Clinical and biological determinants of circulating tumor DNA detection and prognostication using a next-generation sequencing panel assay.

Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) is utilized for molecular profiling of cancers, and is under investigation for a growing number of applications based on the assumption that ctDNA levels faithfully reflect disease burden. Our objective was to investigate whether patient and tumor characteristics may impact ctDNA detection or levels and the prognostic significance of ctDNA levels or mutations. We performed a retrospective cohort analysis of a comprehensively annotated cohort of 561 patients at a National Cancer Institute-designated comprehensive cancer center with advanced solid cancers who underwent ctDNA testing using a commercial targeted next-generation sequencing assay. ctDNA detection in advanced cancers was associated with older age, non-obese body mass index, and diabetes, but not with tumor diameter, volume, lesion number, or other pathological features. Regression models indicate that no more than 14.3% of the variance in ctDNA levels between patients was explained by known clinical factors and disease burden. Even after adjusting for established prognostic factors and tumor burden, ctDNA levels were associated with worse survival among patients without prior systemic therapy, while ctDNA mutations were associated with survival among patients who previously received systemic treatment. These findings uncover clinical factors that affect ctDNA detection in patients with advanced cancers and challenge the convention that ctDNA is a surrogate for tumor burden. Our study also indicates that the prognostic value of ctDNA levels and mutations are independent of tumor burden and dependent on treatment context.

Experience, Perceptions, and Recommendations Concerning COVID-19-Related Clinical Research Adjustments.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 public health emergency, the FDA and NIH altered clinical trial requirements to protect participants and manage study conduct. Given their detailed knowledge of research protocols and regular contact with patients, clinicians, and sponsors, clinical research professionals offer important perspectives on these changes. METHODS: We developed and distributed an anonymous survey assessing COVID-19-related clinical trial adjustment experiences, perceptions, and recommendations to Clinical Research Office personnel at the Harold C. Simmons Comprehensive Cancer Center. Responses were compared using the Fisher exact test. RESULTS: A total of 94 of 109 contacted research personnel (87%) responded. Among these individuals, 58% had >5 years' professional experience in clinical research, and 56% had personal experience with a COVID-19-related change. Respondents perceived that these changes had a positive impact on patient safety; treatment efficacy; patient and staff experience; and communication with patients, investigators, and sponsors. More than 90% felt that positive changes should be continued after COVID-19. For remote consent, telehealth, therapy shipment, off-site diagnostics, and remote monitoring, individuals with personal experience with the specific change and individuals with >5 years' professional experience were numerically more likely to recommend continuing the adjustment, and these differences were significant for telehealth (P=.04) and therapy shipment (P=.02). CONCLUSIONS: Clinical research professionals perceive that COVID-19-related clinical trial adjustments positively impact multiple aspects of study conduct. Those with greatest experience-both specific to COVID-19-related changes and more generally-are more likely to recommend that these adjustments continue in the future.

Timing, Sites, and Correlates of Lung Cancer Recurrence.

INTRODUCTION: Understanding temporal and anatomic patterns of lung cancer recurrence could guide disease management and monitoring. However, these data are not available in population-based datasets and are not routinely recorded in clinical trials. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We identified cases of stage 1 to 3 lung cancer diagnosed January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2017, in the tumor registry of a National Cancer Institute-designated comprehensive cancer center. For cases with documented disease recurrence, we recorded anatomic site(s) and timing. We estimated time to recurrence using Kaplan-Meier methods. Associations between case characteristics and recurrence features were assessed using univariable and multivariable logistic regression models and Cox regression models. RESULTS: A total of 1619 cases of stage 1 to 3 lung cancer from 1549 patients were included in the analysis. Of these, 466 (30%) patients developed recurrent lung cancer. The most common type of first recurrence was distant disease, most commonly central nervous system (CNS) (37%). In multivariable analyses, race (P = .02) and primary treatment modality (P < .001) correlated with recurrent disease, whereas tumor histology (P = .004) and primary treatment modality (P < .001) were associated specifically with distant recurrence. Patient age (P = .05) and initial TNM stage (P = .001) correlated with timing of recurrence. CONCLUSION: In this single-center series of stage 1 to 3 lung cancer, recurrent disease was associated with race, histology, and treatment modality, and most commonly occurred in the CNS. Modulation of clinical and radiographic disease monitoring according to recurrence risk, timing, and site may offer a means to identify future lung cancer when it remains asymptomatic and highly treatable.

Definition and Coordination of Roles and Responsibilities Among Cancer Center Clinic and Research Personnel.

PURPOSE: Effective enrollment and treatment of patients in cancer clinical trials require definition and coordination of roles and responsibilities among clinic and research personnel. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We developed a survey that incorporated modified components of the Survey of Physician Attitudes Regarding the Care of Cancer Survivors. Surveys were administered to clinic nursing staff and research personnel at a National Cancer Institute-designated comprehensive cancer center. Results were analyzed using χ2-tests, t tests, and analyses of variance. RESULTS: Surveys were completed by 105 staff members (n = 50 research staff, n = 55 clinic staff; 61% response rate). Research staff were more likely to feel that they had the skills to answer questions, convey information, and provide education for patients on trials (all P < .05). Both clinic and research staff reported receipt of communication about responsibilities in fewer than 30% of cases, although research staff reported provision of such information in more than 60% of cases. Among 20 tasks related to care of patients in trials, no single preferred model of responsibility assignment was selected by the majority of clinic staff for nine tasks (45%) or by research staff for three tasks (15%). Uncertainty about which team coordinates care was reported by three times as many clinic staff as research staff (P = .01). There was also substantial variation in the preferred model for delivery of care to patients in trials (P < .05). CONCLUSION: Knowledge, attitudes, and perception of care and responsibilities for patients on clinical trials differ between and among clinic and research personnel. Additional research about how these findings affect efficiency and quality of care on clinical trials is needed.

Variation in the Assessment of Immune-Related Adverse Event Occurrence, Grade, and Timing in Patients Receiving Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors.

Importance: Toxic effects of conventional chemotherapy and molecularly targeted cancer therapies are generally well defined and occur at predictable points. By contrast, owing to their heterogeneous manifestations, unpredictable timing, and clinical overlap with other conditions, immune-related adverse events (irAE) may be more difficult to diagnose and characterize. Objective: To determine concordance of algorithm-driven medical record review by medical oncologists for the characterization of 8 irAE in patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors. Design, Setting, and Participants: Cross-sectional study of patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors at a National Cancer Institute-designated comprehensive cancer center from November 30, 2015, to March 7, 2018. A sample size of 52 patients provided 80% power to distinguish substantial agreement (κ = 0.85) from poor agreement (κ = 0.5) based on the Cohen κ. Main Outcomes and Measures: Interrater agreement of 2 observers in the occurrence and grade of irAE. Results: Of 52 patients (32 [61.5%] male; mean [SD] age, 69 [9] years) analyzed, 42 (80.8%) had non-small cell lung cancer and all received anti-programmed cell death 1 or anti-programmed cell death ligand 1 antibodies, with 3 patients (5.8%) receiving combinations with anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 antibodies. A median (interquartile range) of 82 (47-180) documents were reviewed per case. There was limited or poor interrater agreement on irAE occurrence (Cohen κ, 0.37-0.64), with the exception of hypothyroidism (κ = 0.8). Weighted κ similarly showed limited or poor agreement for irAE grade (κ = 0.31-0.75). Differences in assessed time of onset ranged from 5 to 188 days. As a control for data availability and access, observers had a high degree of agreement for the exact start date (98%) and end date (96%) of immunotherapy administration, suggesting that information interpretation rather than identification largely accounted for assessment differences. In multivariable analysis, therapy duration (adjusted odds ratio, 4.80; 95% CI, 1.34-17.17; P = .02) and Charlson Comorbidity Index (adjusted odds ratio, 4.09; 95% CI, 1.10-15.18; P = .03) were significantly associated with discordant irAE assessment. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings underscore critical challenges in assessing the occurrence, type, timing, and severity of irAE. Apart from hypothyroidism (a condition that has a discrete diagnostic laboratory test and few other likely etiologies during immunotherapy treatment), interobserver agreement was poor. Given the importance of accurate and timely assessment of toxic effects for clinical trials and real-world disease management, efforts to improve irAE diagnosis and characterization are needed.

Mobile Device Applications for Electronic Patient Portals in Oncology.

PURPOSE: Mobile devices provide individuals with rapid and frequent access to electronic patient portals. We investigated how oncology patients use this technology to review test results and communicate with providers. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective study of patients enrolled in the MyChart electronic health portal associated with the Epic electronic medical record at the Harold C. Simmons Comprehensive Cancer Center from 2012 to 2017. We recorded type of portal access according to year and patient characteristics. Associations among patient characteristics and types of portal access were tested using Mann-Whitney U test, χ2 test, and linear Gaussian regression models. RESULTS: Since the availability of a mobile device application in 2012, 2,524 patients with cancer accessed MyChart from a mobile device at least once, which accounted for 291,526 mobile log-ins. The number of patients with MyChart mobile application log-ins increased from 4% in 2012 to 13% in 2017 ( P = .004). Among these patients, the median proportion of log-ins that occurred through mobile device use increased from 22% to 72% during this time period ( P < .001). Mobile access occurred more frequently among younger ( P < .001), black ( P = .002), and Hispanic ( P = .004) patients. Since 2012, total portal log-in frequency increased approximately 110% among patients who used the mobile application compared with 25% among those who did not use the mobile application ( P < .001). CONCLUSION: Mobile access to electronic health portals has increased patient portal use, particularly among traditionally underserved populations. How this widely and immediately available technology affects patient expectations and experiences warrants additional study.

Institutional Scientific Review of Cancer Clinical Research Protocols: A Unique Requirement That Affects Activation Timelines.

PURPOSE: The National Cancer Institute (NCI) requirement that clinical trials at NCI-designated cancer centers undergo institutional scientific review in addition to institutional review board evaluation is unique among medical specialties. We sought to evaluate the effect of this process on protocol activation timelines. METHODS: We analyzed oncology clinical trials that underwent full board review by the Harold C. Simmons Comprehensive Cancer Center Protocol Review and Monitoring Committee (PRMC) from January 1, 2009, through June 30, 2013. We analyzed associations between trial characteristics, PRMC decisions, protocol modifications, and process timelines using the χ2 test, Fisher's exact test, Wilcoxon rank sum test, Kruskal-Wallis test, and logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 226 trials were analyzed. Of these, 77% were industry sponsored and 23% were investigator initiated. The median time from submission to PRMC approval was 55 days. The length of review was associated with trial phase, timing of approval, and number of committee changes/clarifications requested. The median process time was 35 days for those approved at first decision, 68 days for second decision, and 116 days for third decision ( P < .001). The median process time was 39 days if no changes/clarifications were requested, 64 days for one to three changes/clarifications, and 73 days for four or more changes/clarifications ( P < .001). Requested changes/clarifications had a greater effect on industry-sponsored trials than on investigator-initiated trials. CONCLUSION: NCI-mandated institutional scientific review of oncology clinical trials contributes substantially to protocol activation timelines. Further evaluation of this process and the value added to research quality is warranted.

Cancer Center Clinic and Research Team Perceptions of Identity and Interactions.

PURPOSE: Conduct of cancer clinical trials requires coordination and cooperation among research and clinic teams. Diffusion of and confusion about responsibility may occur if team members' perceptions of roles and objectives do not align. These factors are critical to the success of cancer centers but are poorly studied. METHODS: We developed a survey adapting components of the Adapted Team Climate Inventory, Measure of Team Identification, and Measure of In-Group Bias. Surveys were administered to research and clinic staff at a National Cancer Institute-designated comprehensive cancer center. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, t tests, and analyses of variance. RESULTS: Responses were received from 105 staff (clinic, n = 55; research, n = 50; 61% response rate). Compared with clinic staff, research staff identified more strongly with their own group ( P < .01) but less strongly with the overall cancer center ( P = .02). Both clinic staff and research staff viewed their own group's goals as clearer than those of the other group ( P < .01) and felt that members of their groups interacted and shared information within ( P < .01) and across ( P < .01) groups more than the other group did. Research staff perceived daily outcomes as more important than did clinic staff ( P = .05), specifically research-related outcomes ( P = .07). CONCLUSION: Although there are many similarities between clinic and research teams, we also identified key differences, including perceptions of goal clarity and sharing, understanding and alignment with cancer center goals, and importance of outcomes. Future studies should examine how variation in perceptions and group dynamics between clinic and research teams may impact function and processes of cancer care.

Oncology Nursing Perceptions of Patient Electronic Portal Use: A Qualitative Analysis.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES: To identify nursing staff reactions to and perceptions of electronic portal use in a cancer setting.
. RESEARCH APPROACH: Qualitative.
. SETTING: Outpatient clinic at the Harold C. Simmons Comprehensive Cancer Center of the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas.
. PARTICIPANTS: 13 nurses with a range of credentials and experience, representing infusion, medical oncology, and bone marrow transplantation clinics.
. METHODOLOGIC APPROACH: Two focus groups were conducted. Theoretical thematic content analysis of data was performed.
. FINDINGS: Key themes that emerged for consideration of electronic portals included work volume and flow, patient expectations and safety, variation in use of communication technologies, and education and management.
. INTERPRETATION: The current study provides insight into the implications of electronic portals by identifying nursing staff reactions to this technology. These reactions are predominantly related to the impact on clinical workload and patient safety and expectations.
. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING: As clinical cancer facilities incorporate electronic portal technology into their operations, attention to the impact on staff workload, division of labor, patient safety, and patient expectations should be considered.

Increase in Cancer Center Staff Effort Related to Electronic Patient Portal Use.

PURPOSE: Electronic portals provide patients with real-time access to personal health records. Use of this technology by individuals with cancer is particularly intensive. We therefore examined patterns of use of electronic portals by clinic staff at a National Cancer Institute-designated comprehensive cancer center. METHODS: We identified and characterized cancer center providers and clinic staff who performed electronic activities related to MyChart, the institution's personal health records portal, from 2009 to 2014. Total MyChart actions and messages received were quantified and characterized according to type, timing, and staff category. RESULTS: Two hundred eighty-nine employees were included in our analysis: 85 nurses (29%), 79 ancillary staff (27%), 49 clerical/managerial staff (17%), 47 physicians (16%), and 29 advanced practice providers (10%). These individuals performed 740,613 MyChart actions and received 117,799 messages. Seventy-seven percent of actions were performed by nurses, 11% by ancillary staff, 6% by advanced practice providers, 5% by physicians, and 1% by clerical/managerial staff. From 2011 to 2014, staff MyChart activity increased approximately 10-fold. On average, 6.3 staff MyChart actions were performed per patient-initiated message. In 2014, nurses performed an average of 3,838 MyChart actions and received an average of 589 messages, compared with 591 actions and 87 messages in 2011 ( P < .001). Sixteen percent of all actions occurred outside clinic hours. CONCLUSION: Cancer center employee effort related to an electronic patient portal has increased markedly over time, particularly among nursing staff. Because further uptake of this technology is expected, it is critical to consider potential effects on clinical resources, employee and patient satisfaction, and patient safety.

BIBF 1120 (nintedanib), a triple angiokinase inhibitor, induces hypoxia but not EMT and blocks progression of preclinical models of lung and pancreatic cancer.

Signaling from other angiokinases may underlie resistance to VEGF-directed therapy. We evaluated the antitumor and biologic effects of BIBF 1120 (nintedanib), a tyrosine kinase inhibitor that targets VEGF receptor, platelet-derived growth factor receptor, and fibroblast growth factor receptor in preclinical models of lung and pancreatic cancer, including models resistant to VEGF-targeted treatments. In vitro, BIBF 1120 did not show antiproliferative effects, nor did it sensitize tumor cells to chemotherapy. However, in vivo BIBF 1120 inhibited primary tumor growth in all models as a single agent and in combination with standard chemotherapy. Analysis of tumor tissue posttreatment revealed that BIBF 1120 reduced proliferation (phospho-histone 3) and elevated apoptosis (cleaved caspase-3) to a greater extent than chemotherapy alone. Furthermore, BIBF 1120 showed potent antiangiogenic effects, including decreases in microvessel density (CD31), pericyte coverage (NG2), vessel permeability, and perfusion, while increasing hypoxia. Despite the induction of hypoxia, markers of epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition (EMT) were not elevated in BIBF 1120-treated tumors. In summary, BIBF 1120 showed potent antitumor and antiangiogenic activity in preclinical models of lung and pancreatic cancer where it induced hypoxia but not EMT. The absence of EMT induction, which has been implicated in resistance to antiangiogenic therapies, is noteworthy. Together, these results warrant further clinical studies of BIBF 1120.

Development of bavituximab, a vascular targeting agent with immune-modulating properties, for lung cancer treatment.

Bavituximab is a chimeric monoclonal antibody directed against the membrane phospholipid phosphatidylserine. Phosphatidylserine exposure is increased on endothelial cells and apoptotic cancer cells in solid tumors, allowing tumor-specific targeting of bavituximab. Bavituximab binding results in tumor vessel occlusion and enhanced antitumor immunity. Preclinical investigations have demonstrated efficacy as monotherapy and in combination with other modalities against multiple cancer types. Phase I clinical trials of bavituximab monotherapy and in combination with chemotherapy in adults with refractory solid tumors have been completed. Phase II trials of bavituximab in combination with chemotherapy for the first- and second-line treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer are currently ongoing. This article summarizes the preclinical development and clinical experience with bavituximab in non-small-cell lung cancer.

Cetuximab in combination therapy: from bench to clinic.

Cetuximab, a chimeric IgG(1) monoclonal antibody directed against the ligand-binding domain of the epidermal growth factor receptor, offers a paradigm for the combination of molecularly targeted therapies with cytotoxic agents. In preclinical models, the addition of cetuximab to chemotherapy or radiation therapy enhances antitumor activity. Proposed mechanisms include reducing tumor cell proliferation, angiogenesis, and DNA repair capacity; increasing apoptosis; and inducing cell cycle arrest at treatment-sensitive points. These effects may enhance and restore tumor sensitivity to cytotoxic therapies. In clinical trials, the addition of cetuximab to chemotherapy improves outcomes of patients who had previously failed such agents, as illustrated in irinotecan-resistant and oxaliplatin-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer. As initial therapy, the addition of cetuximab to chemotherapy extends survival in colorectal cancer, lung cancer, and head and neck cancer. Combining cetuximab with radiation therapy extends survival in locally advanced head and neck cancer. As predictive biomarkers are identified, it may become possible to select patients most likely to benefit from such combinations.