Estimating global treatment toxicity burden from adverse-event data.

BACKGROUND: A summary measure that reflects the global toxicity burden of a treatment is essential for comparing therapies. Current toxicity summaries are ad hoc and do not distinguish among the severities and types of toxicities. Here a clinically feasible method for estimating the toxicity burden, based on a prospective evaluation of the toxicity profile of a randomized clinical trial of 746 prostate cancer patients conducted by SWOG, is proposed. METHODS: For 308 patients who experienced severe toxicities, 2 physicians randomly selected from 14 physicians evaluated each toxicity profile and assigned a visual analogue scale score (0-10) based on their impression of the global burden of toxicities. With mixed-effects models, severity scores and a 10-point toxicity burden score (TBS) were derived from 27 predictors accounting for severe (grade 3) and life-threatening (grade 4) toxicities for each organ class of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events. RESULTS: For most organ classes, grade 3 toxicities had a TBS of 4.14 (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.65-4.63), but infections, cardiovascular events, and pulmonary events had a higher TBS with differences of 0.87 (95% CI, 0.53-1.21), 0.88 (95% CI, 0.51-1.25), and 0.73 (95% CI, 0.22-1.24), respectively. Moreover, most grade 4 events had a higher TBS than grade 3 events, except for hemorrhaging, pain, metabolic events, and musculoskeletal events. The intrarater and interrater correlations were 0.91 and 0.59, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The burden of toxicity grades differs with toxicity types. A TBS provides a toxicity burden summary that incorporates physicians' perspectives and differentiates between severe and life-threatening toxicities and organ classes. Cancer 2018;124:858-64. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Protocol of a feasibility study of a virtual personalized (N-of-1) trial for increasing low-intensity physical activity in older adults via habit formation.

Background: Personalized interventions that can be delivered remotely are needed to increase physical activity (PA) in older adults to reduce risk of CV disease and mortality. Prior research indicates that Behavioral Change Techniques (BCTs) (e.g., goal setting, self-monitoring, behavioral repetition) can instill a habit for increasing daily walking. However, past interventions relied on between-subject randomized clinical trials, which can only only be informative about response of the hypothetical average person. Personalized trial designs can identify the benefits of an intervention for a specific individual although extended periods are required for collecting frequent measurements within-subject. Advances in remote, virtual technologies (e.g., text messaging, activity trackers), integrated with automatic platforms, can meet these requirements because they capacitate delivery of BCT interventions, and collection of data during daily life without personal contact. This Stage I-b trial is designed test whether a virtual, personalized intervention is feasible and acceptable to older adults, can elicit participant adherence and exhibit preliminary evidence for efficacy. Methods: A series of up to 60 single-arm, personalized trials, involving no personal contact, will recruit adults, 45-75 years of age, to wear an activity tracker during a 2-week baseline and a 10-week intervention. Five BCT prompts to execute a walking plan will be delivered on a daily basis during the intervention phase. Participants will rate satisfaction with personalized trial components and whether automaticity of the walking plan can be achieved. Step-counts, adherence to the walking plan and self-monitoring of step-count will also be recorded.

Feasibility Test of Personalized (N-of-1) Trials for Increasing Middle-Aged and Older Adults' Physical Activity.

Purpose: To test the feasibility of a remotely-delivered intervention to increase low-intensity physical activity (walking) in middle-aged and older adults. Design: This study used a Personalized (N-of-1) trial design. Setting: This study took place at a major healthcare system from November 2021 to February 2022. Subjects: Sixty adults (45-75 years, 92% female, 80% white) were recruited. Intervention: A 10-week study comprising a 2-week baseline, followed by four 2-week periods where 4 Behavior Change Techniques (BCTs) - self-monitoring, goal setting, action planning and feedback - were delivered one at a time in random order. Measures: Activity was measured by a Fitbit, and intervention components delivered by email/text. Average daily steps were compared between baseline and intervention. Participants completed satisfaction items derived from the System Usability Scale and reported attitudes and opinions about personalized trials. Results: Participants rated personalized trial components as feasible and acceptable. Changes in steps between baseline and intervention were not significant, but a large heterogeneity of treatment effects existed, suggesting some participants significantly increased walking while others significantly decreased. Conclusions: Our intervention was well-accepted but use of BCTs delivered individually did not result in a significant increase in steps. Feasibility and heterogeneity of treatment effects support adopting a personalized trial approach to optimize intervention results.

Case Example of Dose Optimization Using Data From Bortezomib Dose-Finding Clinical Trials.

PURPOSE: The current dose-finding methodology for estimating the maximum tolerated dose of investigational anticancer agents is based on the cytotoxic chemotherapy paradigm. Molecularly targeted agents (MTAs) have different toxicity profiles, which may lead to more long-lasting mild or moderate toxicities as well as to late-onset and cumulative toxicities. Several approved MTAs have been poorly tolerated during long-term administration, leading to postmarketing dose optimization studies to re-evaluate the optimal treatment dose. Using data from completed bortezomib dose-finding trials, we explore its toxicity profile, optimize its dose, and examine the appropriateness of current designs for identifying an optimal dose. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We classified the toxicities captured from 481 patients in 14 bortezomib dose-finding studies conducted through the National Cancer Institute Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program, computed the incidence of late-onset toxicities, and compared the incidence of dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) among groups of patients receiving different doses of bortezomib. RESULTS: A total of 13,008 toxicities were captured: 46% of patients' first DLTs and 88% of dose reductions or discontinuations of treatment because of toxicity were observed after the first cycle. Moreover, for the approved dose of 1.3 mg/m(2), the estimated cumulative incidence of DLT was > 50%, and the estimated cumulative incidence of dose reduction or treatment discontinuation because of toxicity was nearly 40%. CONCLUSIONS: When considering the entire course of treatment, the approved bortezomib dose exceeds the conventional ceiling DLT rate of 20% to 33%. Retrospective analysis of trial data provides an opportunity for dose optimization of MTAs. Future dose-finding studies of MTAs should take into account late-onset toxicities to ensure that a tolerable dose is identified for future efficacy and comparative trials.