Financial Toxicity Monitoring in a Randomized Controlled Trial of Patient-Reported Outcomes During Cancer Treatment (Alliance AFT-39).

PURPOSE: Financial toxicity (FT) affects 20% of cancer survivors and is associated with poor clinical outcomes. No large-scale programs have been implemented to mitigate FT. We evaluated the effect of monthly FT screening as part of a larger patient-reported outcomes (PROs) digital monitoring intervention. METHODS: PRO-TECT (AFT-39) is a cluster-randomized trial of patients undergoing systemic therapy for metastatic cancer. Practices were randomly assigned 1:1 to digital symptom monitoring (PRO practices) or usual care (control practices). Digital monitoring consisted of between-visit online or automated telephone patient surveys about symptoms, functioning, and FT (single-item screening question from Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-COmprehensive Score for financial Toxicity) for up to 1 year, with automated alerts sent to practice nurses for concerning survey scores. Clinical team actions in response to alerts were not mandated. The primary outcome of this planned secondary analysis was development or worsening of financial difficulties, assessed via the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 financial difficulties measure, at any time compared with baseline. A randomly selected subset of patients and nurses were interviewed about their experiences with the intervention. RESULTS: One thousand one hundred ninety-one patients were enrolled (593 PRO; 598 control) at 52 US community oncology practices. Overall, 30.2% of patients treated at practices that received the FT screening intervention developed, or experienced worsening of, financial difficulties, compared with 39.0% treated at control practices (P = .004). Patients and nurses interviewed stated that FT screening identified patients for financial counseling who otherwise would be reluctant to seek, or unaware of the availability of, assistance. CONCLUSION: In this report of a secondary outcome from a randomized clinical trial, FT screening as part of routine digital patient monitoring with PROs reduced the development, or worsening, of financial difficulties among patients undergoing systemic cancer therapy.

Recommendations on the use of item libraries for patient-reported outcome measurement in oncology trials: findings from an international, multidisciplinary working group.

The use of item libraries for patient-reported outcome (PRO) measurement in oncology allows for the customisation of PRO assessment to measure key health-related quality of life concepts of relevance to the target population and intervention. However, no high-level recommendations exist to guide users on the design and implementation of these customised PRO measures (item lists) across different PRO measurement systems. To address this issue, a working group was set up, including international stakeholders (academic, independent, industry, health technology assessment, regulatory, and patient advocacy), with the goal of creating recommendations for the use of item libraries in oncology trials. A scoping review was carried out to identify relevant publications and highlight any gaps. Stakeholders commented on the available guidance for each research question, proposed recommendations on how to address gaps in the literature, and came to an agreement using discussion-based methods. Nine primary research questions were identified that formed the scope and structure of the recommendations on how to select items and implement item lists created from item libraries. These recommendations address methods to drive item selection, plan the structure and analysis of item lists, and facilitate their use in conjunction with other measures. The findings resulted in high-level, instrument-agnostic recommendations on the use of item-library-derived item lists in oncology trials.

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.

Effects of patient-reported outcome assessment order.

BACKGROUND: In clinical trials and clinical practice, patient-reported outcomes are almost always assessed using multiple patient-reported outcome measures at the same time. This raises concerns about whether patient responses are affected by the order in which the patient-reported outcome measures are administered. METHODS: This questionnaire-based study of order effects included adult cancer patients from five cancer centers. Patients were randomly assigned to complete questionnaires via paper booklets, interactive voice response system, or tablet web survey. Linear Analogue Self-Assessment, Patient-Reported Outcomes Version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System assessment tools were each used to measure general health, physical function, social function, emotional distress/anxiety, emotional distress/depression, fatigue, sleep, and pain. The order in which the three tools, and domains within tools, were presented to patients was randomized. Rates of missing data, scale scores, and Cronbach's alpha coefficients were compared by the order in which they were assessed. Analyses included Cochran-Armitage trend tests and mixed models adjusted for performance score, age, sex, cancer type, and curative intent. RESULTS: A total of 1830 patients provided baseline patient-reported outcome assessments. There were no significant trends in rates of missing values by whether a scale was assessed earlier or later. The largest order effect for scale scores was due to a large mean score at one assessment time point. The largest difference in Cronbach's alpha between the versions for the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System scales was 0.106. CONCLUSION: The well-being of a cancer patient has many different aspects such as pain, fatigue, depression, and anxiety. These are assessed using a variety of surveys often collected at the same time. This study shows that the order in which the different aspects are collected from the patient is not important.

Validation of a Modified Version of the Myeloproliferative Neoplasm Symptom Assessment Form Total Symptom Score.

BACKGROUND: Patients with myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs) suffer from chronic and progressive symptom burden. MPN trials capturing patient-reported symptoms routinely administer the MPN Symptom Assessment Form (SAF). The MPN-10 assesses 10 of the most clinically relevant symptoms, including fatigue and generates a Total Symptom Score (TSS). The original MPN-10 included a fatigue item from the Brief Fatigue Inventory (BFI). The myelofibrosis-specific symptom assessment tool called the MFSAF v4 utilizes a fatigue item developed to be consistent with other items within the SAF. This study sought to validate a modified version of the MPN-10 TSS using the SAF fatigue item for harmonization with MFSAF v4. METHODS: Survey data from two cohorts of patients with essential thrombocythemia, polycythemia vera, or myelofibrosis assessing MPN characteristics and symptom burden were used. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: BFI and SAF fatigue items were highly correlated in raw score (Pearson r = 0.88), comparable in their severity categorizations (89% agreement for severe versus non-severe) and respective contributions to the TSS (both Cronbach's alpha = 0.89). Reliability of SAF fatigue was acceptable and independently associated with known disease-related characteristics (splenomegaly, low quality-of-life, and distress). Fatigue in patients with MPNs is measured with high similarity using the SAF fatigue item within the MPN-10 in harmonization with the MFSAF v4.

Landscape of Health-Related Quality of Life in Patients With Early-Stage Pancreatic Cancer Receiving Adjuvant or Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: A Systematic Literature Review.

OBJECTIVES: Pancreatic resection is associated with postoperative morbidity and reduced quality of life (QoL). A systematic literature review was conducted to understand the patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) landscape in early-stage pancreatic cancer (PC). METHODS: Databases/registries (through January 24, 2019) and conference abstracts (2014-2017) were searched. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale/Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. Searches were for general (resectable PC, adjuvant/neoadjuvant, QoL) and supplemental studies (resectable PC, European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QoL Questionnaire [QLQ] - Pancreatic Cancer [PAN26]). RESULTS: Of 750 studies identified, 39 (general, 22; supplemental, 17) were eligible: 32 used QLQ Core 30 (C30) and/or QLQ-PAN26, and 15 used other PROMs. Baseline QLQ-C30 global health status/QoL scores in early-stage PC were similar to all-stage PC reference values but lower than all-stage-all-cancer values. The QoL declined after surgery, recovered to baseline in 3 to 6 months, and then generally stabilized. A minimally important difference (MID) of 10 was commonly used for QLQ-C30 but was not established for QLQ-PAN26. CONCLUSIONS: In early-stage PC, QLQ-C30 and QLQ-PAN26 are the most commonly used PROMs. Baseline QLQ-C30 global health status/QoL scores suggested a high humanistic burden. Immediately after surgery, QoL declined but seemed stable over the longer term. The QLQ-C30 MID may elucidate the clinical impact of treatment on QoL; MID for QLQ-PAN26 needs to be established.

Assessment of Adverse Events From the Patient Perspective in a Phase 3 Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer Clinical Trial.

Importance: Standard adverse event (AE) reporting in oncology clinical trials has historically relied on clinician grading, which prior research has shown can lead to underestimation of rates of symptomatic AEs. Industry sponsors are beginning to implement in trials the National Cancer Institute's Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE), which was developed to allow patients to self-report symptomatic AEs and improve the quality of symptomatic AE detection. Objectives: To evaluate the feasibility of implementing PRO-CTCAE in a prespecified correlative analysis of the phase 3 COMET-2 trial and enumerate statistically significant between-group differences in symptomatic AEs using PRO-CTCAE and the CTCAE. Design, Setting, and Participants: This correlative study of 119 men in the randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 COMET-2 trial with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer who had undergone at least 2 prior lines of systemic treatment was conducted from March 2012 to July 2014. Participants completed PRO-CTCAE items using an automated telephone system from home prior to treatment and every 3 weeks during treatment. Statistical analysis was performed from May 2018 to June 2019. Main Outcomes and Measures: The proportion of patients who completed expected PRO-CTCAE self-reports was computed as a measure of feasibility. Results: Among the 119 men in the study (median age, 65 years [range, 44-80 years]), 534 of 587 (91.0%) expected PRO-CTCAE self-reports were completed, with consistently high rates of completion throughout participation. Rates of self-report adherence were similar between groups (cabozantinib s-maleate, 286 of 317 [90.2%]; and mitoxantrone hydrochloride-prednisone, 248 of 270 [91.9%]). Of 12 measured, patient-reported PRO-CTCAE symptomatic AEs, 4 reached statistical significance when comparing the proportion of patients with at least 1 postbaseline score greater than 0 between groups (differences ranged from 20.1% to 34.1% with higher proportions in the cabozantinib group; all P < .05), and use of a method for accounting for preexisting symptoms at baseline yielded 7 AEs with statistically significant differences between groups (differences ranged from 20.5% to 41.2% with higher proportions in the cabozantinib group; all P < .05). In the same analysis using investigator-reported CTCAE data, no statistically significant differences were found between groups for any symptomatic AEs. Conclusions and Relevance: PRO-CTCAE data collection was feasible and improved the accuracy of symptomatic AE detection in a phase 3 cancer trial. This analysis adds to mounting evidence of the feasibility and value of patient-reported AEs in oncology, which should be considered for inclusion in cancer trials that incorporate AE evaluation. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01522443.

Assessment of Quality of Life following Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplant for Myelofibrosis.

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) for patients with myelofibrosis (MF) have been well characterized, but little is known about quality of life (QoL) following allogeneic stem cell transplantation (allo-SCT). Medical data and PRO measures were collected before transplant and at day 30, day 100, and 1 year after allo-SCT. PRO measures include Myeloproliferative Neoplasm Symptom Assessment Form (MPN-SAF), Brief Fatigue Inventory, Global Assessment of Change, and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Bone Marrow Transplant. Forty-four patients who had baseline QoL and at least 1 post-transplant assessment were included. The median age of the patients was 62.5 years (range, 35 to 74 years). At baseline, the mean MPN Total Symptom Score was 28.0, and at day 30, day 100, and 1 year, it was 25.4, 32.3, and 24.3, respectively. However, in myeloproliferative neoplasm-specific symptoms, such as itching, night sweats, bone pain, and fever, a statistically significant improvement was observed for at least 1 time point following transplant. At day 30, 10 (26.3%) patients reported a little/moderately/very much better overall QoL since their transplant, and 26 (68.45%) had a little/moderately/very much worse QoL. At day 100, 10 (30.3%) reported better QoL and 19 (57.6%) reported worsening since transplant. By 1 year, 16 (61.5%) reported feeling better. Our study shows that there is very little change in symptom burden at 1 year following transplant in general, but MF-specific symptoms showed improvement. By 1 year, 61% felt that their QoL was better than it was before transplant.

Improving Benefit-harm Assessment of Therapies from the Patient Perspective: OMERACT Premeeting Toward Consensus on Core Sets for Randomized Controlled Trials.

OBJECTIVE: Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) convened a premeeting in 2018 to bring together patients, regulators, researchers, clinicians, and consumers to build upon previous OMERACT drug safety work, with patients fully engaged throughout all phases. METHODS: Day 1 included a brief introduction to the history of OMERACT and methodology, and an overview of current efforts within and outside OMERACT to identify patient-reported medication safety concerns. On Day 2, two working groups presented results; after each, breakout groups were assembled to discuss findings. RESULTS: Five themes pertaining to drug safety measurement emerged. CONCLUSION: Current approaches have failed to include data from the patient's perspective. A better understanding of how individuals with rheumatic diseases view potential benefits and harms of therapies is essential.

Item nonresponse on the Myeloproliferative Neoplasms Symptom Assessment Form (MPN-SAF): a comparison of missing data strategies.

Administering questionnaires to patients is an efficient and effective method for assessing patients' symptoms. However, item nonresponse (skipped questions) potentially compromises the utility of these questionnaires. Using an international sample of 2,067 patients with myeloproliferative neoplasms, we evaluated the impact of item nonresponse on scoring of the Myeloproliferative Neoplasms Symptom Assessment Form Total Symptom Score (MPN-SAF TSS or MPN-10). We characterized item nonresponse on the MPN-10 and compared strategies for addressing item nonresponse (available-case analysis, proration, and multiple imputation) on the MPN-10 (multi-symptom assessment) and Brief Fatigue Inventory (BFI; single-symptom assessment). Characteristics of multi-symptom assessments would be expected to adversely affect proration, yet proration and multiple imputation provided very similar results for both the MPN-10 and BFI. This is likely because the MPN-10 item missing data rates were low, consistent with prior clinic- and internet-based studies. These results support the published scoring method for the MPN-10 (proration).

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.

Feasibility Assessment of Patient Reporting of Symptomatic Adverse Events in Multicenter Cancer Clinical Trials.

IMPORTANCE: In cancer clinical trials, symptomatic adverse events (AEs), such as nausea, are reported by investigators rather than by patients. There is increasing interest to collect symptomatic AE data via patient-reported outcome (PRO) questionnaires, but it is unclear whether it is feasible to implement this approach in multicenter trials. OBJECTIVE: To examine whether patients are willing and able to report their symptomatic AEs in multicenter trials. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A total of 361 consecutive patients enrolled in any 1 of 9 US multicenter cancer treatment trials were invited to self-report 13 common symptomatic AEs using a PRO adaptation of the National Cancer Institute's Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) via tablet computers at 5 successive clinic visits. Patient adherence was tracked with reasons for missed self-reports. Agreement with clinician AE reports was analyzed with weighted κ statistics. Patient and investigator perspectives were elicited by survey. The study was conducted from March 15, 2007, to August 11, 2011. Data analysis was performed from August 9, 2013, to March 21, 2014. RESULTS: Of the 361 patients invited to participate, 285 individuals enrolled, with a median age of 57 years (range, 24-88), 202 (74.3%) female, 241 (85.5%) white, 73 (26.8%) with a high school education or less, and 176 (64.7%) who reported regular internet use (denominators varied owing to missing data). Across all patients and trials, there were 1280 visits during which patients had an opportunity to self-report (ie, patients were alive and enrolled in a treatment trial at the time of the visit). Self-reports were completed at 1202 visits (93.9% overall adherence). Adherence was highest at baseline and declined over time (visit 1, 100%; visit 2, 96%; visit 3, 95%; visit 4, 91%; and visit 5, 85%). Reasons for missing PROs included institutional errors in 27 of 48 (56.3%) of the cases (eg, staff forgetting to bring computers to patients at visits), patients feeling "too ill" in 8 (16.7%), patient refusal in 8 (16.7%), and internet connectivity problems in 5 (10.4%). Patient-investigator CTCAE agreement was moderate or worse for most symptoms (most κ < 0.05), with investigators reporting fewer AEs than patients across symptoms. Most patients believed that the system was easy to use (234 [93.2%]) and useful (230 [93.1%]), and investigators thought that the patient-reported AEs were useful (133 [94.3%]) and accurate (119 [83.2%]). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Participants in multicenter cancer trials are willing and able to report their own symptomatic AEs at most clinic visits and report more AEs than investigators. This approach may improve the precision of AE reporting in cancer trials.

Myeloproliferative neoplasm patient symptom burden and quality of life: evidence of significant impairment compared to controls.

The myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN) including polycythaemia vera (PV), essential thrombocythaemia and primary myelofibrosis (PMF) are rare diseases contributing to significant morbidity. Symptom management is a prime treatment objective but current symptom assessment tools have not been validated compared to the general population. The MPN-symptom assessment form (MPN-SAF), a reliable and validated clinical tool to assess MPN symptom burden, was administered to MPN patients (n = 106) and, for the first time, population controls (n = 124) as part of a UK case-control study. Mean symptom scores were compared between patients and controls adjusting for potential confounders. Mean patient scores were compared to data collected by the Mayo Clinic, USA on 1,446 international MPN patients to determine patient group representativeness. MPN patients had significantly higher mean scores than controls for 25 of the 26 symptoms measured (P < 0.05); fatigue was the most common symptom (92.4% and 78.1%, respectively). Female MPN patients suffered worse symptom burden than male patients (P < 0.001) and substantially worse burden than female controls (P < 0.001). Compared to the Mayo clinic patients, MPN-UK patients reported similar symptom burden but lower satiety (P = 0.046). Patients with PMF reported the worst symptom burden (88.3%); significantly higher than PV patients (P < 0.001). For the first time we report quality of life was worse in MPN-UK patients compared with controls (P < 0.001).

Association of hospital participation in a surgical outcomes monitoring program with inpatient complications and mortality.

IMPORTANCE: Programs that analyze and report rates of surgical complications are an increasing focus of quality improvement efforts. The most comprehensive tool currently used for outcomes monitoring in the United States is the American College of Surgeons (ACS) National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP). OBJECTIVE: To compare surgical outcomes experienced by patients treated at hospitals that did vs did not participate in the NSQIP. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Data from the University HealthSystem Consortium from January 2009 to July 2013 were used to identify elective hospitalizations representing a broad spectrum of elective general/vascular operations in the United States. Data on hospital participation in the NSQIP were obtained through review of semiannual reports published by the ACS. Hospitalizations at any hospital that discontinued or initiated participation in the NSQIP during the study period were excluded after the date on which that hospital's status changed. A difference-in-differences approach was used to model the association between hospital-based participation in NSQIP and changes in rates of postoperative outcomes over time. EXPOSURE: Hospital participation in the NSQIP. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Risk-adjusted rates of any complications, serious complications, and mortality during a hospitalization for elective general/vascular surgery. RESULTS: The cohort included 345,357 hospitalizations occurring in 113 different academic hospitals; 172,882 (50.1%) hospitalizations were in NSQIP hospitals. Hospitalized patients were predominantly female (61.5%), with a mean age of 55.7 years. The types of procedures performed most commonly in the analyzed hospitalizations were hernia repairs (15.7%), bariatric (10.5%), mastectomy (9.7%), and cholecystectomy (9.0%). After accounting for patient risk, procedure type, underlying hospital performance, and temporal trends, the difference-in-differences model demonstrated no statistically significant differences over time between NSQIP and non-NSQIP hospitals in terms of likelihood of complications (adjusted odds ratio, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.97-1.03), serious complications (adjusted odds ratio, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.94-1.03), or mortality (adjusted odds ratio, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.94-1.14). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: No association was found between hospital-based participation in the NSQIP and improvements in postoperative outcomes over time within a large cohort of patients undergoing elective general/vascular operations at academic hospitals in the United States. These findings suggest that a surgical outcomes reporting system does not provide a clear mechanism for quality improvement.

Distinct clustering of symptomatic burden among myeloproliferative neoplasm patients: retrospective assessment in 1470 patients.

Symptom burden in myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs) is heterogeneous even among patients within the same MPN diagnosis. Using cluster analysis from prospectively gathered symptom burden data in 1470 international patients with essential thrombocythemia (ET), polycythemia vera (PV), or myelofibrosis (MF), we assessed for the presence of clusters and relationship to disease features and prognosis. In MF (4 clusters identified), clusters significantly differed by Dynamic International Prognostic Scoring System (DIPSS) risk (P < .001), leukopenia (P = .009), thrombocytopenia (P < .001), and spleen size (P = .02). Although an association existed between clusters and DIPSS risk, high symptom burden was noted in some low and intermediate-1-risk MF patients. In PV (5 clusters identified), total symptom score increased across clusters (P < .001), but clusters did not significantly differ by PV risk or the risk assessment variable of age. Among ET patients (5 clusters identified), clusters differed by gender (P = .04), anemia (P = .01), and prior hemorrhage (P = .047). Total symptom score increased across clusters (P < .001), but clusters did not significantly differ by International Prognostic Score for ET risk including the risk assessment variables. Significant symptom heterogeneity exists within each MPN subtype, sometimes independent of disease features or prognosis.

Immunohistochemistry and fluorescence in situ hybridization assessment of HER2 in clinical trials of adjuvant therapy for breast cancer (NCCTG N9831, BCIRG 006, and BCIRG 005).

A comprehensive, blinded, pathology evaluation of HER2 testing in HER2-positive/negative breast cancers was performed among three central laboratories. Immunohistochemistry (IHC) and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) analyses were performed on 389 tumor blocks from three large adjuvant trials: N9831, BCIRG-006, and BCIRG-005. In 123 cases, multiple blocks were examined. HER2 status was defined according to FDA-approved guidelines and was independently re-assessed at each site. Discordant cases were adjudicated at an on-site, face-to-face meeting. Results across three independent pathologists were concordant by IHC in 351/381 (92 %) and FISH in 343/373 (92 %) blocks. Upon adjudication, consensus was reached on 16/30 and 18/30 of discordant IHC and FISH cases, respectively, resulting in overall concordance rates of 96 and 97 %. Among 155 HER2-negative blocks, HER2 status was confirmed in 153 (99 %). In the subset of 102 HER2-positive patients from N9831/BCIRG-006, primary blocks from discordant cases were selected, especially those with discordant test between local and central laboratories. HER2 status was confirmed in 73 (72 %) of these cases. Among 118 and 113 cases with IHC and FISH results and >1 block evaluable, block-to-block variability/heterogeneity in HER2 results was seen in 10 and 5 %, respectively. IHC-/FISH- was confirmed for 57/59 (97 %) primary blocks from N9831 (locally positive, but centrally negative); however, 5/22 (23 %) secondary blocks showed HER2 positivity. Among 53 N9831 patients with HER2-normal disease adjudicated as IHC-/FISH-(although locally positive), there was a non-statistically significant improvement in disease-free survival with concurrent trastuzumab compared to chemotherapy alone (adjusted hazard ratio 0.34; 95 % CI, 0.11-1.05; p = 0.06). There were similar agreements for IHC and FISH among pathologists (92 % each). Agreement was improved at adjudication (96 %). HER2 tumor heterogeneity appears to partially explain discordant results in cases initially tested as positive and subsequently called negative.

Myeloproliferative neoplasm (MPN) symptom assessment form total symptom score: prospective international assessment of an abbreviated symptom burden scoring system among patients with MPNs.

PURPOSE: Myeloproliferative neoplasm (MPN) symptoms are troublesome to patients, and alleviation of this burden represents a paramount treatment objective in the development of MPN-directed therapies. We aimed to assess the utility of an abbreviated symptom score for the most pertinent and representative MPN symptoms for subsequent serial use in assessing response to therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The Myeloproliferative Neoplasm Symptom Assessment Form total symptom score (MPN-SAF TSS) was calculated as the mean score for 10 items from two previously validated scoring systems. Questions focus on fatigue, concentration, early satiety, inactivity, night sweats, itching, bone pain, abdominal discomfort, weight loss, and fevers. RESULTS: MPN-SAF TSS was calculable for 1,408 of 1,433 patients with MPNs who had a mean score of 21.2 (standard deviation [SD], 16.3). MPN-SAF TSS results significantly differed among MPN disease subtypes (P<.001), with a mean of 18.7 (SD, 15.3), 21.8 (SD, 16.3), and 25.3 (SD, 17.2) for patients with essential thrombocythemia, polycythemia vera, and myelofibrosis, respectively. The MPN-SAF TSS strongly correlated with overall quality of life (QOL; r=0.59; P<.001) and European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire C30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) functional scales (all P<.001 and absolute r≥0.50 except social functioning r=0.48). No significant trends were present when comparing therapy subgroups. The MPN-SAF TSS had excellent internal consistency (Cronbach's α=.83). Factor analysis identified a single underlying construct, indicating that the MPN-SAF TSS is an appropriate, unified scoring method. CONCLUSION: The MPN-SAF TSS is a concise, valid, and accurate assessment of MPN symptom burden with demonstrated clinical utility in the largest prospective MPN symptom study to date. This new prospective scoring method may be used to assess MPN symptom burden in both clinical practice and trial settings.

The Myeloproliferative Neoplasm Symptom Assessment Form (MPN-SAF): international prospective validation and reliability trial in 402 patients.

Symptomatic burden in myeloproliferative neoplasms is present in most patients and compromises quality of life. We sought to validate a broadly applicable 18-item instrument (Myeloproliferative Neoplasm Symptom Assessment Form [MPN-SAF], coadministered with the Brief Fatigue Inventory) to assess symptoms of myelofibrosis, essential thrombocythemia, and polycythemia vera among prospective cohorts in the United States, Sweden, and Italy. A total of 402 MPN-SAF surveys were administered (English [25%], Italian [46%], and Swedish [28%]) in 161 patients with essential thrombocythemia, 145 patients with polycythemia vera, and 96 patients with myelofibrosis. Responses among the 3 administered languages showed great consistency after controlling for MPN subtype. Strong correlations existed between individual items and key symptomatic elements represented on both the MPN-SAF and the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-C30. Enrolling physicians' blinded opinion of patient symptoms (6 symptoms assessed) were highly correlated with corresponding patients' responses. Serial administration of the English MPN-SAF among 53 patients showed that most MPN-SAF items are well correlated (r > 0.5, P < .001) and highly reproducible (intraclass correlation coefficient > 0.7). The MPN-SAF is a comprehensive and reliable instrument that is available in multiple languages to evaluate symptoms associated with all types of MPNs in clinical trials globally.