Administering selected subscales of patient-reported outcome questionnaires to reduce patient burden and increase relevance: a position statement on a modular approach.

Patient-reported outcome (PRO) questionnaires considered in this paper contain multiple subscales, although not all subscales are equally relevant for administration in all target patient populations. A group of measurement experts, developers, license holders, and other scientific-, regulatory-, payer-, and patient-focused stakeholders participated in a panel to discuss the benefits and challenges of a modular approach, defined here as administering a subset of subscales out of a multi-scaled PRO measure. This paper supports the position that it is acceptable, and sometimes preferable, to take a modular approach when administering PRO questionnaires, provided that certain conditions have been met and a rigorous selection process performed. Based on the experiences and perspectives of all stakeholders, using a modular approach can reduce patient burden and increase the relevancy of the items administered, and thereby improve measurement precision and eliminate wasted data without sacrificing the scientific validity and utility of the instrument. The panelists agreed that implementing a modular approach is not expected to have a meaningful impact on item responses, subscale scores, variability, reliability, validity, and effect size estimates; however, collecting additional evidence for the impact of context may be desirable. It is also important to recognize that adequate rationale and evidence (e.g., of fit-for-purpose status and relevance to patients) and a robust consensus process that includes patient perspectives are required to inform selection of subscales, as in any other measurement circumstance, is expected. We believe that the considerations discussed within (content validity, administration context, and psychometric factors) are relevant across multiple therapeutic areas.

Statistical properties of items and summary scores from the Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE®) in a diverse cancer sample.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: The Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE®) was developed to capture symptomatic adverse events from the patient perspective. We aim to describe statistical properties of PRO-CTCAE items and summary scores and to provide evidence for recommendations regarding PRO-CTCAE administration and reporting. METHODS: Using data from the PRO-CTCAE validation study (NCT02158637), prevalence, means, and standard deviations of PRO-CTCAE items, composite scores, and mean and maximum scores across attributes (frequency, severity, and/or interference) of symptomatic adverse events were calculated. For each adverse event, correlations and agreement between attributes, correlations between attributes and composite scores, and correlations between composite, mean, and maximum scores were estimated. RESULTS: PRO-CTCAE items were completed by 899 patients with various cancer types. Most patients reported experiencing one or more adverse events, with the most prevalent being fatigue (87.7%), sad/unhappy feelings (66.0%), anxiety (63.6%), pain (63.2%), insomnia (61.8%), and dry mouth (60.0%). Attributes were moderately to strongly correlated within an adverse event (r = 0.53 to 0.77, all p < 0.001) but not fully concordant (κweighted = 0.26 to 0.60, all p < 0.001), with interference demonstrating lowest mean scores and prevalence among attributes of the same adverse event. Attributes were moderately to strongly correlated with composite scores (r = 0.67 to 0.97, all p < 0.001). Composite scores were moderately to strongly correlated with mean and maximum scores for the same adverse event (r = 0.69 to 0.94, all p < 0.001). Correlations between composite scores of different adverse events varied widely (r = 0.04 to 0.68) but were moderate to strong for conceptually related adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Results provide evidence for PRO-CTCAE administration and reporting recommendations that the full complement of attributes be administered for each adverse event, and that attributes as well as summary scores be reported.

Development and validation of a patient-reported outcome measure to assess symptom burden after chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy.

This cross-sectional study aimed to develop and validate a patient-reported outcomes (PROs) assessment tool to assess symptom burden and daily functioning in patients after chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy, the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory (MDASI-CAR). The items were generated based on literature review, content elicitation interviews with patients, and clinician's review. The patients completed the MDASI core and module, single-item quality-of-life (QoL) measure and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-29 (PROMIS-29). The psychometric validation analysis was based on the acceptability after item reduction process. The final 10 MDASI-CAR module items included tremors, fever/chills, headache, balance, dizziness, attention, difficulty speaking, coughing, sexual dysfunction, and diarrhoea with high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha: MDASI Core, 0.865; MDASI Interference, 0.915; CAR-T module, 0.746). The MDASI-CAR has excellent known-group validity that was demonstrated by differentiate patients based on patient's performance status (Cohen's d for MDASI core = -1.008, interference = -0.771, module = -0.835). Criterion validity was demonstrated by the significant correlations between the MDASI-CAR composite score, the single QoL item and the relevant domains on PROMIS-29 (all p < 0.05). This study established the MDASI-CAR module as a reliable and valid PRO tool for monitoring symptom burden after CAR T-cell therapy in patients with haematological malignancies. The findings need to be validated with a longitudinal design.

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.

Feasibility and preliminary efficacy of a virtual reality intervention targeting distress and anxiety in primary brain tumor patients at the time of clinical evaluation: Study protocol for a phase 2 clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Primary brain tumor (PBT) patients experience higher levels of distress and anxiety than other solid tumor patients, particularly at the time of clinical evaluation when uncertainty about disease status is high ("scanxiety"). There is promising evidence supporting use of virtual reality (VR) to target psychological symptoms in other solid tumor patients, though PBT patients have not been studied extensively in this context. The primary aim of this phase 2 clinical trial is to establish the feasibility of a remote VR-based relaxation intervention for a PBT population, with secondary aims designed to determine preliminary efficacy of improving distress and anxiety symptoms. METHODS: PBT patients (N = 120) with upcoming MRI scans and clinical appointments who meet eligibility will be recruited to participate in a single arm trial conducted remotely through the NIH. Following completion of baseline assessments, participants will complete a 5-min VR intervention via telehealth using a head-mounted immersive device while under supervision of the research team. Following the intervention, over the course of 1 month patients can use VR at their discretion with follow-up assessments done immediately post-VR intervention, as well as 1 week and 4 weeks later. Additionally, a qualitative phone interview will be conducted to assess patient satisfaction with the intervention. DISCUSSION: Use of immersive VR is an innovative interventional approach to target distress and scanxiety symptoms in PBT patients who are at high risk for experiencing these symptoms leading into their clinical appointments. Findings from this study may inform design of a future multicenter randomized VR trial for PBT patients and may aid in development of similar interventions for other oncology populations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04301089), registered 9 March 2020.

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.

Identification of health-related quality of life profiles among long-term survivors of primary central nervous system tumors.

PURPOSE: We aimed to identify health-related quality of life (HRQOL) latent classes among primary central nervous system tumor (PCNST) long-term survivors (LTS) and to evaluate differences between classes in survivor sociodemographic characteristics, clinical characteristics, and symptoms to guide  the development of survivorship care programs tailored to unique class needs. METHODS: Data from 298 PCNST LTS reporting HRQOL on the EQ-5D-3L were analyzed using latent profile analysis. Correlations and independent group t-tests were performed to identify differences between identified HRQOL classes by sociodemographic, clinical characteristics, and symptoms. RESULTS: Sample mean age was 48 years, 54% were male, 82% Caucasian, 56% employed, 60% had a high-grade glioma, and 52% had a KPS ≥ 90. Two HRQOL classes, good (61%) and poor (39%), were identified. The good HRQOL class reported no problems with self-care and few problems with mobility or usual activities. Thirty-eight percent reported anxiety and depression and 21% pain. Over 94% of the poor HRQOL class had at least moderate problems with mobility and usual activities, and over 50% had pain, self-care issues, anxiety, and depression. Older age (φ = 0.21), unemployment (φ = 0.30), spine tumors (φ = 0.18), active treatment (φ = 0.20), tumor recurrence (φ = 0.28), and poorer KPS scores (φ = 0.61) were associated with membership in the poor HRQOL class. CONCLUSIONS: In the poor PCNST LTS HRQOL class, an overwhelming majority faced significant physical challenges, and the good HRQOL class experienced mood-related disturbance but limited physical challenges. These HRQOL profiles can be used to guide survivorship programs and tailored interventions.

Feasibility of a virtual reality intervention targeting distress and anxiety symptoms in patients with primary brain tumors: Interim analysis of a phase 2 clinical trial.

PURPOSE: Cancer patients experience distress and anxiety when undergoing imaging studies to monitor disease status, yet these symptoms are not always appropriately identified or well-managed. This interim analysis of a phase 2 clinical trial explored feasibility and acceptability of a virtual reality relaxation (VR) intervention for primary brain tumor (PBT) patients at the time of clinical evaluation. METHODS: English speaking, adult PBT patients with previous reports of distress and upcoming neuroimaging were recruited between March of 2021 and March 2022. A brief VR session was done within 2 weeks prior to neuroimaging with patient-reported outcomes (PROs) collected before and immediately post-intervention. Self-directed VR use over the next 1 month was encouraged with additional PROs assessments at 1 and 4 weeks. Feasibility metrics included enrollment, eligibility, attrition, and device-related adverse effects with satisfaction measured with qualitative phone interviews. RESULTS: Fifty-five patients were approached via email, 40 (73%) responded and 20 (50%) enrolled (9 declines, 11 screen fails). 65% of participants were ≤ 50 years, 50% were male, 90% were White/non-Hispanic, 85% had good KPS (≥ 90), and most were on active treatment. All patients completed the VR intervention, PROs questionnaires, weekly check-ins, and qualitative interview. Most (90%) reported frequent VR use and high satisfaction and only 7 mild AEs were recorded (headache, dizziness, nausea, neck pain). CONCLUSION: This interim analysis supports feasibility and acceptability of a novel VR intervention to target psychological symptoms for PBT patients. Trial enrollment will continue to assess for intervention efficacy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04301089 registered on 3/9/2020.

Assessing gaps in motherhood after cancer: development and psychometric testing of the Survivorship Oncofertility Barriers Scale.

OBJECTIVE: With a growing population of young cancer survivors, there is an increasing need to address the gaps in evidence regarding cancer survivors' obstetric outcomes, fertility care access, and experiences. As part of a large research program, this study engaged survivors and experts in co-developing and testing the validity, reliability, acceptability, and feasibility of a scale to assess survivor-reported barriers to motherhood after cancer. METHODS: Scale items were developed based on literature and expert review of 226 reproductive health items, and six experience and focus groups with 26 survivors of breast and gynecological cancers. We then invited 128 survivors to complete the scale twice, 48 hours apart, and assessed the scale's psychometric properties using exploratory factor analyses including reliability, known-group validity, and convergent validity. RESULTS: Item development identified three primary themes: multifaceted barriers for cancer survivors; challenging decisions about whether and how to pursue motherhood; and a timely need for evidence about obstetric outcomes. Retained items were developed into a 24-item prototype scale with four subscales. Prototype testing showed acceptable internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha=0.71) and test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient=0.70). Known-group validity was supported; the scale discriminated between groups by age (x=70.0 for patients ≥35 years old vs 54.5 for patients <35 years old, p=0.02) and years since diagnosis (x=71.5 for ≥6 years vs 54.3 for<6 years, p=0.01). The financial subscale was correlated with the Economic StraiN and Resilience in Cancer measure of financial toxicity (ρ=0.39, p<0.001). The scale was acceptable and feasibly delivered online. The final 22-item scale is organized in four subscales: personal, medical, relational, and financial barriers to motherhood. CONCLUSION: The Survivorship Oncofertility Barriers Scale demonstrated validity, reliability, and was acceptable and feasible when delivered online. Implementing the scale can gather the data needed to inform shared decision making and to address disparities in fertility care for survivors.

Trans-pacific multicenter collaborative study of minimally invasive proximal versus total gastrectomy for proximal gastric and gastroesophageal junction cancers.

BACKGROUND: The current standard operation for proximal gastric and gastroesophageal junction (P/GEJ) cancers with limited esophageal extension is total gastrectomy (TG). TG is associated with impaired appetite and weight loss due to the loss of gastric functions such as production of ghrelin and with anemia due to intrinsic factor loss and vitamin B12 malabsorption. Theoretically, proximal gastrectomy (PG) can mitigate these problems by preserving gastric function. However, PG with direct esophagogastric reconstruction is associated with severe postoperative reflux, delayed gastric emptying, and poor quality of life (QoL). Minimally invasive PG (MIPG) with antireflux techniques has been increasingly performed by experts but is technically demanding owing to its complexity. Moreover, the actual advantages of MIPG over minimally invasive TG (MITG) with regards to postoperative QoL are unknown. Our overall objective of this study is to determine the short-term QoL benefits of MIPG. Our central hypotheses are that MIPG is safe and that patients have improved appetite after MIPG with effective antireflux techniques, which leads to an overall QoL improvement when compared with MITG. METHODS: Enrollment of a total of 60 patients in this prospective survey-collection study is expected. Procedures (MITG versus MIPG, antireflux techniques for MIPG [double-tract reconstruction versus the double-flap technique]) will be chosen based on surgeon and/or patient preference. Randomization is not considered feasible because patients often have strong preferences regarding MITG and MIPG. The primary outcome is appetite level (reported on a 0-10 scale) at 3 months after surgery. With an expected 30 patients per cohort (MITG versus MIPG), this study will have 80% power to detect a one-point difference in appetite level. Patient-reported outcomes will be longitudinally collected (including questions about appetite and reflux), and specific QoL items, body weight, body mass index and ghrelin, albumin, and hemoglobin levels will be compared. DISCUSSION: Surgeons from the US, Japan, and South Korea formed this collaboration with the agreement that the surgical approach to P/GEJ cancers is an internationally important but controversial topic that requires immediate action. At the completion of the proposed research, our expected outcome is the establishment of the benefit and safety of MIPG. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was registered with Clinical Trials Reporting Program Registration under the registration number NCI-2022-00267 on January 11, 2022, as well as with ClinicalTrials.gov under the registration number NCT05205343 on January 11, 2022.

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.

Development and Validation of a Patient-reported Outcome Measure for Gastrointestinal Obstruction in the Setting of Advanced Malignancy.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to construct a valid and reliable patient-reported outcome measure for patients with advanced malignancy and GIO. BACKGROUND: Bowel obstruction is the most common indication for palliative surgical consultation in patients with advanced cancer; however, no validated patient-reported outcome measures exist for this population. METHODS: A total of 125 patients with GIO and 64 patients without GIO who underwent palliative surgical consultation completed the MDASI-GIO questionnaire and a single global quality-of-life question. Summary statistics were used to assess the symptom burden of GIO patients. Outcome measures were validity (construct and criterion) and reliability (internal and test-retest) for the MDASI-GIO. RESULTS: The majority of patients rated the severity of each of the 5 following GIO-specific symptoms as moderate to severe (rating of ≥5 on a 0 to 10 scale): "being unable to eat'' (72%), "being unable to have a bowel movement'' (65%), "abdominal discomfort'' (62%), "stomach feeling full'' (55%), and "abdominal cramping'' (54%). The MDASI-GIO subscale Cronbach coefficient alpha values were 0.80-0.91, and intraclass correlations were 0.72-0.84. Correlations between MDASI-GIO subscales and global quality of life were -0.39 to-0.49 ( P < 0.001 for all comparisons). GIO patients had significantly worse symptoms and higher interference than did non-GIO patients (all P < 0.05) with effect-size differences of ≥0.36, supporting known-group validity. CONCLUSIONS: The MDASI-GIO shows initial validity and reliability for assessing the severity of symptoms of patients with GIO and the interference of these symptoms in patients' daily functioning.

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.

Glioma patient-reported outcome assessment in clinical care and research: a Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology collaborative report.

Clinical trials of treatments for high-grade gliomas have traditionally relied on measures of response or time-dependent metrics; however, these endpoints have limitations because they do not characterise the functional or symptomatic effect of the condition on the person. Including clinical outcome assessments, such as patient- reported outcomes (PROs), to determine net clinical benefit of a treatment strategy is needed because of the substantial burden of symptoms and impaired functioning in this patient population. The US National Cancer Institute convened a meeting to review previous recommendations and existing PRO measures of symptoms and function that can be applied to current trials and clinical practice for high-grade gliomas. Measures were assessed for relevance, relationship to disease and therapy, sensitivity to change, psychometric properties, response format, patient acceptability, and use of self-report. The group also relied on patient input including the results of an online survey, a literature review on available clinical outcomes, expert opinion, and alignment with work done by other organisations. A core set of priority constructs was proposed that allows more comprehensive evaluation of therapies and comparison of outcomes among studies, and enhances efforts to improve the measurement of these core clinical outcomes. The proposed set of constructs was then presented to the Society for Neuro-Oncology Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology Working Group and feedback was solicited.

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.

The prevalence of altered body image in patients with primary brain tumors: an understudied population.

PURPOSE: Body image (BI) is an important issue for cancer patients, as patients with BI concerns are susceptible to depression, anxiety, difficulty coping, and poor quality of life (QoL). While this concern has been documented in patients with other malignancies, no data exists of this QoL issue in patients with primary brain tumors (PBT). METHODS: A cross-sectional survey of 100 PBT patients was conducted on an IRB approved prospective protocol using structured questionnaires. Participants completed the body image scale (BIS), Appearance Scheme Inventory Revised (ASI-R), MD Anderson Symptom Inventory Brain Tumor (MDASI-BT), and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Depression, Anxiety, and Psychosocial Impact Positive measures. RESULTS: The prevalence of clinically significant body image dissatisfaction (BIS ≥ 10) was 28% (95% CI 19-37%), median BIS score was 5 (range 0-27). The median ASI-R composite score was 2.9 (range 1.5-4.7). BIS was significantly correlated with the ASI-R (r = 0.53, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.65). The mean PROMIS Depression score was 48.4 (SD = 8.9), PROMIS Anxiety score was 49.4 (SD = 9.9), and PROMIS Psychosocial Illness Impact Positive score was 48.9 (SD = 9.7). BIS was significantly correlated with age, and trended with BMI and sex. The PROMIS Psychosocial Illness Impact Positive and PROMIS Anxiety scores were the most strongly related to BIS. CONCLUSIONS: This study, the first to explore altered body image in PBT patients, revealed clinically significant body image dissatisfaction in nearly 1/3 of patients, similar to other malignancies. These findings underscore the potential contribution of disease and treatment-related body image concerns on psychosocial wellbeing in patients with PBT.

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.