to offer synergistic improvements in the system. Here, we summarize the workshop discussions of the Infrastructure Working Group, whose goal was to address infrastructural challenges, identify underlying resources, and offer solutions to facilitate accrual of older adults into cancer clinical trials. Based on preconference work and workshop discussions, four key recommendations to strengthen NCI infrastructure were proposed: 1) further centralize resources and expertise; 2) provide training for clinical research staff; (3) develop common data elements; and 4) evaluate what works and does not work. These recommendations provide a strategy to improve the infrastructure to enroll more older adults in cancer clinical trials.

Recommendations and outcomes from a geriatric assessment guided multidisciplinary clinic prior to autologous stem cell transplant in older patients.

BACKGROUND: Autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplant (autoHCT) is a mainstay of treatment for multiple myeloma and non-Hodgkin lymphoma but is underutilized in older adults. We investigated the association of vulnerabilities identified by a geriatric assessment (GA)-guided multidisciplinary clinic (MDC) on the receipt of autoHCT and evaluated its ability to predict outcomes in older autoHCT candidates. METHODS: Patients 50+ years received GA-informed optimization recommendations: 'decline' if unlikely to realize benefits of autoHCT, 'defer' if optimization necessary before autoHCT, and 'proceed' if autoHCT could proceed without delay. We compared characteristics and outcomes of autoHCT recipients (n = 62) to non-autoHCT patients (n = 29) and evaluated GA deficits on outcomes. RESULTS: 91 patients were evaluated; the MDC recommendation was 'decline' for 5 (6%), 'defer' for 25 (27%), and 'proceed' for 61 (67%). AutoHCT recipients had fewer GA-rated impairments relative to non-autoHCT patients, as did patients with a 'proceed' recommendation relative to 'defer'. Among autoHCT recipients, 1-year and 3-year non-relapse morality (NRM) was 0% and 5%, and there was no difference in length of hospitalization, readmission rate, or mortality after transplant by MDC recommendation. Frail grip strength and poor performance status were associated with inferior post-autoHCT progression-free survival and overall survival. CONCLUSIONS: Patients pursuing autoHCT after MDC-directed optimization achieved excellent outcomes, including patients deferred but ultimately receiving autoHCT. GA-identified functional deficits, especially frail grip strength, may improve risk stratification in older autoHCT candidates. Employing a GA earlier in the disease trajectory to inform early referral to an MDC may increase autoHCT safety and utilization in older patients.

Symptom clusters in patients with breast cancer receiving radiation therapy.

PURPOSE: Symptoms experienced by breast cancer patients often cluster together in groups known as "symptom clusters". The aim was to determine the symptom clusters in women with non-metastatic breast cancer treated by radiation therapy (RT). METHODS: Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) scores were taken from breast cancer patients receiving RT before, at completion of RT, and after RT. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA), principal component analysis (PCA), and hierarchical cluster analysis (HCA) were used to identify symptom clusters among the nine ESAS items at all three time points. RESULTS: This study included 1224 patients. The PCA and EFA identified the same two symptom clusters before the start of RT: 1) pain, tiredness, nausea, drowsiness, appetite, and dyspnea; 2) depression, anxiety, and wellbeing. The HCA further split the symptoms into three clusters. Wellbeing, depression, and anxiety consistently clustered together. Among the ESAS scores collected at the end of and after RT, each statistical method identified different symptom clusters. For the symptom clusters experienced at the end of RT, the following symptoms were always in the same cluster: wellbeing, depression, and anxiety; nausea and appetite; drowsiness and dyspnea. Following RT, depression and anxiety consistently clustered together, with nausea and appetite in a second cluster. CONCLUSION: Among the symptom clusters derived before, at the end of RT, and after RT, the following symptoms consistently presented together: depression and anxiety, nausea and appetite, pain and tiredness, and drowsiness, dyspnea, and tiredness. Understanding symptom clusters in this population can improve management of symptoms.