A Randomized Trial Evaluating Patient Experience and Preference Between Octreotide Long-Acting Release and Lanreotide for Treatment of Well-Differentiated Neuroendocrine Tumors.

PURPOSE: Somatostatin analogs octreotide long-acting release (octLAR) and lanreotide are equally acceptable in National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines for neuroendocrine tumors (NETs). Lanreotide is more expensive and given by deep subcutaneous injection, whereas octLAR is given intramuscularly. We evaluated patient preference between these agents in terms of injection site pain. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Randomized, single-blinded study. Patients with NETs received injections every 4 weeks. Arm 1: octLAR × 3, then lanreotide × 3; arm 2: reverse order. Self-reported injection site pain scores (range, 0-10) were obtained after each of the first three injections. Primary end point was comparison of mean pain scores over the first three injections. Secondary end points included patient-reported preference. RESULTS: Fifty-one patients enrolled (26 in arm 1 and 25 arm 2), all evaluable for primary end point. No significant difference was identified in the mean pain score over the first three injections (2.4 ± 1.9 v 1.9 ± 1.5, P = .5). Thirty-four of 51 (67%) patients (15 in arm 1 and 19 in arm 2) completed post-therapy questionnaires and were evaluable for secondary end points. Seven patients (47%) in arm 1 and eight patients (42%) in arm 2 indicated no drug preference at the end of treatment. In the other 19 patients, more patients indicated mild or strong preference for octLAR over lanreotide. CONCLUSION: We found minimal pain with octLAR and lanreotide and no significant pain score differences between the two. Patients indicating a drug preference trended toward favoring octLAR.

Integrated collaborative care teams to enhance service delivery to youth with mental health and substance use challenges: protocol for a pragmatic randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Among youth, the prevalence of mental health and addiction (MHA) disorders is roughly 20%, yet youth are challenged to access evidence-based services in a timely fashion. To address MHA system gaps, this study tests the benefits of an Integrated Collaborative Care Team (ICCT) model for youth with MHA challenges. A rapid, stepped-care approach geared to need in a youth-friendly environment is expected to result in better youth MHA outcomes. Moreover, the ICCT approach is expected to decrease service wait-times, be more youth-friendly and family-friendly, and be more cost-effective, providing substantial public health benefits. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: In partnership with four community agencies, four adolescent psychiatry hospital departments, youth and family members with lived experience of MHA service use, and other stakeholders, we have developed an innovative model of collaborative, community-based service provision involving rapid access to needs-based MHA services. A total of 500 youth presenting for hospital-based, outpatient psychiatric service will be randomised to ICCT services or hospital-based treatment as usual, following a pragmatic randomised controlled trial design. The primary outcome variable will be the youth's functioning, assessed at intake, 6 months and 12 months. Secondary outcomes will include clinical change, youth/family satisfaction and perception of care, empowerment, engagement and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Intent-to-treat analyses will be used on repeated-measures data, along with cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses, to determine intervention effectiveness. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Research Ethics Board approval has been received from the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, as well as institutional ethical approval from participating community sites. This study will be conducted according to Good Clinical Practice guidelines. Participants will provide informed consent prior to study participation and data confidentiality will be ensured. A data safety monitoring panel will monitor the study. Results will be disseminated through community and peer-reviewed academic channels. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02836080.