Are community oncology practices with or without clinical research programs different? A comparison of patient and practice characteristics.

BACKGROUND: Expanding access to clinical trials in community settings is a potential approach to addressing disparities in accrual of historically underrepresented populations. However, little is known about the characteristics of practices that do not participate in research. We investigated differences in patient and practice characteristics of US community oncology practices with high vs low engagement in clinical research. METHODS: We included patients from a real-world, nationwide electronic health record-derived, de-identified database who received active treatment for cancer at community oncology practices between November 1, 2017, and October 31, 2022. We assessed patient and practice characteristics and their associations with high vs low research engagement using descriptive analyses and logistic regression models. RESULTS: Of the 178 practices, 70 (39.3%) events had high research engagement, treated 57.8% of the overall 568 540 patient cohort, and enrolled 3.25% of their patients on cancer treatment trials during the 5-year observation period (vs 0.27% enrollment among low engagement practices). Practices with low vs high research engagement treated higher proportions of the following patient groups: ages 75 years and older (24.2% vs 21.8%), non-Latinx Black (12.6% vs 10.3%) or Latinx (11.6% vs 6.1%), were within the lowest socioeconomic status quintile (21.9% vs16.5%), and were uninsured or had no documented insurance (22.2% vs 13.6%). CONCLUSIONS: Patient groups historically underrepresented in oncology clinical trials are more likely to be treated at community practices with limited or no access to trials. These results suggest that investments to expand the clinical research footprint among practices with low research engagement could help address persistent inequities in trial representation.

Evaluation of US oncology electronic health record real-world data to reduce uncertainty in health technology appraisals: a retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: Examine whether data from early access to medicines in the USA can be used to inform National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) health technology assessments (HTA) in oncology. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Oncology-based community and academic treatment centres in the USA. PARTICIPANTS: Patients present in a nationwide electronic health record (EHR)-derived deidentified database. INTERVENTIONS: Cancer drugs that underwent NICE technology appraisal (TA) between 2014 and 2019. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The count and follow-up time of US patients, available in the EHR, who were exposed to cancer drugs of interest in the period between Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval and dates relevant to the NICE appraisal process. RESULTS: In 59 of 60 TAs analysed, the cancer therapy was approved in the USA before the final appraisal by NICE. The median time from FDA approval to the publication of NICE recommendations was 18.5 months, at which time the US EHR-derived database had, on average, 269 patients (SD=356) exposed to the new therapy, with a median of 75.3 person-years (IQR: 13.1-173) in time-at-risk. A case study generated evidence on real-world overall survival and treatment duration. CONCLUSIONS: Across different cancer therapies, there was substantial variability in US real-world data accumulated between FDA approval and NICE decision milestones. The applicability of these data to generate evidence for HTA decision-making should be assessed on a case-by-case basis depending on the intended HTA use case.

Racial and Ethnic Inequities in US Oncology Clinical Trial Participation From 2017 to 2022.

Importance: There is increasing recognition from regulatory agencies that racial and ethnic representation in clinical trials is inadequate and linked to health inequities. The extent of racial inequities in clinical trial participation is unclear because prior studies have synthesized enrollment data from published trials, which often do not report participant race and ethnicity. Objective: To evaluate racial and ethnic inequities in oncology clinical trial participation in a contemporary cohort of patients with cancer before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study used a nationwide electronic health record-derived deidentified database, which includes data for approximately 280 US cancer clinics (approximately 800 sites of care). The study included Latinx, non-Latinx Black (hereinafter, Black), and non-Latinx White (reference; hereinafter, White) patients aged 18 years or older who had been diagnosed with advanced non-small cell lung cancer, metastatic colorectal cancer, metastatic breast cancer, multiple myeloma, or metastatic pancreatic cancer between January 1, 2017, and June 30, 2022 (follow-up through December 31, 2022). Data analysis was performed between August 1, 2022, and February 7, 2023. Exposures: Electronic health record-documented race and ethnicity. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was oncology trial participation (ie, receipt of a clinical study drug). Stratified cause-specific hazard models were used to estimate adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs for likelihood of participation. Participation was assessed overall, by cancer type, and by period of diagnosis (2017-2019 vs 2020-2022). Results: Of the 50 411 patients in this study, 28 878 (57.3%) were women and 21 533 (42.7%) were men. Black and Latinx patients were younger than White patients, with a median age of 65 (IQR, 57-72), 64 (IQR, 54-73), and 68 (IQR, 60-76) years, respectively. Oncology trial participation was lower among Black patients (307 of 6912 [4.4%]) and Latinx patients (166 of 3973 [4.2%]) relative to White patients (2858 of 39 526 [7.2%]) over the entire study period. Inequities in participation were observed across the 5 cancer types studied, with notably large inequities observed among Black patients (HR, 0.54 [95% CI, 0.36-0.81]) and Latinx patients (HR, 0.46 [95% CI, 0.27-0.77]) with metastatic pancreatic cancer. Moreover, inequities between Black and White patients in terms of participation widened among those diagnosed in the COVID-19 era (2020-2022: HR, 0.49 [95% CI, 0.40-0.60] vs 1.00 [95% CI, 0.93-1.09]) relative to those diagnosed before the pandemic (2017-2019: HR, 0.61 [95% CI, 0.53-0.70] vs 1 [reference]). Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this cohort study suggest that oncology trial participation was lower among Black and Latinx patients relative to White patients across all 5 cancer types examined. These findings, including potentially widening inequities in the COVID-19 era, support the need for regulatory guidance to improve enrollment of participants from historically excluded racial and ethnic populations in clinical trials.

Real-World Dosing Patterns of Ruxolitinib in Patients With Polycythemia Vera Who Are Resistant to or Intolerant of Hydroxyurea.

INTRODUCTION: Approximately one-quarter of patients with polycythemia vera become resistant to and/or intolerant of hydroxyurea. This analysis characterizes reasons patients were switched from hydroxyurea to ruxolitinib and describes ruxolitinib dosing patterns and outcomes in real-world clinical practice. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This medical chart review of United States community hematology/oncology practices in the Cardinal Health Oncology Provider Extended Network included patients with polycythemia vera who were ≥18 years old, received hydroxyurea for ≥3 months, started ruxolitinib between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2016, and had ≥2 visits during the subsequent 6 months. Clinical data were collected at predefined intervals from diagnosis to last provider visit. RESULTS: Providers identified 249 patients for inclusion. jcauses of hydroxyurea discontinuation were resistance (78%; frequently for hematocrit ≥45% [79%]) and intolerance (28%; frequently for nausea/vomiting [50%]). Initial ruxolitinib dosing was 10 mg twice daily (recommended dose) in 131 patients (53%). Among these patients, median treatment duration was 29.2 months, 35 (27%) had dose modification (increase, n = 24; decrease, n = 11) and 4 had interruptions within 6 months. The most common reason for dose increase was continued need for phlebotomy (46%); 6 patients had dose reductions owing to reduced platelets. Hematocrit control at initiation and during the first 6 months of ruxolitinib treatment was 15% and 63%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Most patients initiated ruxolitinib upon hydroxyurea resistance. Approximately half initiated ruxolitinib at the recommended dose, 27% of whom experienced dosing modifications within the first 6 months. After switching to ruxolitinib, most patients achieved hematocrit control and continued treatment for extended time frames.

Lessons Learned Using Real-World Data to Emulate Randomized Trials: A Case Study of Treatment Effectiveness for Newly Diagnosed Immune Thrombocytopenia.

Regulatory agencies are increasingly considering real-world evidence (RWE) to support label expansions of approved medicines. We conducted a comparative effectiveness study to emulate a proposed randomized trial of romiplostim vs. standard-of-care (SOC) therapy among patients with recently diagnosed (≤12 months) immune thrombocytopenia (ITP), that could support expansion of the romiplostim label. We discuss challenges that we encountered and solutions that were developed to address those challenges. Study size was a primary concern, particularly for romiplostim initiators, given the rarity of ITP and the stringent trial eligibility criteria. For this reason, we leveraged multiple data sources (Nordic Country Patient Registry for Romiplostim; chart review study of romiplostim initiators in Europe; Flatiron Health EMR linked with MarketScan claims). Additionally, unlike the strictly controlled clinical trial setting, platelet counts were not measured at regular intervals in the observational data sources, and therefore the end point of durable platelet response often used in trials could not be reliably measured. Instead, the median platelet count was chosen as the primary end point. Ultimately, while we observed a slightly higher median platelet count in the romiplostim group vs. SOC, precision was limited because of small study size (median difference was 11 × 109 /L (95% CI: -59, 81)). We underscore the importance of conducting comprehensive feasibility assessments to identify fit-for-purpose data sources with sufficient sample size, data elements, and follow-up. Beyond technical challenges, we also discuss approaches to increase the credibility of RWE, including systematic incorporation of clinical expertise into study design decisions, and separation between decision makers and the data.

Assessment of thrombotic risk during long-term treatment of immune thrombocytopenia with fostamatinib.

BACKGROUND: Patients with immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) are at risk of bleeding and, paradoxically, thromboembolic events (TEEs), irrespective of thrombocytopenia. The risk of thrombosis is increased by advanced age, obesity, and prothrombotic comorbidities: cancer, hyperlipidemia, diabetes, hypertension, coronary artery disease, and chronic kidney disease, among others. Certain ITP treatments further increase the risk of TEE, especially splenectomy and thrombopoietin receptor agonists. Spleen tyrosine kinase (SYK) is a key signaling molecule common to thromboembolic and hemostatic (in addition to inflammatory) pathways. Fostamatinib is an orally administered SYK inhibitor approved in the USA and Europe for treatment of chronic ITP in adults. METHODS: The phase III and extension studies included heavily pretreated patients with long-standing ITP, many of whom had risk factors for thrombosis prior to initiating fostamatinib. This report describes long-term safety and efficacy of fostamatinib in 146 patients with up to 5 years of treatment, a total of 229 patient-years, and assesses the incidence of thromboembolic events (by standardized MedDRA query). RESULTS: Platelet counts ⩾50,000/µL were achieved in 54% of patients and the safety profile was as described in the phase III clinical studies with no new toxicities observed over the 5 years of follow-up. The only TEE occurred in one patient (0.7%, or 0.44/100 patient-years), who experienced a mild transient ischemic attack. This is a much lower rate than might be expected in ITP patients. CONCLUSION: This report demonstrates durable efficacy and a very low incidence of TEE in patients receiving long-term treatment of ITP with the SYK inhibitor fostamatinib. CLINICALTRIALSGOV IDENTIFIERS: NCT02076399, NCT02076412, and NCT02077192.

Cabozantinib and Panitumumab for RAS Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

LESSONS LEARNED: Antitumor activity was observed in the study population. Dose modifications of cabozantinib improve long-term tolerability. Biomarkers are needed to identify patient populations most likely to benefit. Further study of cabozantinib with or without panitumumab in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer is warranted. BACKGROUND: The epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) antibody panitumumab is active in patients with RAS wild-type (WT) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), but nearly all patients experience resistance. MET amplification is a driver of panitumumab resistance. Cabozantinib is an inhibitor of multiple kinases, including vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 2 (VEGFR2) and c-MET, and may delay or reverse anti-EGFR resistance. METHODS: In this phase Ib clinical trial, we established the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended phase II dose (RP2D) of cabozantinib and panitumumab. We then treated an expansion cohort to further describe the tolerability and clinical activity of the RP2D. Eligibility included patients with KRAS WT mCRC (later amended to include only RAS WT mCRC) who had received prior treatment with a fluoropyrimidine, oxaliplatin, irinotecan, and bevacizumab. RESULTS: Twenty-five patients were enrolled and treated. The MTD/RP2D was cabozantinib 60 mg p.o. daily and panitumumab 6 mg/kg I.V. every 2 weeks. The objective response rate (ORR) was 16%. Median progression free survival (PFS) was 3.7 months (90% confidence interval [CI], 2.3-7.1). Median overall survival (OS) was 12.1 months (90% CI, 7.5-14.3). Five patients (20%) discontinued treatment due to toxicity, and 18 patients (72%) required a dose reduction of cabozantinib. CONCLUSION: The combination of cabozantinib and panitumumab has activity. Dose reductions of cabozantinib improve tolerability.

Does Cancer Treatment-Related Financial Distress Worsen Over Time?

BACKGROUND Patients with cancer are at risk for both objective and subjective financial distress. Financial distress during treatment is adversely associated with physical and mental well-being. Little is known about whether patients' subjective financial distress changes during the course of their treatment.method This is a cross-sectional study of insured adults with solid tumors on anti-cancer therapy for ≥1 month, surveyed at a referral center and three rural oncology clinics. The goal was to investigate how financial distress varies depending on where patients are in the course of cancer therapy. Financial distress (FD) was assessed via a validated measure; out-of-pocket (OOP) costs were estimated and medical records were reviewed for disease/treatment data. Logistic regression was used to evaluate the potential association between treatment length and financial distress.RESULTS Among 300 participants (86% response rate), median age was 60 years (range 27-91), 52.3% were male, 78.3% had stage IV cancer or metastatic recurrence, 36.7% were retired, and 56% had private insurance. Median income was $60,000/year and median OOP costs including insurance premiums were $592/month. Median FD score (7.4/10, SD 2.5) corresponded to low FD with 16.3% reporting high/overwhelming distress. Treatment duration was not associated with the odds of experiencing high/overwhelming FD in single-predictor (OR = 1.01, CI [.93, 1.09], P = .86) or multiple predictor regression models (OR = .98, CI [.86, 1.12], P = .79). Treatment duration was not correlated with FD as a continuous variable (P = .92).LIMITATIONS This study is limited by its cross-sectional design and generalizability to patients with early-stage cancer and those being treated outside of a major referral center.CONCLUSION Severity of cancer treatment-related financial distress did not correlate with time on treatment, indicating that patients are at risk for FD throughout the treatment continuum. Screening for and addressing financial distress should occur throughout the course of cancer therapy.

Rapid rise in the cost of targeted cancer therapies for Medicare patients with solid tumors from 2006 to 2015.

BACKGROUND: Inflation-adjusted cancer costs in the United States have increased 40% in the last decade, leading to increasing financial burden on both payers and patients. Patients under 65 show substantial increases in utilization of expensive targeted therapy anticancer agents; however, patients aged 65+ account for the majority of new malignancies. Utilization and cost trends for these emerging agents have not been examined in detail in the Medicare population. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Retrospective prevalent cohort analysis of patients 65+ with any stage of invasive lung, breast, colorectal, or prostate cancer, receiving systemic therapy drawn from the United States Medicare 5% fee-for-service sample claims (2005-2015). Yearly trends in utilization and associated costs were modeled with adjustment for inflation, demographics, and comorbidities. RESULTS: Among Medicare beneficiaries with fee-for-service and Part D enrollment who were receiving some type of systemic anticancer therapy, there were 9230 patients with colorectal, 32,738 patients with breast, and 16,278 patients with lung cancers identified from 2006 to 2015, and 19,295 patients with prostate cancer from 2009 to 2015. The share of cancer costs to Medicare attributable to targeted therapies, increased dramatically for prostate cancer (1.7% to 19.4%), lung cancer (6.7% to 19.4%), colorectal cancer (11.7% to 22.2%), and breast cancer (15.8% to 25.5%). Although the proportion of patients receiving targeted therapies remained stable, mean per-patient cancer costs increased dramatically from 2006 to 2015 for patients with lung or prostate cancer receiving targeted therapy and for patients with breast cancer receiving non-hormonal targeted therapies. Targeted agents for these cancers showed substantial inflation-adjusted price growth over this time period.

Treatment Patterns Among Adults with Primary Immune Thrombocytopenia Diagnosed in Hematology Clinics in the United States.

PURPOSE: Patients with immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) have low platelet counts and an increased risk of bleeding. We described treatment patterns and clinical outcomes in routine practice in the United States (US). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Using electronic health record data from hematology/oncology clinics linked to administrative claims in the US, we studied 447 adults newly diagnosed with primary ITP from 2011 to 2016. Patients with a secondary cause of thrombocytopenia were excluded. The incidence of ITP treatment initiation, bleeding events, and rescue therapy use were estimated using competing risk models. RESULTS: At 1-year post-ITP diagnosis, 50% of patients were prescribed an oral corticosteroid, with the majority being prescribed immediately following diagnosis. Of the more common second-line options, rituximab use was the most frequent (1-year cumulative incidence: 16% [95% confidence interval: 12, 19]), followed by romiplostim (9% [7, 12] and eltrombopag (5% [3, 8]). Use of these drugs was similar at 2 years post-diagnosis. At 6 months post-ITP treatment initiation, the cumulative incidence of bleeding was similar among eltrombopag and romiplostim initiators (17% [6, 33] and 19% [9, 31], respectively) and was slightly lower in rituximab users (12% [6, 20]). However, during this same timeframe, rituximab users had a higher incidence of rescue therapy use (48% [36, 58] versus 29% [14, 46] in eltrombopag and 26% [14, 39] in romiplostim users). Although splenectomy was rare, at 6 months post-surgery nearly 20% had experienced a bleed and nearly 20% had required rescue. CONCLUSION: This study describes the health trajectory of adults with ITP who are managed in hematology clinics in the US and could inform the design of non-interventional studies of comparative effectiveness among treatments.

Treatment Patterns and Blood Counts in Patients With Polycythemia Vera Treated With Hydroxyurea in the United States: An Analysis From the REVEAL Study.

BACKGROUND: Polycythemia vera (PV) is associated with increased blood cell counts, risk of thrombosis, and symptoms including fatigue and pruritus. National guidelines support the use of hydroxyurea (HU) in high-risk patients or those with some other clinical indication for cytoreduction. PATIENTS AND METHODS: REVEAL is a prospective, observational study designed to collect data pertaining to demographics, disease burden, clinical management, patient-reported outcomes, and health care resource utilization of patients with PV in the United States. In this analysis, HU treatment patterns and outcomes were assessed from 6 months prior to enrollment to the time of discontinuation, death, or data cutoff. RESULTS: Of the 1381 patients who received HU for ≥ 3 months, the median HU exposure was 23.6 months (range, 3.1-38.5 months). The most common maximum daily HU doses were 1000 mg (30.6%) and 500 mg (30.1%); only 6.4% received ≥ 2 g/d HU. Approximately one-third (32.3%) of patients had dose adjustments, 23.8% had dose interruptions, and 257 (18.6%) discontinued HU. The most common reasons for HU discontinuations and interruptions were adverse events/intolerance (37.1% and 54.5%, respectively) and lack of efficacy (35.5% and 22.1%, respectively). Of those who received HU for ≥ 3 months, 57.1% had hematocrit values > 45% on ≥ 1 occasion, 33.1% continued to receive phlebotomies, and 27.4% had uncontrolled myeloproliferation. CONCLUSION: The results of this analysis emphasize the need for active management of patients with PV with appropriate HU dose titration to maintain blood count control while monitoring for signs and symptoms of HU intolerance.

A phase Ib study of capecitabine and ziv-aflibercept followed by a phase II single-arm expansion cohort in chemotherapy refractory metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Patients with chemotherapy refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) have a poor prognosis and limited therapeutic options. In this phase Ib/II clinical trial, we established the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended phase II dose (RPTD) for the combination of capecitabine and ziv-aflibercept, and then we evaluated the efficacy of the combination in patients with chemotherapy refractory metastatic CRC. METHODS: All patients were required to have a Karnofsky Performance Status > 70% and adequate organ function. The phase Ib dose escalation cohort included patients with advanced solid tumors who had progressed on all standard therapies. Using a standard 3 + 3 design, we identified the MTD and RPTD for the combination. Fifty patients with metastatic CRC who had progressed on or were intolerant of a fluoropyrimidine, oxaliplatin, irinotecan, and bevacizumab were then enrolled in a single-arm phase II expansion cohort, and were treated at the RPTD. Prior EGFR antibody therapy was required for subjects with RAS wildtype tumors. The primary endpoint for the expansion cohort was progression-free survival (PFS) at two months. Secondary endpoints included objective response rate (ORR) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: A total of 63 patients were enrolled and evaluable for toxicity (13 dose escalation; 50 expansion). The MTD and RPTD were: capecitabine 850 mg/m2, P.O. bid, days 1-14, and ziv-aflibercept 6 mg/kg I.V., day 1, of each 21-day cycle. In the expansion cohort, 72% of patients were progression-free at two months (95% confidence interval [CI], 60-84%). Median PFS and OS were 3.9 months (95% CI, 2.3-4.5) and 7.1 months (95% CI: 5.8-10.0), respectively. Among all patients evaluable for toxicity, the most common treatment related adverse events (all grade [%]; grade ≥ 3 [%]) included palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia (41%; 6%), hypertension (33%; 22%), and mucositis (19%; 5%). RNA was isolated from archived tumor specimens and gene expression analyses revealed no association between angiogenic biomarkers and clinical outcomes. CONCLUSION: The combination of capecitabine and ziv-aflibercept at the RPTD demonstrated acceptable safety and tolerability. PFS at 2 months in patients with chemotherapy refractory metastatic CRC was significantly greater than that in historical controls, indicating that this combination warrants further study. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This clinical trial was registered in the www.clinicaltrials.gov system as NCT01661972 on July 31, 2012.

Using a geriatric oncology assessment to link with services (GOAL).

OBJECTIVE: Geriatric screening tools assess functional limitations and inform clinical decision-making for older adults with cancer. Our objective was to evaluate the feasibility and effectiveness of a screener in community-based oncology clinics. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eligible patients were from two rural, underserved community-based cancer clinics; within 12 months of a cancer diagnosis (breast, lung, colorectal, pancreas, esophageal); aged ≥60 years; and not exclusively pursuing palliative care. We used a previously validated tool that was embedded in the electronic health record (EHR). Patient-reported responses identified memory impairment, depressive symptoms, deficits in activities of daily living, poor nutrition, and polypharmacy. At the discretion of the oncologist, responses prompted service referrals. From the EHR, we extracted information about referrals and completion of planned therapy. We present descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Enrolled patients (n = 44) had a mean age of 71.5 years (SD = 6.9). Most were non-white (61%), women (66%), with government-sponsored health insurance (80%). The most commonly identified geriatric syndromes: polypharmacy (89%), reduced quality of life (39%), and poor nutrition (39%). The screener triggered a referral in 98% of patients. Generated referrals were for depressive symptoms (52% needed, 39% received), nutrition (43% needed, 37% received), and polypharmacy (89% needed, 26% received). Patients were referred to social work (56%), nutrition (44%), and pharmacy (25%). Many patients completed planned radiation therapy (100%), surgery (70%), and chemotherapy (60%). CONCLUSIONS: Use of an EHR-embedded brief geriatric oncology assessment in rural oncology clinics identified geriatric syndromes that would benefit from provision of services in nearly all enrolled patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02906592.

Going for Broke: A Longitudinal Study of Patient-Reported Financial Sacrifice in Cancer Care.

PURPOSE: Patients with cancer are at risk for substantial treatment-related costs; however, little is known about patients' willingness to sacrifice to receive cancer care and how their attitudes and burden may change with time. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a longitudinal survey of insured patients with solid tumor cancers receiving chemotherapy or hormonal therapy. Patients were surveyed at two time points about their willingness to make financial sacrifices and their actual sacrifices, including out-of-pocket costs. Patient attitudes and sacrifices were compared over time. RESULTS: Of 349 patients approached, 300 completed the baseline survey (86% response) and 245 completed the follow-up survey 3 months later (82% retention). Median patient-reported cancer-related out-of-pocket costs for patients who completed both surveys were $393 per month (range, $0 to $26,586 per month) at baseline and $328 per month (range, $0 to $8,210 per month) at follow-up. At baseline, 49% were willing to declare personal bankruptcy, 38% were willing to sell their homes, and ≥ 65% were willing to make other sacrifices, including borrowing money to afford their cancer care. Upon follow-up, there were minor decreases in willingness; the maximum net change was a 7% decline in patients willing to declare bankruptcy. Actual sacrifice increased over time; the greatest increase was in patients who used their savings (increased from 41% to 54%). CONCLUSION: A large proportion of insured patients with cancer were willing to make considerable personal and financial sacrifices to receive care; these attitudes did not change greatly over time. Shared decision making is important to ensure patients fully understand the goals, risks, and benefits of therapy before they make such personal sacrifices.

Physician Experience and Attitudes Toward Addressing the Cost of Cancer Care.

PURPOSE: We surveyed US cancer doctors to examine current attitudes toward cost discussions and how they influence decision making and practice management. METHODS: We conducted a self-administered, anonymous, electronic survey of randomly selected physician ASCO members to evaluate the frequency and nature of cost discussions reported by physicians, attitudes toward discussions of cost in clinics, and potential barriers. RESULTS: A total of 333 of 2,290 physicians responded (response rate [RR], 15%; adjusted RR after omitting nonpracticing physician ASCO members, 25%), Respondent practice settings were 45% academic and 55% community/private practice. Overall, 60% reported addressing costs frequently/always in clinic, whereas 40% addressed costs rarely/never. The largest reported barrier was lack of resources to guide discussions. Those who reported frequent discussions were significantly more likely to prioritize treatments in terms of cost and believed doctors should explain patient and societal costs. A total of 36%did not believe that doctors should discuss costs with patients. Academic practitioners were significantly less likely to discuss costs (odds ratio [OR], 0.41; P = .001) and felt less prepared for such discussions (OR, 0.492; P = .005) but were more likely to consider costs to the patient (OR, 2.68; P = .02) and society (OR, 1.822; P = .02). CONCLUSION: Although the majority of respondents believe it is important to consider out-of-pocket costs to patients, a substantial proportion do not discuss or consider costs of cancer care. Lack of consensus on the importance of such discussions and uncertainty regarding the optimal timing and content appear to be barriers to addressing costs of care with patients.

The utility of cost discussions between patients with cancer and oncologists.

OBJECTIVES: Patients with cancer can experience substantial financial burden. Little is known about patients' preferences for incorporating cost discussions into treatment decision making or about the ramifications of those discussions. The objective of this study was to determine patient preferences for and benefits of discussing costs with doctors. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional, survey study. METHODS: We enrolled insured adults with solid tumors on anticancer therapy who were treated at a referral cancer center or an affiliated rural cancer clinic. Patients were surveyed at enrollment and again 3 months later about cost discussions with doctors, decision making, and financial burden. Medical records were abstracted for disease and treatment data. Logistic regression investigated characteristics associated with greater desire to discuss costs. RESULTS: Of 300 patients (86% response rate), 52% expressed some desire to discuss treatment-related out-of-pocket costs with doctors and 51% wanted their doctor to take costs into account to some degree when making treatment decisions. However, only 19% had talked to their doctor about costs. Of those, 57% reported lower out-of-pocket costs as a result of cost discussions. In multivariable logistic regression, higher subjective financial distress was associated with greater likelihood to desire cost discussions (odds ratio [OR], 1.22; 95% CI, 1.10-1.36). Nonwhite race was associated with lower likelihood to desire cost discussions (OR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.30-0.95). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with cancer varied in their desire to discuss costs with doctors, but most who discussed costs believed the conversations helped reduce their expenses. Patient-physician cost communication might reduce out-of-pocket costs even in oncology where treatment options are limited.

Integrated analysis of long-term safety in patients with chronic immune thrombocytopaenia (ITP) treated with the thrombopoietin (TPO) receptor agonist romiplostim.

A safety analysis of pooled data from clinical studies of romiplostim, a thrombopoietin (TPO) receptor agonist, in which patients with immune thrombocytopaenia (ITP) received romiplostim, placebo, or medical standard of care (SOC) Rodeghiero et al. (Eur J Haematol 91:423-436, 2013), has been updated. Included are data from 14 trials spanning 2002-2011; placebo- and SOC-arm data are pooled. Most patients (n = 1059) were female (61 %) and Caucasian (85 %); 38 % had undergone splenectomy; 23 were children. Mean (SD) baseline platelet count was 20.6 (16.5) × 10(9)/L. Mean (SD) weekly dose of romiplostim was 4.2 (2.8) µg/kg; total exposure was 1520 patient-years. Overall, 921 patients received romiplostim only, 65 received placebo/SOC only, and 73 received placebo/SOC followed by romiplostim. Rates of haemorrhage (romiplostim, 205/100 patient-years; placebo/SOC, 263/100), thrombosis (both, 5.5/100 patient-years), haematological malignancy/myelodysplastic syndrome (romiplostim, 0.5/100 patient-years; placebo/SOC, 2.7/100), and non-haematological tumours (romiplostim, 2.2/100 patient-years; placebo/SOC, 3.6/100) were comparable among groups. Bone marrow reticulin was reported in 17 patients and collagen in one patient receiving romiplostim; one patient receiving placebo/SOC had reticulin reported. Three patients developed neutralizing antibodies to romiplostim, but not to endogenous TPO. This integrated analysis of the safety profile of romiplostim in patients with ITP is consistent with previously reported studies; no new safety concerns emerged.

The neoadjuvant treatment of rectal cancer: a review.

Rectal adenocarcinoma is an important cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide, and key anatomic differences between the rectum and the colon have significant implications for management of rectal cancer, especially in the curative setting. For stage II and III rectal cancers, combined chemoradiotherapy offers the lowest rates of local and distant relapse, and is delivered neoadjuvantly to improve tolerability and optimize surgical outcomes, particularly when sphincter-sparing surgery is an endpoint. We review both pivotal trial data that has shaped the current standard of care, fluoropyrimidine-based chemoradiotherapy, while also presenting results from more recent studies, which aim to outperform this standard. Strategies combining 5FU radiotherapy with oxaliplatin, VEGF inhibition, EGFR inhibition, other targeted agents, and/or use of induction chemotherapy hold promise but thus far have failed to improve outcomes in randomized trials. Results of studies such as the ongoing PROSPECT trial may help further define our current therapeutic algorithm for stage II and III rectal cancer.