Evolving assessment pathways for precision oncology medicines to improve patient access: a tumor-agnostic lens.

BACKGROUND: Genomic and molecular alterations are increasingly important in cancer diagnosis, and scientific advances are opening new treatment avenues. Precision oncology (PO) uses a patient's genomic profile to determine optimal treatment, promising fewer side effects and higher success rates. Within PO, tumor-agnostic (TA) therapies target genomic alterations irrespective of tumor location. However, traditional value frameworks and approval pathways pose challenges which may limit patient access to PO therapies. OBJECTIVES: This study describes challenges in assessing PO and TA medicines, explores possible solutions, and provides actionable recommendations to facilitate an iterative life-cycle assessment of these medicines. METHODS: After reviewing the published literature, we obtained insights from key stakeholders and European experts across a range of disciplines, through individual interviews and an industry workshop. The research was guided and refined by an international expert committee through 2 sounding board meetings. RESULTS: The current challenges faced by PO and TA medicines are multiple and can be demonstrated through real-world examples of the current barriers and opportunities. A life-cycle approach to assessment should be taken, including key actions at the early stages of evidence generation, regulatory and reimbursement stage, as well as payment and adoption solutions that make use of the evolving evidence base. Working toward these solutions to maximize PO medicine value is a shared responsibility and stands to benefit all stakeholders. CONCLUSIONS: Our call to action is to expand access to comprehensive genomic testing, foster a learning health care system, enable fast and equitable access to cost-effective treatments, and ultimately improve health outcomes.

Physical exercise recommendations for patients with chronic myeloid leukemia based on individual preferences identified in a large international patient survey study of the East German Study Group for Hematology and Oncology (OSHO #97).

Background: Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) have significantly lowered mortality of chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) patients adjusting life expectancy to that of the standard population. However, CML and its treatment with TKIs causes a high disease burden. Physical exercise (PE) could be a non-pharmacological approach to reducing these and improving quality of life. Purpose: The aim of this study was to determine the individual disease burden as well as PE preferences of CML patients and to deduce thereof specific PE recommendations. Methods: This multicenter survey was conducted in cooperation with the LeukaNET/Leukemia-patient network including CML patients aged ≥18 years (German Registry of Clinical Trials, DRKS00023698). The severity of selected symptoms was assessed using the adapted Myeloproliferative Neoplasms Symptom Assessment Form: 0 (absent), 1-30 (mild), 31-70 (moderate), or 71-100 (severe). Information about patients' PE needs and preferences depending on their motivation was recorded. Results: A total of 212 questionnaires were analyzed (52% female, median age 54 years). The prevalence of moderate-to-severe symptoms was 49% for fatigue, 40% for musculoskeletal pain, and 37% for concentration problems. Other commonly reported symptoms included skin reactions (42%) and weight gain (24%). The proportion of overweight/obese patients was 52%. Half of all respondents requested more information regarding PE. Patients with CML preferred individual training (82%), located outdoors (71%), at home (47%), or in an indoor swimming pool (31%). Regarding the training frequency, sports-inactive patients preferred a frequency of 1-2 training sessions per week, whereas sports-active patients preferred 3-4 sessions per week (p <0.001). Sports-inactive patients preferred a training time of 15-45 minutes, while sports-active patients preferred 30-60 minutes (p = 0.002). Subsequently, PE recommendations were developed for patients with CML. Combined resistance and endurance training (moderate intensity twice per week for 30 minutes) was recommended for beginners. Obese patients should prioritize joint-relieving sports. To reduce the risk of skin reactions, direct sunlight and possibly water sports should be avoided, and UV protection should be used. Conclusion: Counseling and motivation of CML patients to be physically active should be part of the standard of care as well as support for implementation.

Precision oncology medicines and the need for real world evidence acceptance in health technology assessment: Importance of patient involvement in sustainable healthcare.

Precision oncology has made remarkable strides in improving clinical outcomes, offering hope to patients with historically difficult-to-treat, as well as rare or neglected cancers. However, despite rapid advancement, precision oncology has reached a critical juncture, where patient access to these life-saving medicines may be hampered by strict requirements by Health Technology Assessment (HTA) bodies for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) for assessing new medicines against appropriate comparator. The very nature of precision oncology-matching a tumour's unique molecular alterations to targeted therapies predicted to elicit response-can make the use of RCTs very difficult, as only a very small number of patients might qualify for a given therapy within a traditional clinical trial setting. Real-world evidence (RWE) has been accepted for regulatory decision-making but has yet to reach widespread acceptance by HTA bodies. As the oncology treatment landscape has evolved towards favouring the concept of precision oncology, there is a growing need for flexibility in the way HTA bodies evaluate new medicines. We must acknowledge that current assessment methodologies can limit access to life-changing medicines for many patients who have no alternative options and that a growing number of precision oncology medicines with proven clinical benefits in rare tumours cannot be reasonably evaluated using traditional methodologies. The objectives of this paper are to advocate a change in mindset regarding best practices in drug assessment models and to propose alternative approaches when considering indications for which RWE is the most compelling data source available.

An inter-specialty cancer training programme curriculum for Europe.

INTRODUCTION: Multidisciplinary and multi-professional collaboration is vital in providing better outcomes for patients The aim of the INTERACT-EUROPE Project (Wide Ranging Cooperation and Cutting Edge Innovation As A Response To Cancer Training Needs) was to develop an inter-specialty curriculum. A pilot project will enable a pioneer cohort to acquire a sample of the competencies needed. METHODS: A scoping review, qualitative and quantitative surveys were undertaken. The quantitative survey results are reported here. Respondents, including members of education boards, curriculum committees, trainee committees of European specialist societies and the ECO Patient Advisory Committee, were asked to score 127 proposed competencies on a 7-point Likert scale as to their value in achieving the aims of the curriculum. Results were discussed and competencies developed at two stakeholder meetings. A consultative document, shared with stakeholders and available online, requested views regarding the other components of the curriculum. RESULTS: Eleven competencies were revised, three omitted and three added. The competencies were organised according to the CanMEDS framework with 13 Entrustable Professional Activities, 23 competencies and 127 enabling competencies covering all roles in the framework. Recommendations regarding the infrastructure, organisational aspects, eligibility of trainees and training centres, programme contents, assessment and evaluation were developed using the replies to the consultative document. CONCLUSIONS: An Inter-specialty Cancer Training Programme Curriculum and a pilot programme with virtual and face-to-face components have been developed with the aim of improving the care of people affected by cancer.

A New Framework for Co-Creating Telehealth for Cancer Care with the Patient Community.

The increased use of telehealth in cancer care during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has added to our knowledge and experience of the modality with benefits in terms of efficacy, cost, and patient and healthcare professional experience reported. However, telehealth has also been found not to be universally available to all patients with cancer, nor to be appropriate for every healthcare interaction; additionally, not all patients prefer it. Now that coronavirus disease restrictions have essentially ended and an opportunity to re-assess telehealth provision in cancer care presents, we offer a framework that aims to ensure that the needs and preferences of the patient community are included in the development of telehealth provision. Stakeholders in this process include patients, patient advocates, healthcare providers, healthcare services commissioners, managers, and policy makers. The framework outlines how patient advocates can work with other stakeholders as equal partners at all stages of telehealth service development. The patient advocate community has a unique understanding of the patient perspective as well as expertise in healthcare design and delivery. This enables advocates to contribute to shaping telehealth provision, from policy and guideline formulation to patient navigation. Appropriate resources, education and training may be needed for all stakeholders to support the development of an effective telehealth system. Together with other stakeholders, patient advocates can make an important contribution to optimizing appropriate patient-centred telehealth provision in cancer care.

Adopting recommendations for implementing patient involvement in cancer research: a funder's approach.

BACKGROUND: The role of patients in cancer research is undergoing a significant evolution as all stakeholders seek to enhance the level of direct patient involvement in the design and development of clinical trials. However, there are significant hurdles that patients, patient advocates, laboratory researchers, clinical investigators, and funding institutions must overcome to implement relevant patient involvement in all aspects of biomedical research. By using innovative grant funding models, philanthropic organizations can lead the field in overcoming these challenges. Rising Tide Foundation for Clinical Cancer Research (RTFCCR), a private philanthropy that funds academic research, has developed a novel approach for requiring and supporting partnerships among grantees and patients in designing and conducting research projects. This paper presents a reflective case study of efforts to advance the field of patient involvement in clinical research. METHODS: The decision to focus on patient involvement stems from an expressed focus area established by the RTFCCR board of directors. In conducting this work, RTFCCR partnered with Patvocates, a patient advocacy and engagement network, to create a set of guiding documents and resources aimed at public and private health research funders within various national, international, and therapeutic settings. This effort included a landscape assessment, interviews with experts, and an iterative development process. RESULTS: To date, RTFCCR has completed and disseminated three guiding documents, one for funders, one for grant applicants, and one for patient advocates. These resources have already generated three major ongoing initiatives at RTFCCR: (1) inclusion of these recommendations in the foundation's funding guidelines; patient input to prioritization of research focus areas; and in topic selection for calls for proposals; (2) direct involvement of patient experts in the grant review process; and (3) a commitment to support high impact clinical research projects in Low- and Middle-Income Countries. Moreover, the foundation has launched a partnership with the International Cancer Research Partnership, the global alliance of cancer research organizations. CONCLUSION: By using its grantmaking function and developing standardized approaches for implementation of patient involvement, RTFCCR is seeking to advance patient-centric cancer clinical research. This approach will continue to develop as it is implemented and shared with partners throughout the world.

The Rising Tide Foundation for Clinical Cancer Research (RTFCCR), a private philanthropy that funds academic research, has developed a novel approach for requiring and supporting partnerships among grantees (scientists) and patients in designing and conducting research projects.The decision to focus on patient involvement stems from an expressed focus area established by the RTFCCR board of directors. In conducting this work, RTFCCR partnered with Patvocates, a patient advocacy and engagement network. Patvocates conducted a landscape assessment, interviews with experts, and their collective experience as patient advocates. This work generated a set of guiding documents and resources. These resources are to help public and private health research funders to better understand current challenges and support scientists and patients through their funding mechanisms. Three guiding documents, one for funders, one for grant applicants, and one for patient advocates are now available for download at the RTFCCR website: https://www.risingtide-foundation.org/clinical-cancer-research/patient-engagement#start Delivering a paradigm change involves not only the introduction of additional requirements and rules, but also enhanced education of patients and investigators. By using its grantmaking function and developing standardized approaches for implementation of patient involvement, RTFCCR is seeking to advance patient-centric cancer clinical research.Development and implementation of consistent policies and procedures for the integration of the patients' view in the design and review of research proposals is needed for funders as well as for research institutes, both public and private.

Understanding Quality of Life in Patients With Acute Leukemia, a Global Survey.

Purpose: The Acute Leukemia Advocates Network (ALAN) sought to determine which factors are most associated with poor quality of life (QoL) in patients with acute leukemia and to determine key issues and unmet needs through administration of an online survey distributed worldwide via partner patient organizations. Methods: ALAN developed a questionnaire informed by literature review and based extensively on the hematological malignancy-specific patient-reported outcomes (HM-PRO) measure to assess the impact of acute leukemia on QoL and its relationships with patients' demographics, disease state, disease impact, and support from health care professionals. Univariate and multivariable statistical analysis was used to investigate relationships between HM-PRO scores and the other factors. Results: Of 552 respondents from 42 countries, 332 had acute myeloid leukemia, 139 had acute lymphoblastic leukemia, and 81 had acute promyelocytic leukemia (survey data collected in 2019). Younger age, female gender, and lower income were all significantly negatively associated with QoL. Weak or moderate correlations were observed between overall support, management, and impact of treatment and diagnosis of acute leukemia. Feeling isolated and having reduced ability to carry out physical or enjoyable activities were the most important individual factors, while the best predictors for QoL impact were age, gender, and income (model r2=0.16, complete case n=449). Conclusions: Findings indicated key factors, particularly age, gender, and socioeconomic state, that clinicians responsible for the care of patients with acute leukemia should be aware of when designing support strategies. The importance of social functioning in relation to patient QoL also should be included in considerations.

European Groundshot-addressing Europe's cancer research challenges: a Lancet Oncology Commission.

Cancer research is a crucial pillar for countries to deliver more affordable, higher quality, and more equitable cancer care. Patients treated in research-active hospitals have better outcomes than patients who are not treated in these settings. However, cancer in Europe is at a crossroads. Cancer was already a leading cause of premature death before the COVID-19 pandemic, and the disastrous effects of the pandemic on early diagnosis and treatment will probably set back cancer outcomes in Europe by almost a decade. Recognising the pivotal importance of research not just to mitigate the pandemic today, but to build better European cancer services and systems for patients tomorrow, the Lancet Oncology European Groundshot Commission on cancer research brings together a wide range of experts, together with detailed new data on cancer research activity across Europe during the past 12 years. We have deployed this knowledge to help inform Europe's Beating Cancer Plan and the EU Cancer Mission, and to set out an evidence-driven, patient-centred cancer research roadmap for Europe. The high-resolution cancer research data we have generated show current activities, captured through different metrics, including by region, disease burden, research domain, and effect on outcomes. We have also included granular data on research collaboration, gender of researchers, and research funding. The inclusion of granular data has facilitated the identification of areas that are perhaps overemphasised in current cancer research in Europe, while also highlighting domains that are underserved. Our detailed data emphasise the need for more information-driven and data-driven cancer research strategies and planning going forward. A particular focus must be on central and eastern Europe, because our findings emphasise the widening gap in cancer research activity, and capacity and outcomes, compared with the rest of Europe. Citizens and patients, no matter where they are, must benefit from advances in cancer research. This Commission also highlights that the narrow focus on discovery science and biopharmaceutical research in Europe needs to be widened to include such areas as prevention and early diagnosis; treatment modalities such as radiotherapy and surgery; and a larger concentration on developing a research and innovation strategy for the 20 million Europeans living beyond a cancer diagnosis. Our data highlight the important role of comprehensive cancer centres in driving the European cancer research agenda. Crucial to a functioning cancer research strategy and its translation into patient benefit is the need for a greater emphasis on health policy and systems research, including implementation science, so that the innovative technological outputs from cancer research have a clear pathway to delivery. This European cancer research Commission has identified 12 key recommendations within a call to action to reimagine cancer research and its implementation in Europe. We hope this call to action will help to achieve our ambitious 70:35 target: 70% average 10-year survival for all European cancer patients by 2035.

An Approach to Solving the Complex Clinicogenomic Data Landscape in Precision Oncology: Learnings From the Design of WAYFIND-R, a Global Precision Oncology Registry.

Precision oncology, where patients are given therapies based on their genomic profile and disease trajectory, is rapidly evolving to become a pivotal part of cancer management, supported by regulatory approvals of biomarker-matched targeted therapies and cancer immunotherapies. However, next-generation sequencing (NGS)-based technologies have revealed an increasing number of molecular-based cancer subtypes with rare patient populations, leading to difficulties in executing/recruiting for traditional clinical trials. Therefore, approval of novel therapeutics based on traditional interventional studies may be difficult and time consuming, with delayed access to innovative therapies. Real-world data (RWD) that describe the patient journey in routine clinical practice can help elucidate the clinical utility of NGS-based genomic profiling, multidisciplinary case discussions, and targeted therapies. We describe key learnings from the setup of WAYFIND-R (NCT04529122), a first-of-its-kind global cancer registry collecting RWD from patients with solid tumors who have undergone NGS-based genomic profiling. The meaning of 'generalizability' and 'high quality' for RWD across different geographic areas was revisited, together with patient recruitment processes, and data sharing and privacy. Inspired by these learnings, WAYFIND-R's design will help physicians discuss patient treatment plans with their colleagues, improve understanding of the impact of treatment decisions/cancer care processes on patient outcomes, and provide a platform to support the design and conduct of further clinical/epidemiologic research. WAYFIND-R demonstrates user-friendly, electronic case report forms, standardized collection of molecular tumor board-based decisions, and a dashboard providing investigators with access to local cohort-level data and the ability to interact with colleagues or search the entire registry to find rare populations. Overall, WAYFIND-R will inform on best practice for NGS-based treatment decisions by clinicians, foster global collaborations between cancer centers and enable robust conclusions regarding outcome data to be drawn, improve understanding of disparities in patients' access to advanced diagnostics and therapies, and ultimately drive advances in precision oncology.

Building a Healthcare Alliance for Resourceful Medicine Offensive Against Neoplasms in Hematology Added Value Framework for Hematologic Malignancies: A Comparative Analysis of Existing Tools.

OBJECTIVES: The Innovative Medicines Initiative-funded, multistakeholders project Healthcare Alliance for Resourceful Medicine Offensive Against Neoplasms in Hematology (HARMONY) created a task force involving patient organizations, medical associations, pharmaceutical companies, and health technology assessment/regulator agencies' representatives to evaluate the suitability of previously established value frameworks (VFs) for assessing the clinical and societal impact of new interventions for hematologic malignancies (HMs). METHODS: Since the HARMONY stakeholders identified the inclusion of patients' points of view on evaluating VFs as a priority, surveys were conducted with the patient organizations active in HMs and part of the HARMONY network, together with key opinion leaders, pharmaceutical companies, and regulators, to establish which outcomes were important for each HM. Next, to evaluate VFs against the sources of information taken into account (randomized clinical trials, registries, real-world data), structured questionnaires were created and filled by HARMONY health professionals to specify preferred data sources per malignancy. Finally, a framework evaluation module was built to analyze existing clinical VFs (American Society of Clinical Oncology, European Society of Medical Oncology, Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale, Institut für Qualität und Wirtschaftlichkeit im Gesundheitswesen, Institute for Clinical and Economic Review, National Comprehensive Cancer Network Evidence Blocks, and patient-perspective VF). RESULTS: The comparative analysis describes challenges and opportunities for the use of each framework in the context of HMs and drafts possible lines of action for creating or integrating a more specific, patient-focused clinical VF for HMs. CONCLUSIONS: None of the frameworks meets the HARMONY goals for a tool that applies to HMs and assesses in a transparent, reproducible, and systematic way the therapeutic value of innovative health technologies versus available alternatives, taking a patient-centered approach and using real-world evidence.

Delivering precision oncology to patients with cancer.

With the increasing use of genomic profiling for diagnosis and therapy guidance in many tumor types, precision oncology is rapidly reshaping cancer care. However, the current trajectory of drug development in oncology results in a paradox: if patients cannot access advanced diagnostics, we may be developing drugs that will reach few patients. In this Perspective, we outline the major challenges to the implementation of precision oncology and discuss critical steps toward resolving these, including facilitation of equal access to genomics tests, ensuring that clinical studies provide robust evidence for new drugs and technologies, enabling physicians to interpret genomics data, and empowering patients toward shared decision-making. A multi-stakeholder approach to evidence generation, value assessment, and healthcare delivery is necessary to translate advances in precision oncology into benefits for patients with cancer globally.

Reaching beyond maximum grade: progress and future directions for modernising the assessment and reporting of adverse events in haematological malignancies.

Remarkable improvements in outcomes for many haematological malignancies have been driven primarily by a proliferation of novel therapeutics over the past two decades. Targeted agents, immune and cellular therapies, and combination regimens have adverse event profiles distinct from conventional finite cytotoxic chemotherapies. In 2018, a Commission comprising patient advocates, clinicians, clinical investigators, regulators, biostatisticians, and pharmacists representing a broad range of academic and clinical cancer expertise examined issues of adverse event evaluation in the context of both newer and existing therapies for haematological cancers. The Commission proposed immediate actions and long-term solutions in the current processes in adverse event assessment, patient-reported outcomes in haematological malignancies, toxicities in cellular therapies, long-term toxicity and survivorship in haematological malignancies, issues in regulatory approval from an international perspective, and toxicity reporting in haematological malignancies and the real-world setting. In this follow-up report, the Commission describes progress that has been made in these areas since the initial report.

Anxieties, age and motivation influence physical activity in patients with myeloproliferative neoplasms - a multicenter survey from the East German study group for hematology and oncology (OSHO #97).

Background: Physical activity (PA) is a non-pharmacological approach to alleviate symptom burden and improve health-related quality of life (HrQoL) in cancer patients (pts). Whether pts with myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN) PA behavior changes due to symptom burden and/or knowledge of the putative beneficial effects of PA has not yet been investigated. Methods: We performed a large questionnaire study in MPN pts. Self-reported PA behavior and potential influencing factors of 634 MPN pts were analyzed. Questionnaires were used to assess demographics, anxiety, severity of symptoms, HrQoL, current level of everyday and sports activities, and the level of information regarding the importance/possibilities of PA. According to their PA, the pts were assigned to the three groups: "inactive", "non-targeted active", and "sporty active" and compared with each other. Results: Key findings are that in 73% of the pts, the disease had an impact on PA, with 30% of pts reducing their PA. The prevalence of anxieties (e.g., occurrence of thrombosis and bleeding) regarding PA was 45%. Sporty active pts had a lower symptom burden and better HrQoL (p ≤ 0.001) compared to the other groups. Inactive pts were significantly older and had a higher body mass index than sporty active pts. Inactive and non-targeted active pts felt less informed about the importance/possibilities of PA (p = 0.002). Conclusion: Our results suggest that especially older and non-sporty MPN pts could benefit from motivational as well as disease-specific PA information. This study was registered at the German Registry of Clinical Trials, DRKS00023698.

The European Code of Cancer Practice.

There are considerable disparities between the quality of cancer care and clinical outcomes for cancer patients in different European countries, regions, hospitals and communities. These have persisted despite the introduction of many European and National Cancer Plans, an extensive portfolio of clinical guidelines and the existence of evidence based guidelines for the good practice in planning cancer healthcare systems. We describe the European Code of Cancer Practice which is a citizen and patient-centred accessible widely disseminated statement of the core requirements for good clinical cancer practice. The Code sets out 10 key overarching Rights of what a patient should expect from their healthcare system each supported by a plain language explanation. The Rights highlight the importance of equal access to affordable and optimal cancer care, good quality information about an individual patient's disease and treatment and about the quality and outcomes of the cancer service they will use. Specialised multidisciplinary cancer care teams, shared decision-making, research and innovation, a focus on quality of life, the integration of supportive and palliative care within oncology are all emphasised. There is a need for a systematic approach to supporting cancer survivors with a survivorship care plan including their rehabilitation, reintegration into society and return to work where appropriate without discrimination. The Code has been co-produced by a team of cancer patients, patient advocates and cancer professionals to bridge the gap between clinical guidelines, healthcare policies and patients' everyday experience. It is robustly evidence-based and supported by a comprehensive review of the medical literature and evidence for good clinical practice. The Code is strongly endorsed by Europe's professional and patient cancer organisations and the European Commission.

Core outcome set measurement for future clinical trials in acute myeloid leukemia: the HARMONY study protocol using a multi-stakeholder consensus-based Delphi process and a final consensus meeting.

BACKGROUND: Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is the most common acute leukemia in adults and has an unacceptably low cure rate. In recent years, a number of new treatment strategies and compounds were developed for the treatment of AML. There were several randomized controlled clinical trials with the objective to improve patients' management and patients' outcome in AML. Unfortunately, these trials are not always directly comparable since they do not measure the same outcomes, and currently there are no core outcome sets that can be used to guide outcome selection and harmonization in this disease area. The HARMONY (Healthcare Alliance for Resourceful Medicine Offensive against Neoplasms in Hematology) Alliance is a public-private European network established in 2017 and currently includes 53 partners and 32 associated members from 22 countries. Amongst many other goals of the HARMONY Alliance, Work Package 2 focuses on defining outcomes that are relevant to each hematological malignancy. Accordingly, this pilot study will be performed to define a core outcome set in AML. METHODS: The pilot study will use a three-round Delphi survey and a final consensus meeting to define a core outcome set. Participants will be recruited from different stakeholder groups, including patients, clinicians, regulators and members of the European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations. At the pre-Delphi stage, a literature research was conducted followed by several semi-structured interviews of clinical public and private key opinion leaders. Subsequently, the preliminary outcome list was discussed in several multi-stakeholder face-to-face meetings. The Delphi survey will reduce the preliminary outcome list to essential core outcomes. After completion of the last Delphi round, a final face-to-face meeting is planned to achieve consensus about the core outcome set in AML. DISCUSSION: As part of the HARMONY Alliance, the pilot Delphi aims to define a core outcome set in AML on the basis of a multi-stakeholder consensus. Such a core outcome set will help to allow consistent comparison of future clinical trials and real-world evidence research and ensures that appropriate outcomes valued by a range of stakeholders are measured within future trials.

Treatment-free remission in chronic myeloid leukemia: the patient perspective and areas of unmet needs.

In CML, treatment-free remission (TFR) refers to having a stable deep molecular response without the need for ongoing tyrosine kinase inhibitor treatment. Whilst recommendations exist about the technical management of stopping and re-starting therapy, much is still unknown about the experiences of those considering and undertaking TFR. This study sought to obtain the patient perspective, identify areas of unmet needs and create recommendations for improvements. Fifty-six percent of patients reported fear or anxiety during treatment discontinuation, whereas only 7% of patients were asked if they needed psychological support during this period. Where patients re-initiated treatment; 59% felt scared or anxious, and 56% felt depressed. Twenty-six percent of re-initiated patients received psychological and/or emotional support at this time. Sixty percent of patients experienced withdrawal symptoms whilst discontinuing treatment, however, 40% of patients who experienced withdrawal symptoms reported that they were not fully supported by their doctor in managing all the symptoms. Healthcare professionals should further consider how they monitor the psychological well-being of patients who are discontinuing or re-initiating treatment, and review what support is offered in response to identified concerns. Surveillance of withdrawal symptoms should be a priority during treatment discontinuation, along with how healthcare professionals assist in the management of these.

Including the patient voice in the development and implementation of patient-reported outcomes in cancer clinical trials.

CONTEXT: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are used in parallel with clinical evidence to inform decisions made by industry, clinicians, regulators, health technology assessment bodies and other health-care decision-makers. In addition, PRO data can also guide shared decision making and individual patient choice. Yet, the quality of many PROs in cancer clinical trials is suboptimal and requires improvement to add value to health care and policy decision making. OBJECTIVE: To show how the integration of the patient and/or patient advocate at all stages of PRO development can help to realize the full potential of PROs. METHODS: We examined the literature to show that the patient voice is often absent from the planning and implementation of PROs in cancer clinical trials. Good practice examples from the literature were combined with guideline recommendations, training or educational resources, and our own experience to create detailed practical steps for the inclusion of patients and/or patient advocates throughout PRO development. RESULTS: Patient or patient advocates can play an active role in shaping PROs that are meaningful to the patient. They can contribute to content, choice of medium and implementation in a way that may support PRO completion and minimize missing data. Patients and their advocates can work to ensure PRO findings are disseminated appropriately in a way that is accessible to patients. CONCLUSION: This practical guidance aims to optimize PRO development and implementation in clinical trials, resulting in robust, relevant data that reflect the patient experience and that support decisions made by all stakeholders involved in research and health care.

Beyond maximum grade: modernising the assessment and reporting of adverse events in haematological malignancies.

Tremendous progress in treatment and outcomes has been achieved across the whole range of haematological malignancies in the past two decades. Although cure rates for aggressive malignancies have increased, nowhere has progress been more impactful than in the management of typically incurable forms of haematological cancer. Population-based data have shown that 5-year survival for patients with chronic myelogenous and chronic lymphocytic leukaemia, indolent B-cell lymphomas, and multiple myeloma has improved markedly. This improvement is a result of substantial changes in disease management strategies in these malignancies. Several haematological malignancies are now chronic diseases that are treated with continuously administered therapies that have unique side-effects over time. In this Commission, an international panel of clinicians, clinical investigators, methodologists, regulators, and patient advocates representing a broad range of academic and clinical cancer expertise examine adverse events in haematological malignancies. The issues pertaining to assessment of adverse events examined here are relevant to a range of malignancies and have been, to date, underexplored in the context of haematology. The aim of this Commission is to improve toxicity assessment in clinical trials in haematological malignancies by critically examining the current process of adverse event assessment, highlighting the need to incorporate patient-reported outcomes, addressing issues unique to stem-cell transplantation and survivorship, appraising challenges in regulatory approval, and evaluating toxicity in real-world patients. We have identified a range of priority issues in these areas and defined potential solutions to challenges associated with adverse event assessment in the current treatment landscape of haematological malignancies.

Factors influencing adherence in CML and ways to improvement: Results of a patient-driven survey of 2546 patients in 63 countries.

Optimal adherence to CML therapy is of key importance to maximize treatment effectiveness. Two clinical studies (ADAGIO and Hammersmith) have proven a clear correlation between adherence and achieving optimal treatment response and have revealed that non-adherence is common in CML patients (Marin et al. in J Clin Oncol 28(24):2381-2388, 2010, Noens et al. in Haematologica 99(33):437-447, 2014). The aim of this study is to assess the extent of suboptimal adherence and to investigate motivations and behavioural patterns of adherence in a worldwide patient sample. Questionnaires were provided by the CML Advocates Network and were filled in by patients online and offline. Patient characteristics, treatment and motivations were collected. Adherence was assessed by the 8-item Morisky Medication Adherence scale. Logistic regression models were fitted to investigate the influence of different factors on adherence. Overall, 2 546 questionnaires from 63 countries and 79 CML patient organisations were evaluable. 32.7% of participants were highly adherent, 46.5% were in the medium and 20.7% in the low adherence group. Factors increasing the probability of being in the high adherence group are older age, male sex, management of side effects, only one tablet per day and feeling well informed about CML by the doctor. More than 2 years since diagnosis were significantly lowering the chance as was the use of reminding tools. Living arrangements, multiple medication and personal payment obligations increased the probability to be at least in the medium adherent group. This is the most comprehensive study conducted to date to gain knowledge about factors causing non-adherence in CML. Better information on the disease, medication and management of side effects, supported by haematologists, is key to improve adherence.