Incidence and Risk Factors for Pneumonitis Associated With Checkpoint Inhibitors in Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Single Center Experience.

INTRODUCTION: Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) pneumonitis causes substantial morbidity and mortality. Estimates of real-world incidence and reported risk factors vary substantially. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of 419 patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who were treated with anti-PD-(L)1 with or without anti-CTLA-4 therapy. Clinical, imaging, and microbiological data were evaluated by multidisciplinary adjudication teams. The primary outcome of interest was grade ≥2 (CTCAEv5) pneumonitis. Clinicopathologic variables, tobacco use, cancer therapies, and preexisting lung disease were assessed for univariate effects using Cox proportional hazards models. We created multivariate Cox proportional hazards models to assess risk factors for pneumonitis and mortality. Pneumonitis, pneumonia, and progression were modeled as time-dependent variables in mortality models. RESULTS: We evaluated 419 patients between 2013 and 2021. The cumulative incidence of pneumonitis was 9.5% (40/419). In a multivariate model, pneumonitis increased the risk for mortality (HR 1.6, 95% CI, 1.0-2.5), after adjustment for disease progression (HR 1.6, 95% CI, 1.4-1.8) and baseline shortness of breath (HR 1.5, 95% CI, 1.2-2.0). Incomplete resolution was more common with more severe pneumonitis. Interstitial lung disease was associated with higher risk for pneumonitis (HR 5.4, 95% CI, 1.1-26.6), particularly in never smokers (HR 26.9, 95% CI, 2.8-259.0). CONCLUSION: Pneumonitis occurred at a high rate and significantly increased mortality. Interstitial lung disease, particularly in never smokers, increased the risk for pneumonitis.

Should We Use COMM (Current Opioid Misuse Measure) to Screen for Opioid Abuse in Patients With Cancer Pain?

BACKGROUND: Growing concerns about opioid use disorder (OUD) and the resulting decrease in opioid availability for patients with cancer pain highlight the need for reliable screening tools to identify the subset of patients at increased risk for aberrant opioid use. Our study examines the utility of Current Opioid Misuse Measure (COMM) recommended by the NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology for Adult Cancer Pain. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We analyzed prospectively collected patient-reported outcomes of 444 consecutive patients with cancer seen in pain clinics of a cancer center at 2 time points within 100 days. The relationship of COMM to other OUD screening tools, pain, opioid doses, patient demographics, and mortality was examined using univariate and multivariable logistic regression. We also examined individual items of COMM for face validity. RESULTS: Among 444 patients who completed pain surveys at 2 time points, 157 (35.4%) did not complete COMM surveys. Using a COMM cutoff of ≥13, a total of 84 patients (29.3%; 84/287) scored positive for aberrant drug use. As patients remained on opioids for 49 to 100 days, the likelihood of improving COMM score (turning from positive to negative) was 6.1 times greater than the reverse. The number of patients with COMM ≥13 was 3.8 times higher than the number of patients with CPT diagnostic codes for OUD, 5.3 times higher than those with a positive urine drug screening, and 21 times higher than those with a positive CAGE (Cut Down, Annoyed, Guilty, Eye-Opener Questionnaire) score. COMM ≥13 was not associated with pain relief response (worst pain intensity score ≥2 points on the Brief Pain Inventory), opioid doses, gender, or age. Contrary to the intended use of COMM to identify aberrant opioid use, COMM ≥13 predicted mortality: patients with COMM ≥13 were 1.9 times more likely to die within 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: Our study found that using COMM in a cancer population may significantly overestimate the risk of opioid misuse. Using COMM without modifications can create an additional barrier to cancer pain management, such as limiting appropriate opioid use.

Pneumonitis after immune checkpoint inhibitor therapies in patients with acute myeloid leukemia: A retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI), combined with hypomethylating agents, can be used to treat acute myeloid leukemia (AML), but this strategy results in a high rate of pneumonitis. The authors sought to determine risk factors for pneumonitis development and whether pneumonitis increased mortality. METHODS: The authors conducted a retrospective review of 258 AML patients who received ICI-containing regimens from 2016 to 2018. A multidisciplinary adjudication committee diagnosed pneumonia and pneumonitis by reviewing symptoms, imaging, microbiology, and response to therapies. To measure risk factors for pneumonitis and mortality, multivariate Cox proportional hazards models were constructed. Pneumonia, pneumonitis, and disease progression were modeled as a time-dependent variable and incorporated a standard risk set modifying variables into the models. RESULTS: Thirty patients developed pneumonitis (12%). Of these, 17 had partial or complete resolution, whereas 13 patients died from pneumonitis. Increasing age (hazard ratio [HR], 1.04 per year; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.00-1.08), and baseline shortness of breath increased pneumonitis risk (HR, 2.51; 95% CI, 1.13-5.55). Female sex (HR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.15-0.70) and increasing platelet count (HR, 0.52 per log-unit increase; 95% CI, 0.30-0.92) decreased pneumonitis risk. In adjusted models, ICI-related pneumonitis significantly increased mortality (HR, 2.84; 95% CI, 1.84-4.37). CONCLUSIONS: ICI-related pneumonitis occurs at a high rate in AML patients and increases mortality. LAY SUMMARY: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) remove inhibitory signals that reduce T-cell function and allow T-cells to better attack cancer cells. In acute myeloid leukemia (AML), the effectiveness of ICIs is limited in part by inflammation of the lung, called pneumonitis. This study reviewed 258 patients with AML who received ICIs and identified 30 patients who developed pneumonitis, nearly half of whom died. Older age and baseline shortness of breath increased pneumonitis risk, whereas female sex and higher baseline platelet counts decreased pneumonitis risk. Pneumonitis increased mortality by nearly 3-fold. This work highlights the significant harm imposed by pneumonitis after ICI therapies.

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.

Effects of glutamine for prevention of radiation-induced esophagitis: a double-blind placebo-controlled trial.

Purpose Acute radiation-induced esophagitis (ARIE) leads to treatment delays, decreased quality of life (QOL), and secondary adverse events such as weight loss. Grade 3 ARIE occurs in 15%-30% of patients undergoing radiotherapy to the esophagus, leading to disruption or discontinuation of treatment. The purpose of this study was to assess the effects of glutamine, a common nutritional supplement, on ARIE in patients with thoracic malignancies. Patients and methods This double-blind, placebo-controlled trial enrolled patients with advanced thoracic malignancies receiving concurrent chemotherapy/radiotherapy or radiotherapy alone, with radiation doses to the esophagus ≥45 Gy. Patients were randomized (1:1) to receive 4 g of glutamine or glycine placebo twice daily. The primary objective was to determine whether glutamine decreases the severity of ARIE in these patients. Secondary objectives included assessment of the effects of glutamine on other measures of ARIE, weight, symptom burden measure assessed by the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory (MDASI-HN) questionnaire and the toxicity profile of glutamine. Results At the time of interim analysis, 53 patients were enrolled: 27 in the glutamine arm and 26 in the placebo arm. There was no difference in the incidence of esophagitis in the first 6 weeks of radiotherapy between the glutamine and placebo arms (74% versus 68%; P = 1.00). There were no significant differences between the two arms for time to onset of esophagitis. The duration of ARIE was shorter (6.3 versus 7.1 weeks; P = 0.54) and median weight loss was lower (0.9 kg versus 2.8 kg; p = 0.83) in the glutamine arm versus the placebo arm. The groups differ significantly in core symptom severity (2.1 vs 1.5, p < .03) but not in head and neck specific symptom severity (1.2 vs 1.1, p < .60) nor in symptom interference (2.1 vs 1.7, p < .22). There was no grade 3 or higher adverse event at least possibly related to glutamine. The study was terminated for futility following interim analysis. Conclusion Oral glutamine was not associated with significant improvement in severity of ARIE, weight loss, head and neck specific symptoms or symptom interference compared with placebo in patients with advanced thoracic malignancies receiving radiotherapy to the esophagus.Clinical trial information. NCT01952847, and date of registration is September 30, 2013.

Minocycline for symptom reduction in patients with multiple myeloma during maintenance therapy: a phase II placebo-controlled randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients with multiple myeloma (MM) experience substantial cancer/treatment-related symptom burden during maintenance therapy. This is a phase II randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled clinical trial to examine the effect of minocycline for symptom reduction by its potential anti-inflammatory effect. METHODS: Eligible MM patients for maintenance therapy were randomized to receive minocycline (100 mg twice daily) or placebo. The MD Anderson Symptom Inventory for MM (MDASI-MM) was used to assess multiple symptoms weekly during the trial. Clinician-rated toxicities and blood samples were prospectively collected. The effect size, area under the curve (AUC), and t tests were used to determine the symptom burden between treatment groups and identify the 5 most-severe MDASI-MM symptoms. The longitudinal analysis compared the changes in symptom severity and associated inflammatory markers between groups over time. RESULTS: Sixty-nine evaluable MM patients (33 from the intervention group and 36 from the placebo group) were included. No grade 3+ adverse events related to study medication were noted. The AUCs for the 5 worst MDASI-MM symptoms (fatigue, pain, disturbed sleep numbness/tingling, and drowsiness) were not significantly different between two arms. Regardless of group assignment, pain reduction was positively associated with decreased serum levels of soluble tumor necrosis factor-α receptors 1 and 2 during therapy (all P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: This pPhase II randomized study observed no statistically significant positive signal impact from minocycline on symptom reduction or inflammatory markers during maintenance therapy for MM, although using minocycline was feasible and had a low toxicity profile.

Composite grading algorithm for the National Cancer Institute's Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE).

BACKGROUND: The Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events is an item library designed for eliciting patient-reported adverse events in oncology. For each adverse event, up to three individual items are scored for frequency, severity, and interference with daily activities. To align the Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events with other standardized tools for adverse event assessment including the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, an algorithm for mapping individual items for any given adverse event to a single composite numerical grade was developed and tested. METHODS: A five-step process was used: (1) All 179 possible Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events score combinations were presented to 20 clinical investigators to subjectively map combinations to single numerical grades ranging from 0 to 3. (2) Combinations with <75% agreement were presented to investigator committees at a National Clinical Trials Network cooperative group meeting to gain majority consensus via anonymous voting. (3) The resulting algorithm was refined via graphical and tabular approaches to assure directional consistency. (4) Validity, reliability, and sensitivity were assessed in a national study dataset. (5) Accuracy for delineating adverse events between study arms was measured in two Phase III clinical trials (NCT02066181 and NCT01522443). RESULTS: In Step 1, 12/179 score combinations had <75% initial agreement. In Step 2, majority consensus was reached for all combinations. In Step 3, five grades were adjusted to assure directional consistency. In Steps 4 and 5, composite grades performed well and comparably to individual item scores on validity, reliability, sensitivity, and between-arm delineation. CONCLUSION: A composite grading algorithm has been developed and yields single numerical grades for adverse events assessed via the Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, and can be useful in analyses and reporting.

Factors affecting symptom presentation in an early-phase clinical trials clinic patient population.

Increasing numbers of oncology therapies are being approved based on early-phase single-arm studies. Yet, little is known regarding the use of patient-reported outcomes in single-arm oncology trials testing novel therapies. We examined patient-reported symptom severity and symptom interference with activity- (WAW: work, general activity, walking) and mood-(REM: relations with others, enjoyment of life, mood) related functioning, and their association with factors known to influence symptom severity reporting, in early-phase clinical trials clinic patients. Patients completed the validated MD Anderson Symptom Inventory, containing 13 severity items and six interference items, each rated on a 0-10 scale (higher scores = worse symptom severity/interference). Performance status (ECOG-PS) and age were ascertained. Multiple linear regression was performed. In 248 phase I patients (51% female, 90% ECOG 0-1, and 74% ≤65 years), 67% of patients had ≥seven concurrent symptoms of any severity level, and 51% of patients described ≥three concurrent symptoms as moderate-to-severe (severity rating ≥ 5). Composite symptom severity, WAW and REM were worse in patients with ECOG-PS ≥ 2 vs. 0-1, and worse in patients with ECOG-PS = 1 than in patients with ECOG-PS = 0. Compared with patients over 65y, adolescent and young adult (AYA) patients (18y-39y) and patients aged 40y to 65y had worse composite symptom severity. As expected, being employed full-time/retired was associated with better symptom profiles in phaseI patients. The variation of symptom burden by performance status and age suggest that these factors need to be considered in the design of early-phase trials, particularly if patient-reported symptoms are used as primary/secondary/exploratory endpoints.

Validation study of the Japanese version of MD Anderson Symptom Inventory for Brain Tumor module.

OBJECTIVE: The MD Anderson Symptom Inventory for Brain Tumor (MDASI-BT) module is a widely used instrument for measuring symptom burden and interference of daily activities in brain tumor patients. This study aims to develop and validate its Japanese version (MDASI-BT-Japanese). METHODS: Following forward and backward translation of the original MDASI-BT into Japanese, understandability and feasibility were assessed by cognitive debriefing. Subsequently, patients with brain tumors were asked to fill out MDASI-BT-Japanese and European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D). Feasibility, reliability and validity of MDASI-BT-Japanese were assessed. RESULTS: Cognitive debriefing confirmed overall ease of completion and good understandability. The study population composed of 140 patients with brain tumors (most commonly gliomas). The mean symptom severity score and mean interference score were 1.9 ± 1.7 and 2.8 ± 2.7, respectively. The top items included distress and drowsiness for symptom severity and general activity and work for interference. The median time required was 4 minutes (range, 0.5-30), and missing values were seen in 1%. Internal consistency was proven by excellent Cronbach's coefficient alpha (0.94 for symptom severity, 0.92 for interference). Test-retest reliability was assessed with acceptable intra-class correlation coefficient (mean, 0.76). Correlation efficient ranged between 0.7 and 0.9 for convergent validity. Known-group validity was confirmed by significantly different mean symptom severity score and mean interference score among patients with different performance status. As evidence of concurrent validity, MDASI-BT-Japanese correlated with EQ-5D in the hypothesized magnitude and direction. CONCLUSIONS: The newly developed MDASI-BT-Japanese has demonstrated feasibility, reliability and validity in evaluation of clinical benefit in Japanese-speaking brain tumor patients.

Minocycline for symptom reduction during radiation therapy for head and neck cancer: a randomized clinical trial.

PURPOSE: Local/systemic symptoms during cancer therapy may be exacerbated by dysregulated inflammation and its downstream toxic effects. Minocycline can suppress proinflammatory cytokine release; therefore, we investigated its potential to reduce patient-reported symptom severity during radiotherapy (RT) for head and neck cancer (HNC). METHODS: Eligible patients for this blinded, placebo-controlled trial were adults with T0-3, N-any, and M0 HNC receiving single-modality RT. Participants were randomized 1:1 to either minocycline (200 mg/day) or placebo during RT. The primary endpoint was the area under the curve (AUC) of 5 prespecified symptoms (pain, fatigue, disturbed sleep, poor appetite, difficulty swallowing/chewing) during RT, assessed with the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory for HNC (MDASI-HN). RESULTS: We analyzed data from 20 evaluable patients per arm. Overall, 75% had oropharyngeal cancer and 78% were male. No grade 3+ adverse events potentially related to study medication were observed. Two minocycline patients required a feeding tube during RT vs 5 placebo patients (P = 0.21). The average daily AUC during RT for the 5 MDASI-HN symptoms was 3.1 (SD = 1.0) for minocycline and 3.7 (SD = 1.7) for placebo (P = 0.16); the 0.37 effect size was less than our 0.70 target. AUC comparisons for several individual symptoms and symptom interference favored minocycline but were not statistically significant. The greatest numerical differences occurred for systemic symptoms, larger toward treatment end, and in early post-RT recovery. CONCLUSIONS: Minocycline was feasible, well tolerated, and achieved a positive signal toward reducing patient-reported symptom severity during RT for HNC, particularly for systemic symptoms. This justifies additional study and informs future trial design.

New Developments in the Use of Patient-Reported Outcomes in Cancer Patients Undergoing Immunotherapies.

In a previous chapter, how best to measure symptoms was discussed, the desirable properties of a psychometrically valid symptom assessment tool were listed, available symptom assessment tools were reviewed, methods to assist in the interpretation of patient-reported outcomes (PRO) data were provided, and the current use of PROs in immunotherapy was described. Two areas for further research were also identified. These two areas were (1) deciding on the frequency of administration of symptom assessment and (2) determining the adequacy of the chosen symptom list to cover both known and unknown effects of immunotherapy. This brief update provides new developments on these two critical issues that are of significant concerns to researchers and clinicians who are investigating the use of immunotherapies either singly or in combination in cancer patients.

Interpreting Patient-reported Outcome Scores for Clinical Research and Practice: Definition, Determination, and Application of Cutpoints.

OBJECTIVES: Cutpoints are specific numeric values used to create discrete categories for patient-reported outcome (PRO) items or scales. Cutpoints are widely used in both clinical research and practice. This article offers a definition for cutpoints, describes strategies for determining actionable cutpoints, and discusses considerations related to interpreting cutpoints in clinical applications. METHODS: We clarify the definition of cutpoints for PRO measures and summarize the major statistical approaches for identifying cutpoints, including multivariate analysis of variance and receiver operating characteristic and regression modeling. DISCUSSION: We review issues related to cutpoint determination and interpretation that should be considered when integrating PROs into clinical research and practice, including the selection of anchors, variability of cutpoints, and clinical burden that may be generated when a cutpoint is used as a threshold for further clinical action. KEY POINTS: Cutpoints are widely used to categorize PRO responses in both clinical research and practice. Cutpoints can be derived for PRO measures regardless of the response scale used; however, the mild, moderate, and severe categories generated from numeric cutpoints are distinct from the mild, moderate, and severe categories found in some PRO measures that use verbal descriptors as response options. Bootstrap analysis is recommended to quantify the variability of cutpoints. The application of cutpoints is limited by how well the anchors are chosen and how cutpoints developed using group-level data are applied at the individual level.

Concept domain validation and item generation for the Treatment-Induced Neuropathy Assessment Scale (TNAS).

PURPOSE: Treatment-induced peripheral neuropathy (TIPN) is a difficult problem experienced by patients with cancer that can interfere with their ability to receive optimal therapy. The Treatment-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy Scale (TNAS) is a patient-reported outcome (PRO) measure developed to assess TIPN symptom burden. However, PRO validation is an ongoing process. The aim of this qualitative study was to define the conceptual model, establish content domain validity, and refine items for the TNAS based on patient input. METHODS: Patients who received bortezomib, oxaliplatin, or platinum-taxane combination therapy reported their experience of TIPN in single qualitative audiotaped interviews. Themes of the TIPN experience were identified by descriptive analysis of the transcribed interviews. RESULTS: Three groups of 10 patients each who had received bortezomib, oxaliplatin, or platinum-taxane combination therapy, for a total of 30 patients, reported their experiences. Two themes reported by patients were TIPN sensations and functional interference. Five sensations (numbness, tingling, pain, heat or burning, and coldness) and five functional impacts (using hands, walking, maintaining balance or falling, wearing shoes, and sleeping) were reported by at least 20% of patients and were selected for inclusion in the TNAS v3.0 for additional psychometric testing. CONCLUSIONS: The assessment of TIPN must be convenient, reliable, and practical for patients, who are the most reliable source of information about symptoms. The TNAS, developed with direct patient input, provides an easily administered and conceptually valid method of patient report of TIPN burden for use in research and practice.

Assessment of baseline symptom burden in treatment-naïve patients with lung cancer: an observational study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with newly diagnosed lung cancer who have not yet begun treatment may already be experiencing major symptoms produced by their disease. Understanding the symptomatic effects of cancer treatment requires knowledge of pretreatment symptoms (both severity and interference with daily activities). We assessed pretreatment symptom severity, interference, and quality of life (QOL) in treatment-naïve patients with lung cancer and report factors that correlated with symptom severity. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of data collected at initial intake. Symptoms/interference were rated on the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory (MDASI) between 30 days prediagnosis and 45 days postdiagnosis. We examined symptom severity by disease stage and differences in severity by histology. Linear regression analyses identified significant predictors of severe pain and dyspnea. RESULTS: Of 460 eligible patients, 256 (62%) had adenocarcinoma, 30 (7%) had small cell carcinoma, and 100 (24%) had squamous cell carcinoma; > 30% reported moderate-to-severe (rated ≥ 5, 0-10 scale) pretreatment symptoms. The most-severe were fatigue, disturbed sleep, distress, pain, dyspnea, sadness, and drowsiness. Symptoms affected work, enjoyment of life, and general activity (interference) and physical well-being (QOL) the most. Patients with advanced disease (n = 289, 63%) had more-severe symptoms. Cancer stage was associated with pain severity; both histology and cancer stage were associated with severe dyspnea. CONCLUSION: One third of lung cancer patients were symptomatic at initial presentation. Quantification of pretreatment symptom burden can inform patient-specific palliative therapy and differentiate disease-related symptoms from treatment-related toxicities. Poorly controlled symptoms could negatively affect treatment adherence and therapeutic outcomes.

The Utility and Validity of the Alopecia Areata Symptom Impact Scale in Measuring Disease-Related Symptoms and their Effect on Functioning.

Alopecia areata (AA) is an autoimmune disease that causes hair loss. Although persons with the disease can be physically described as having varying degrees of hair loss, the condition has significant ramifications on an individual's well-being. We previously reported the preliminary psychometric properties of the Alopecia Areata Symptom Impact Scale (AASIS), a disease-specific measure that asks participants about their AA symptoms and how these symptoms interfere with their daily functioning. The goals of this article are to provide a detailed description of the development of the AASIS items and to offer a psychometric update for the measure. Preliminary items for the AASIS were developed on the basis of responses from 1,649 participants to 125 health-related quality-of-life questions/items from the National Alopecia Areata Registry. Clinicians affiliated with the registry were asked to rate the relevance of these items for content validity. Cluster analysis and clinician ratings were used to reduce the number of items. The resulting 13-item AASIS was administered to 452 participants, who were also cognitively debriefed. Results showed that the AASIS is a valid and reliable measure of AA symptoms and their impact on functioning.

Modification of existing patient-reported outcome measures: qualitative development of the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory for malignant pleural mesothelioma (MDASI-MPM).

PURPOSE: Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is an aggressive cancer of the lung pleura. The MD Anderson Symptom Inventory (MDASI) is a patient-reported outcome (PRO) measure of symptom burden, the combined impact of disease-related and treatment-related symptoms on functioning. Validated PRO measures may require modification for use in specific study populations. We sought to modify the MDASI for patients with MPM and create a fit-for-purpose symptom-burden measure for use in a clinical trial, according to US Food and Drug Administration guidance on PRO utilization to support labeling claims. METHODS: A literature review for MPM symptoms was conducted. Patients with MPM were qualitatively interviewed about experiences of disease and treatment. Descriptive analysis identified symptoms and interference with functioning to define MPM-related symptom burden. An expert panel rated the relevance of identified symptoms to patients with MPM. Patients who received the investigational drug in a previous Phase I study were interviewed for drug-specific symptoms. RESULTS: Literature review and interviews of 20 patients identified 31 MPM-related symptoms. A conceptual model of MPM-related symptom burden was developed. After expert-panel relevance review, five MPM-specific items and the 13 core MDASI symptoms met criteria for inclusion in a provisional MDASI-MPM for psychometric testing. Interviews with six patients identified six drug-specific symptoms; three were mentioned by multiple patients. Of these three, one was not in the core MDASI. CONCLUSIONS: The MDASI-MPM has established content validity and, with the addition of one symptom item, is ready for psychometric testing as fit-for-purpose for a clinical trial of an investigational agent.

Symptoms as Patient-Reported Outcomes in Cancer Patients Undergoing Immunotherapies.

Cancer therapies are toxic. Newer oncological treatments such as immunotherapy produce unconventional adverse events that are collectively referred to as immune-related adverse events (irAEs). These irAEs are clinician-rated and typically reported via tabulation of adverse events from the National Cancer Institute's Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE). However, the symptomatic effects of treatment and the severity of disease are best reported by the patient themselves. Although many pivotal trials for immunotherapeutic agents include health-related quality-of-life measures, symptom-focused assessments are more proximal to the effects of treatment and disease burden. This chapter discusses how best to measure symptoms, describes the desirable properties of a psychometrically valid symptom assessment tool, reviews available symptom assessment tools, provides methods to assist in the interpretation of PRO data, elucidates the feasibility and benefit of incorporating PRO in several cancer cohorts, describes the current use of PROs in immunotherapy, and identifies areas where further research are needed to enhance the use of PROs in cancer patients undergoing immunotherapy.

Evaluation of different recall periods for the US National Cancer Institute's PRO-CTCAE.

AIMS: The US National Cancer Institute recently developed the PRO-CTCAE (Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events). PRO-CTCAE is a library of questions for clinical trial participants to self-report symptomatic adverse events (e.g. nausea). The objective of this study is to inform evidence-based selection of a recall period when PRO-CTCAE is included in a trial. We evaluated differences between 1-, 2-, 3-, and 4-week recall periods, using daily reporting as the reference. METHODS: English-speaking patients with cancer receiving chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy were enrolled at four US cancer centers and affiliated community clinics. Participants completed 27 PRO-CTCAE items electronically daily for 28 days, and then weekly over 4 weeks, using 1-, 2-, 3-, and 4-week recall periods. For each recall period, mean differences, effect sizes, and intraclass correlation coefficients were calculated to evaluate agreement between the maximum of daily ratings and the corresponding ratings obtained using longer recall periods (e.g. maximum of daily scores over 7 days vs 1-week recall). Analyses were repeated using the average of daily scores within each recall period rather than the maximum of daily scores. RESULTS: A total of 127 subjects completed questionnaires (57% male; median age: 57). The median of the 27 mean differences in scores on the PRO-CTCAE 5-point response scale comparing the maximum daily versus the longer recall period (and corresponding effect size) was -0.20 (-0.20) for 1-week recall, -0.36 (-0.31) for 2-week recall, -0.45 (-0.39) for 3-week recall, and -0.47 (-0.40) for 4-week recall. The median intraclass correlation across 27 items between the maximum of daily ratings and the corresponding longer recall ratings for 1-week recall was 0.70 (range: 0.54-0.82), for 2-week recall was 0.74 (range: 0.58-0.83), for 3-week recall was 0.72 (range: 0.61-0.84), and for 4-week recall was 0.72 (range: 0.64-0.86). Similar results were observed for all analyses using the average of daily scores rather than the maximum of daily scores. CONCLUSION: A 1-week recall corresponds best to daily reporting. Although intraclass correlations remain stable over time, there are small but progressively larger differences between daily and longer recall periods at 2, 3, and 4 weeks, respectively. The preferred recall period for the PRO-CTCAE is the past 7 days, although investigators may opt for recall periods of 2, 3, or 4 weeks with an understanding that there may be some information loss.

Higher Stem Cell Dose Infusion after Intensive Chemotherapy Does Not Improve Symptom Burden in Older Patients with Multiple Myeloma and Amyloidosis.

Autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (ASCT) for multiple myeloma (MM) is associated with high symptom burden, particularly for older patients and those with amyloid light-chain (AL) amyloidosis. Symptom burden peaks during leukopenia. We hypothesized that higher doses of CD34(+) stem cells would be associated with an improved symptom outcome. Patients undergoing ASCT for MM who were ≥60 years old or had AL amyloidosis were randomized to receive either a standard (4 to 6 × 10(6) cells/kg) or high dose (10 to 15 × 10(6) cells/kg) of CD34(+) cells after melphalan 200 mg/m(2). Symptom burden was assessed via the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory MM module. Eighty patients were enrolled. Median CD34(+) cell doses were 5.1 × 10(6) cells/kg (standard dose) and 10.5 × 10(6) cells/kg (high dose). The most severe symptoms during the first week were fatigue, lack of appetite, drowsiness, disturbed sleep, and pain. The area under the curve for the mean composite severity score of these symptoms was similar between treatment arms (P = .819). Median times to neutrophil, lymphocyte, and platelet engraftment were also similar between groups. IL-6 increased similarly for both groups throughout the ASCT course. Infusion of higher autologous stem cell dose after high-dose chemotherapy does not yield a difference in symptom burden or engraftment time in the first few weeks after ASCT.

Sleep quality and its association with fatigue, symptom burden, and mood in patients with advanced cancer in a clinic for early-phase oncology clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Limited data exist about sleep quality for patients with advanced cancer in phase 1 clinical trials. Poor sleep quality is often not captured as an adverse event, and its association with fatigue, one of the most frequently reported adverse events, is not documented routinely. This article describes sleep quality and its relation with fatigue, symptom burden, and mood in patients recruited from an early-phase clinic for targeted therapy. METHODS: Sleep, fatigue, symptom burden, and mood were assessed with the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), the Brief Fatigue Inventory, the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory (MDASI), and the Brief Profile of Mood States, respectively; the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) was determined from medical records. RESULTS: The sample (n = 256) was 51.2% female, 90% had an ECOG PS of 0 or 1, and the mean age was 58 ± 0.8 years. Poor sleepers (global PSQI score > 5) constituted 64% of the sample. In separate multiple regression models, poor sleepers had higher levels of fatigue (P < .001), symptom burden (P < .001), and overall mood disturbance (P < .001) than good sleepers. Also, compared with good sleepers, poor sleepers had greater fatigue-related and symptom-related interference with daily activities (all P values < .001). The MDASI disturbed-sleep item correlated well with the global PSQI score (Pearson's r = 0.679, P < .001), and this suggests its usefulness as a patient-reported outcome screener of sleep quality in early-phase clinical trials clinics. CONCLUSIONS: Poor sleep quality was a significant problem in the current study and was associated with greater fatigue, symptom burden, and mood disturbance. Sleep quality should be routinely assessed in patients with advanced cancer who are participating in early-phase clinical trials. Cancer 2016;122:3401-3409. © 2016 American Cancer Society.