Circulating Tumor DNA Analysis Guiding Adjuvant Therapy in Stage II Colon Cancer.

BACKGROUND: The role of adjuvant chemotherapy in stage II colon cancer continues to be debated. The presence of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) after surgery predicts very poor recurrence-free survival, whereas its absence predicts a low risk of recurrence. The benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy for ctDNA-positive patients is not well understood. METHODS: We conducted a trial to assess whether a ctDNA-guided approach could reduce the use of adjuvant chemotherapy without compromising recurrence risk. Patients with stage II colon cancer were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to have treatment decisions guided by either ctDNA results or standard clinicopathological features. For ctDNA-guided management, a ctDNA-positive result at 4 or 7 weeks after surgery prompted oxaliplatin-based or fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy. Patients who were ctDNA-negative were not treated. The primary efficacy end point was recurrence-free survival at 2 years. A key secondary end point was adjuvant chemotherapy use. RESULTS: Of the 455 patients who underwent randomization, 302 were assigned to ctDNA-guided management and 153 to standard management. The median follow-up was 37 months. A lower percentage of patients in the ctDNA-guided group than in the standard-management group received adjuvant chemotherapy (15% vs. 28%; relative risk, 1.82; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.25 to 2.65). In the evaluation of 2-year recurrence-free survival, ctDNA-guided management was noninferior to standard management (93.5% and 92.4%, respectively; absolute difference, 1.1 percentage points; 95% CI, -4.1 to 6.2 [noninferiority margin, -8.5 percentage points]). Three-year recurrence-free survival was 86.4% among ctDNA-positive patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy and 92.5% among ctDNA-negative patients who did not. CONCLUSIONS: A ctDNA-guided approach to the treatment of stage II colon cancer reduced adjuvant chemotherapy use without compromising recurrence-free survival. (Supported by the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council and others; DYNAMIC Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry number, ACTRN12615000381583.).

Nontraditional approaches to sedation for anterior segment surgery: a narrative review.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Surgical and anesthetic technological advancement have made both cataract and noncataract anterior segment surgery significantly less invasive and time-intensive, facilitating the transition of some of these procedures from the operating room under monitored anesthesia care (MAC) to the office-based setting without MAC. This transition has been aided by the popularization of nonintravenous approaches to achieving patient sedation for these procedures. In this review, we discuss the literature surrounding traditional and nontraditional methods of achieving patient sedation for anterior segment surgery. RECENT FINDINGS: Our survey of the literature suggests that nonintravenous (IV) approaches to sedation for these procedures may be just as safe, effective, and satisfactory to patients as traditional IV approaches. SUMMARY: As anterior segment surgery becomes less invasive and less time-intensive, providers considering transitioning their cataract and anterior segment surgery out of the operating room and into the office-based setting without MAC anesthesia should consider the non-IV sedation options outlined in this review to achieve adequate patient sedation and comfort.

A Bayesian approach for two-stage multivariate Mendelian randomization with mixed outcomes.

Many research studies have investigated the relationship between baseline factors or exposures, such as patient demographic and disease characteristics, and study outcomes such as toxicities or quality of life, but results from most of these studies may be problematic because of potential confounding effects (eg, the imbalance in baseline factors or exposures). It is important to study whether the baseline factors or exposures have causal effects on the clinical outcomes, so that clinicians can have better understanding of the diseases and develop personalized medicine. Mendelian randomization (MR) provides an efficient way to estimate the causal effects using genetic instrumental variables to handle confounders, but most of the existing studies focus on a single outcome at a time and ignores the correlation structure of multiple outcomes. Given that clinical outcomes like toxicities and quality of life are usually a mixture of different types of variables, and multiple datasets may be available for such outcomes, it may be much more beneficial to analyze them jointly instead of separately. Some well-established methods are available for building multivariate models on mixed outcomes, but they do not incorporate MR mechanism to deal with the confounders. To overcome these challenges, we propose a Bayesian-based two-stage multivariate MR method for mixed outcomes on multiple datasets, called BMRMO. Using simulation studies and clinical applications on the CO.17 and CO.20 studies, we demonstrate better performance of our approach compared to the commonly used univariate two-stage method.

Compliance with Therapeutic Goods Association prescribing information: weekly or second weekly cetuximab for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Treatment with cetuximab provides a survival benefit for patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Practice-defining cetuximab studies utilised weekly (q1w) administration. More convenient second weekly (q2w) administration is supported by pharmacokinetic data and a recent meta-analysis, but large head-to-head studies have not been conducted. Therapeutic Goods Association (TGA) prescribing information states cetuximab be administered q1w for all indications. AIM: To assess the real-world use of q1w versus q2w cetuximab schedule and any difference in outcomes. METHODS: We analysed data from a prospective mCRC database at seven Melbourne hospitals from January 2010 to August 2019. Characteristics and outcomes for cetuximab-treated patients were examined, comparing q1w versus q2w schedules. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were the primary endpoints. RESULTS: Of 214 eligible patients, 103 (48%) received q1w and 111 (52%) received q2w cetuximab. Q2w cetuximab has been used in >70% of patients from 2015. Q2w was more commonly used in public patients (70% vs 13% in private, P < 0.001), in left-sided primary tumours (83% vs 68%, P = 0.025) and in combination with chemotherapy (73% q2w vs 40% q1w, P < 0.001). Q2w treatment was less common in BRAFV600E mutated tumours (4% vs 13%, P = 0.001). PFS was similar across all lines of therapy, including when analyses were limited to a left-sided primary and there was no difference in OS in multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: This real-world analysis shows q2w cetuximab has become the dominant method of administration, despite TGA guidance. Our outcome data adds to other data supporting the use of q2w cetuximab as the standard option. Consideration could be given to modifying current TGA advice.

Impact of Diplopia and Ptosis From Lingering Third Nerve Palsy After Treatment of Cerebral Aneurysms.

BACKGROUND: Third nerve palsies (TNPs) may not resolve after intervention for intracranial aneurysms that have compressed the nerve. The disability related to this lingering condition has not been assessed with the support of patient self-report. METHODS: A single-institutional retrospective study of patients with TNP who had undergone interventions for intracranial aneurysms. We used residual primary-position diplopia, a narrow zone of single binocular vision, and vision-obscuring ptosis to divide TNP recovery into complete, incomplete nondisabling, and incomplete disabling outcomes based on medical record documentation and patient self-report derived from telephonic interviews. RESULTS: In a cohort of 33 patients, 13 (39%) had complete TNP recovery. There were 11 patients (33%) with lingering visual disability from diplopia or ptosis present before ophthalmic interventions. Of the 6 patients who underwent ophthalmic interventions, visual disability was relieved in only 2 patients, leaving 9 patients (27%) with lingering impairment in instrumental activities of daily living. Telephonic interviews of 23 patients (70% of the cohort) confirmed that the outcome criteria we applied were accurate in assessing visual disability in 17 patients (74%). Univariate analysis using the Fisher exact test showed that aneurysmal clipping as a treatment modality was the only clinical feature associated with a favorable TNP outcome. CONCLUSIONS: In applying a novel method of assessing disability, this study showed that more than one-quarter of patients undergoing procedures for brain aneurysms had lingering disability from third nerve palsy-associated diplopia or ptosis, despite later ophthalmic interventions. Patient self-report gleaned from telephonic interviews was valuable in largely validating the assessment method derived from medical records and in revealing differences between physician and patient estimation of disability.

Complementary Medicine Use Amongst Patients with Metastatic Cancer Enrolled in Phase III Clinical Trials.

BACKGROUND: Complementary medicines (CM) are frequently used by patients with cancer. Controversy exists over the effectiveness and risk that CM may add to conventional cancer therapy. The incidence of CM use among patients enrolled in phase III clinical trials is unknown. METHODS: Medication lists from 6 international phase III clinical trials were retrospectively reviewed to identify patients using CM. Patients had metastatic breast, colorectal, or lung cancers. Quality of life, adverse events, overall survival, and progression-free survival were compared between CM users and non-users. Baseline differences between groups were adjusted with propensity score matching groups. RESULTS: Seven hundred and six of 3446 patients (20.5%) used at least one CM. CM use was highest among patients with breast cancer (35.6%). CM users had more favorable baseline prognostic factors (ECOG 0-1, non-smoking status, younger age, and fewer metastases). CM use was associated with lower rates of adverse events (50% vs. 62%, P = .002) and quality of life was similar between both groups. After adjustment with propensity score matching, CM use was also associated with longer overall survival in patients with lung cancer (adjusted hazard ratio 0.80, 95%CI, 0.68-0.94, P =.0054). However, several key control variables like EGFR status were not available. CONCLUSION: One in 5 patients in phase III clinical trials report using CM. CM was not associated with worse cancer-specific outcomes. However, CM users had more favorable baseline prognostic factors, and likely other confounders that may have contributed to improved outcomes observed in the lung cohort. Physicians should monitor for CM use and potential interactions with clinical trial drugs.

Use and outcomes of chemotherapy for metastatic pancreatic cancer in Australia.

BACKGROUND: Metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (mPDAC) is highly lethal. Combination chemotherapy regimens improve overall survival (OS). Historically, only one-third of mPDAC patients in Victoria received chemotherapy. AIM: To describe current Australian chemotherapy utilisation and outcomes in patients with mPDAC using the multi-site PURPLE (Pancreatic cancer: Understanding Routine Practice and Lifting End Results) registry. METHODS: PURPLE collects longitudinal data on consecutive patients with pancreatic cancer seen since January 2016. Data were collated for patients with mPDAC from six Victorian sites, and analysed descriptively. RESULTS: Three hundred and sixty-three patients with mPDAC were identified. Median age was 70 years (range 20-94 years). First-line chemotherapy was administered in 195 (54%) patients. Prevalent regimens included gemcitabine-nab-paclitaxel (71%), gemcitabine alone (10%) and FOLFIRINOX (6%). Sixty-two of 195 (32%) patients who received first line treatment have proceeded to second-line chemotherapy. Chemotherapy-treated patients were younger (69 versus 73 years; P < 0.01), with better Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (ECOG 0-1 89 vs 66%; P < 0.01) and lower median Charlson comorbidity index (3 vs 4; P < 0.01) compared with untreated patients. Median OS of the entire cohort from diagnosis of metastases was 5.1 months. Median OS was 9.3 months in the chemotherapy treated patients, and 2.5 months in chemotherapy-untreated patients (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: A substantial proportion of patients with mPDAC still do not receive active treatment, which may in part by explained by age, poor performance status and comorbidity. Gemcitabine-nab-paclitaxel was the preferred first-line chemotherapy regimen. Median OS for treated patients in this cohort was comparable to that of recent published clinical trials.

A qualitative investigation of the supportive care experiences of people living with pancreatic and oesophagogastric cancer.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic and oesophagogastric (OG) cancers have a dismal prognosis and high symptom burden, with supportive care forming an integral component of the care provided to patients. This study aimed to explore the supportive care experiences of patients and caregivers living with pancreatic and OG cancers in order to identify perceived opportunities for improvement. METHODS: Semi-structured individual interviews were conducted with people living with pancreatic and OG cancers, and their caregivers, across Victoria, Australia during 2020. Interviews were thematically analysed to identify common themes. RESULTS: Forty-one participants were interviewed, including 30 patients and 11 caregivers. Three overarching themes, each with multiple sub-themes, were identified: (i) inadequate support for symptoms and issues across the cancer journey (ii) caregiver's desire for greater support, and (iii) a multidisciplinary care team is the hallmark of a positive supportive care experience. Generally, those who had access to a cancer care coordinator and/or a palliative care team recounted more positive supportive care experiences. CONCLUSION: Unmet needs are prevalent across the pancreatic and OG cancer journey, with supportive care provided to varying levels of satisfaction. Greater awareness of and access to high-quality multidisciplinary support services is greatly desired by both patients with pancreatic and OG cancer and their caregivers.

The association between quality care and outcomes for a real-world population of Australian patients diagnosed with pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: This study: (i) assessed compliance with a consensus set of quality indicators (QIs) in pancreatic cancer (PC); and (ii) evaluated the association between compliance with these QIs and survival. METHODS: Four years of data were collected for patients diagnosed with PC. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). A multivariable analysis tested the relationship between significant patient and hospital characteristics, patient cluster effects within hospitals and survival. RESULTS: 1061 patients were eligible for this study. Significant association with improved survival were: (i) in the potentially resectable group having adjuvant chemotherapy administered following surgery or a reason documented (HR, 0.29; 95 CI, 0.19-0.46); (ii) in the locally advanced group included having chemotherapy ± chemoradiation, or a reason documented for not undergoing treatment (HR, 0.38; 95 CI, 0.25-0.58); and (iii) in the metastatic disease group included having documented performance status at presentation (HR, 0.65; 95 CI, 0.47-0.89), being seen by an oncologist in the absence of treatment (HR, 0.48; 95 CI, 0.31-0.77), and disease management discussed at a multidisciplinary team meeting (HR, 0.79; 95 CI, 0.64-0.96). CONCLUSION: Capture of a concise data set has enabled quality of care to be assessed.

Cancer clinical trial vs real-world outcomes for standard of care first-line treatment in the advanced disease setting.

Clinical trials have strict eligibility criteria, potentially limiting external validity. However, while often discussed this has seldom been explored, particularly across cancer types and at variable time frames posttrial completion. We examined comprehensive registry data (January 2014 to June 2019) for standard first-line treatments for metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC), advanced pancreatic cancer (PC), metastatic HER2-amplified breast cancer (BC) and castrate-resistant prostate cancer (CaP). Registry patient characteristics and outcomes were compared to the practice-changing trial. Registry patients were older than the matched trial cohort by a median of 2-6 years (all P = <.01) for the CRC, BC and PC cohorts. The proportion of Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) 0-1 patients was lower for CRC (94.1% vs 99.2%, P = .001) and BC (94.9% vs 99.3%, P = .001). Progression-free survival (PFS) for registry patients was similar to the trial patients or significantly longer (CaP, Hazard Ratio [HR] = 0.65, P = <.001). Overall survival (OS) was also similar or significantly longer (CaP, HR 0.49, P = <.001). In conclusion, despite real-world patients sometimes being older or having inferior PS to trial cohorts, the survival outcomes achieved were consistently equal or superior to those reported for the same treatment in the trial. We suggest that this is potentially due to optimised use of each treatment over time, improved multidisciplinary care and increased postprogression options. We can reassure clinicians and patients that outcomes matching or exceeding those reported in trials are possible. The potential for survival gains over time should routinely be factored into future trial statistical plans.

Dose modification for haematological toxicity: a survey of Australian medical oncologists.

BACKGROUND: Evidence supporting dose modifications to reduce serious treatment-related adverse events of antineoplastic therapy is limited and frequently based on clinical trial protocols, which are not always generalisable to community patients. eviQ is an online resource with treatment protocols and recommendations for dose modification formulated by expert opinion and evidence-based review. Original recommended haematological thresholds to delay treatment were: neutrophil count <1.5 × 109 /L and platelet count <100 × 109 /L. AIMS: To evaluate the current practices of Australian medical oncologists with regard to haematological dose modifications for antineoplastic treatments, and to determine rates of adherence to eviQ recommendations. METHODS: An online survey regarding haematological dose modifications was distributed to over 400 Medical Oncology Group of Australia members and eviQ medical oncology reference committee members via email. Responses were collated on 18 December 2017. RESULTS: Of 153 respondents, 67% indicated that they did not follow the eviQ haematological dose modification guidelines; 8% delayed curative intent treatment at neutrophil counts <1.5 × 109 /L, compared with 36% for palliative treatment; most delayed treatment at neutrophil counts <1.0 × 109 /L (94% curative and 97% palliative respectively). 70% of clinicians delayed palliative treatment at platelet counts <100 × 109 /L, compared to 34% with curative treatment. No respondents indicated the original haematological cut-off levels were too aggressive. CONCLUSION: The majority of responding medical oncologists indicated that they did not follow the eviQ haematological dose modification guidelines, which were viewed as too conservative. Subsequent to this survey, eviQ reviewed and updated haematological dose modification recommendations.

Chemotherapy and biologic use in the routine management of metastatic colorectal cancer in Australia: is clinical practice following the evidence?

BACKGROUND: Emerging evidence on the optimal use of chemotherapy and biologics in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer should impact management in routine care. Recent studies have demonstrated benefits for initial triplet chemotherapy (5-fluorouracil, oxaliplatin and irinotecan, FOLFOXIRI) and for initial treatment with an epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitor (EGFRi) in patients with a RAS wild-type tumour and a left-sided primary tumour. AIM: To explore evolving pattern of metastatic colorectal cancer care over time in Australia. METHODS: We analysed data from the Treatment of Recurrent and Advanced Colorectal Cancer registry. RESULTS: From July 2009 to December 2017, 2552 metastatic colorectal cancer patients were entered into the Treatment of Recurrent and Advanced Colorectal Cancer registry. Of 1585 patients who initially underwent chemotherapy, treatment was with a doublet in 76%. FOLFOXIRI was given to 22 patients (1.4%), mostly young patients and those with potentially resectable disease. Along with first-line chemotherapy, 61% received bevacizumab, while 3.3% received an EGFRi, predominantly over the last 2 years. Within the KRAS wild-type left-sided tumour cohort, EGFRi use increased from 9% in 2015 to 37% in 2017. Across treatment sites, there was a wide variation in the utilisation of FOLFOXIRI and EGFRi therapy; bevacizumab use was more consistent. A clear impact on survival outcomes from these regimens is not evident, potentially due to multiple confounders. CONCLUSION: Doublet chemotherapy + bevacizumab remains the dominant initial strategy, with limited uptake of triplet chemotherapy and of EGFRi. Potential explanations include uncertainty about the significance of post hoc analyses for EGFRi and concerns regarding adverse events for both strategies.

Timing of palliative care referral and aggressive cancer care toward the end-of-life in pancreatic cancer: a retrospective, single-center observational study.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic cancer is noted for its late presentation at diagnosis, limited prognosis and physical and psychosocial symptom burden. This study examined associations between timing of palliative care referral (PCR) and aggressive cancer care received by pancreatic cancer patients in the last 30 days of life through a single health service. METHOD: A retrospective cohort analysis of end-of-life (EOL) care outcomes of patients with pancreatic cancer who died between 2012 and 2016. Key indicators of aggressive cancer care in the last 30 days of life used were: ≥1 emergency department (ED) presentations, acute inpatient/intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and chemotherapy use. We examined time from PCR to death and place of death. Early and late PCR were defined as > 90 and ≤ 90 days before death respectively. RESULTS: Out of the 278 eligible deaths, 187 (67.3%) were categorized as receiving a late PCR and 91 (32.7%) an early PCR. The median time between referral and death was 48 days. Compared to those receiving early PCR, those with late PCR had: 18.1% (95% CI 6.8-29.4%) more ED presentations; 12.5% (95% CI 1.7-24.8%) more acute hospital admissions; with no differences in ICU admissions. Pain and complications of cancer accounted for the majority of overall ED presentations. Of the 166 patients who received chemotherapy within 30 days of death, 23 (24.5%) had a late PCR and 12 (16.7%) an early PCR, with no association of PCR status either unadjusted or adjusted for age or gender. The majority of patients (55.8%) died at the inpatient palliative care unit. CONCLUSION: Our findings reaffirm the benefits of early PCR for pancreatic cancer patients to avoid inappropriate care toward the EOL. We suggest that in modern cancer care, there can sometimes be a need to reconsider the use of the term 'aggressive cancer care' at the EOL when the care is appropriately based on an individual patient's presenting physical and psychosocial needs. Pancreatic cancer patients warrant early PCR but the debate must thus continue as to how we best achieve and benchmark outcomes that are compatible with patient and family needs and healthcare priorities.

The impact of recipient choice on aid effectiveness.

This study compares the impact of several common development programs (agricultural extension, subsidized agricultural inputs and poultry transfers) to cash transfers equal to the cost of each program. Prior to program delivery, recipients were asked their valuation for each program (i.e., their cash indifference point between cash and the program) as a proxy for their preference between cash and the program. Subsequently, recipients were randomly assigned to receive cash or a program. Six months after delivery of cash and programs, we do not find that individuals who receive the intervention they value most are different from others in terms of consumption, food security, assets, psychological well-being or feelings of autonomy, and can rule out effects of any meaningful size. When comparing cash transfers directly to common development programs, the point estimates indicate no difference in impacts and confidence intervals rule out large differences. We do find that cash transfers increase feelings of autonomy and respect compared to non-cash interventions.

Meaning and Purpose (MaP) therapy II: Feasibility and acceptability from a pilot study in advanced cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Meaning and Purpose (MaP) therapy aims to enhance meaning-based coping through a life review that focuses on the value and worth of the person, key relationships, sources of fulfillment, roles, and future priorities in living life out fully. We sought to test the feasibility and acceptability of a six-session model of MaP therapy against a wait-list control cohort in a pilot study seeking effect sizes on measures of adaptation. METHOD: We randomized patients with advanced cancer to MaP therapy or wait-list control, with measures administered at baseline and after 6-8 weeks. Wait-list patients could then crossover to receive therapy, with further measures collected postintervention. Adherence to the manualized model was sustained through weekly supervision and fidelity coding of recorded sessions. We used generalized estimating equations to control for baseline and any correlation of data.ResultFrom 134 eligible participants, 57 (43%) consented, and 40 of 45 (89%) offered therapy completed 6 sessions. Key barriers to consenting patients were poor health (15 refusers and 4 withdrawals) and death intervened in 6 participants. MaP therapy generated adequate effect sizes in posttraumatic growth (new possibilities, appreciation of life, and personal strength) and life attitudes (choices and goal seeking) to permit calculation of power for a formal randomized, controlled trial.Significance of resultsDelivery of this model of existentially oriented therapy is feasible and acceptable to patients. A properly powered randomized controlled trial is justified to examine the efficacy of this intervention.

The survival outcome of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer based on the site of metastases and the impact of molecular markers and site of primary cancer on metastatic pattern.

BACKGROUND: Pattern of spread in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is variable and may reflect different biology in subsets of patients. This is a retrospective study to explore the outcome of patients with mCRC based on their site of metastasis at diagnosis and to explore the association between tumor characteristics [KRAS/RAS, BRAF, mismatch repair (MMR) status, site of primary] and the site of metastasis. METHODS: Patients from two Australian databases were divided into six groups based on site of metastasis at time of diagnosis of metastatic disease; lung-only, liver-only, lymph node-only or any patients with brain, bone or peritoneal metastases. Primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) of each cohort compared with the rest of the population. A Mantel-Haenszel chi-squared test used to explore the association between site of metastasis and selected tumor characteristics. RESULTS: Five thousand nine hundred and sixty-seven patients were included. In a univariate analysis, median OS was significantly higher when metastases were limited to lung or liver and shorter for those with brain, bone or peritoneal metastases (p < .001) in both datasets. BRAF mutation was strongly associated with peritoneal metastases (relative risk = 1.8, p < .001) with lower incidence of lung (RR = 0.3, p = .004) and liver (RR = 0.7, p = .005) limited metastases. Lung-only metastases were more frequent with KRAS/RAS mutation (RR = 1.4, p = .007). Left colon tumors were associated with bone (RR = 1.6, p < .001) and lung-only metastases (RR = 2.3, p = .001) while peritoneal spread was less frequent compared with right colon tumors (RR = 0.6, p < .001). Rectal cancer was associated with brain, bone and lung metastases (RR = 1.7; p = .002, 1.7; p < .001, 2.0; p < .001). Liver-only metastases were less frequent in deficient MMR tumors (RR = 0.7, p = .01). CONCLUSION: Survival duration with mCRC is related to the site of metastases with lung limited disease showing a more favorable survival outcome compared to other single metastatic site disease. The BRAF mutation and primary rectal cancer were associated with poor prognostic metastatic sites.

A Randomized Controlled Trial of a Nurse-Led Supportive Care Package (SurvivorCare) for Survivors of Colorectal Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Colorectal cancer (CRC) and its treatments can cause distressing sequelae. We conducted a multicenter randomized controlled trial aiming to improve psychological distress, supportive care needs (SCNs), and quality of life (QOL) of patients with CRC. The intervention, called SurvivorCare (SC), comprised educational materials, needs assessment, survivorship care plan, end-of-treatment session, and three follow-up telephone calls. METHODS: At the end of treatment for stage I-III CRC, eligible patients were randomized 1:1 to usual care (UC) or to UC plus SC. Distress (Brief Symptom Inventory 18), SCNs (Cancer Survivors' Unmet Needs measure), and QOL (European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer [EORTC] QOL questionnaires C30 and EORTC CRC module CR29) were assessed at baseline and at 2 and 6 months (follow-up 1 [FU1] and FU2, respectively). The primary hypothesis was that SC would have a beneficial effect on distress at FU1. The secondary hypotheses were that SC would have a beneficial effect on (a) SCN and QOL at FU1 and on (b) distress, SCNs, and QOL at FU2. A total of 15 items assessed experience of care. RESULTS: Of 221 patients randomly assigned, 4 were ineligible for the study and 1 was lost to FU, leaving 110 in the UC group and 106 in the SC group. Patients' characteristics included the following: median age, 64 years; men, 52%; colon cancer, 56%; rectal cancer, 35%; overlapping sites of disease, 10%; stage I disease, 7%; stage II, 22%; stage III, 71%. Baseline distress and QOL scores were similar to population norms. Between-group differences in distress at FU1 (primary outcome) and at FU2, and SCNs and QOL at FU1 and FU2 were small and nonsignificant. Patients in the SC group were more satisfied with survivorship care than those in the UC group (significant differences on 10 of 15 items). CONCLUSION: The addition of SC to UC did not have a beneficial effect on distress, SCNs, or QOL outcomes, but patients in the SC group were more satisfied with care. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Some survivors of colorectal cancer report distressing effects after completing treatment. Strategies to identify and respond to survivors' issues are needed. In a randomized controlled trial, the addition of a nurse-led supportive care package (SurvivorCare) to usual post-treatment care did not impact survivors' distress, quality of life, or unmet needs. However, patients receiving the SurvivorCare intervention were more satisfied with survivorship care. Factors for consideration in the design of subsequent studies are discussed.

ICECREAM: randomised phase II study of cetuximab alone or in combination with irinotecan in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer with either KRAS, NRAS, BRAF and PI3KCA wild type, or G13D mutated tumours.

BACKGROUND: Patients with metastatic colorectal cancer whose disease has progressed on oxaliplatin- and irinotecan-containing regimens may benefit from EGFR-inhibiting monoclonal antibodies if they do not contain mutations in the KRAS gene (are "wild type"). It is unknown whether these antibodies, such as cetuximab, are more efficacious in refractory metastatic colorectal cancer as monotherapy, or in combination with irinotecan. Lack of mutation in KRAS, BRAF and PIK3CA predicts response to EFGR-inhibitors. The ICECREAM trial examines the question of monotherapy versus combination with chemotherapy in two groups of patients: those with a "quadruple wild type" tumour genotype (no mutations in KRAS, NRAS, PI3KCA or BRAF genes) and those with the specific KRAS mutation in codon G13D, for whom possibly EGFR-inhibitor efficacy may be equivalent. METHODS AND DESIGN: ICECREAM is a randomised, phase II, open-label, controlled trial comparing the efficacy of cetuximab alone or with irinotecan in patients with "quadruple wild type" or G13D-mutated metastatic colorectal cancer, whose disease has progressed on, or who are intolerant of oxaliplatin- and fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy. The primary endpoint is the 6-month progression-free survival benefit of the treatment regimen. Secondary endpoints are response rate, overall survival, and quality of life. The tertiary endpoint is prediction of outcome with further biological markers. International collaboration has facilitated recruitment in this prospective trial of treatment in these infrequently found molecular subsets of colorectal cancer. DISCUSSION: This unique trial will yield prospective information on the efficacy of cetuximab and whether this is further enhanced with chemotherapy in two distinct populations of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: the "quadruple wild type", which may 'superselect' for tumours sensitive to EGFR-inhibition, and the rare KRAS G13D mutated tumours, which are also postulated to be sensitive to the drug. The focus on establishing both positive and negative predictive factors for the response to targeted therapy is an attempt to improve outcomes, reduce toxicity and contain treatment costs. Tissue and blood will yield a resource for molecular studies. Recruitment, particularly of patients with the rare G13D mutation, will demonstrate the ability for international collaboration to run prospective trials in small colorectal cancer molecular subgroups. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: ACTRN12612000901808 , registered 16 August 2012.

Quality of life in patients with K-RAS wild-type colorectal cancer: the CO.20 phase 3 randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: The CO.20 trial randomized patients with K-RAS wild-type, chemotherapy-refractory, metastatic colorectal cancer to receive cetuximab (CET) plus brivanib alaninate (BRIV) or CET plus placebo (CET/placebo). METHODS: Quality of life (QoL) was assessed using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire C30 at baseline and at 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, and 24 weeks until disease progression. Predefined coprimary QoL endpoints were time to deterioration (first worsening from baseline of ≥ 10 points) on the Physical Function (PF) and Global (GHS) scales. RESULTS: Of 750 randomized patients, 721 (358 of whom received CET/BRIV) were assessable for QoL. QoL compliance and baseline PF and GHS scores did not differ by treatment arm. The median time to deterioration was 1.6 months versus 1.1 months for GHS (P =.02) and 5.6 months versus 1.7 months for PF (P <.0001) favoring CET/placebo. Secondary analysis favored CET/placebo for QOL response on the PF, Cognitive Function, Fatigue, Nausea, Appetite, and Diarrhea scales. A greater percentage of patients on the CET/BRIV arm had PF worsening at 6 weeks (31% vs 17%). Clinical adverse events of ≥ grade 3 were more common with CET/BRIV than with CET/placebo, including fatigue (25% vs 11%), hypertension, rash, diarrhea, abdominal pain, dehydration, and anorexia. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with CET/placebo, the combination of CET/BRIV worsened time to QoL deterioration for patients with K-RAS wild-type, chemotherapy-refractory, metastatic colorectal cancer on the PF and GHS scales of European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire C30. This result may be due to higher rates of fatigue and gastrointestinal adverse events.

Health Care Use for Eye Pain.

Importance: National estimates regarding the frequency of presentations and patterns of care for eye pain are unknown. This information could guide research and clinical efforts to optimize outcomes. Objective: To estimate eye pain visits in the US in the outpatient and emergency department (ED) settings. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cross-sectional study of National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey and National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey data (2008-2019) analyzed a population-based sample of visits to outpatient clinics and EDs. The sample consisted of patients presenting with eye pain. Data were analyzed from September 2023 to April 2024. Main Outcomes and Measures: Weighted sample data estimated outpatient and ED eye pain presentations including patient and clinician characteristics, diagnoses (International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision [ICD-10]), and disposition. Results: From 2008 through 2019, 4.6 million (95% CI, 3.9 million to 5.3 million) outpatient and 1.0 million (95% CI, 0.8 million to 1.1 million) ED eye pain visits occurred annually. Patients were predominantly women (63.2% [95% CI, 59.4%-67.0%]) and older than 60 years (46.6% [95% CI, 42.4%-51.0%]) in the outpatient setting. Patients presenting to the ED were more often men (51.8% [95% CI, 48.7%-55.0%]) and aged younger than 45 years (aged <15 years: 16.4% [95% CI, 13.9%-18.8%]; 15-24 years: 19.2% [95% CI, 16.6%-21.7%]; and 25-44 years: 35.6% [95% CI, 32.7%-38.5%]). In nearly half of outpatient eye pain visits, the major problem was classified as nonacute (2.0 million [95% CI, 1.6 million to 2.3 million]). Eye pain was the primary reason for the visit (RFV) in 42.0% (95% CI, 37.8%-46.2%) of outpatient visits and 66.9% (95% CI, 62.9%-70.9%) of ED eye pain visits. It was the only RFV in 18.3% (95% CI, 15.0%-21.7%) of outpatient and 32.7% (95% CI, 29.0%-36.4%) of ED eye pain encounters. Ophthalmologists evaluated the largest number of outpatient visits (45.3% [95% CI, 38.8%-51.7%). The primary diagnosis was non-vision threatening for most outpatient (78.5% [95% CI, 56.8%-100%]) and ED (69.9% [95% CI, 62.1%-77.7%]) visits when eye pain was the primary RFV. Additional follow-up was scheduled in 89.4% (95% CI, 86.2%-92.6%) of visits. Conclusions and Relevance: More than 5 million eye pain visits occur annually; the largest percentage are outpatient with ophthalmologists. Most diagnoses were non-vision threatening in both the outpatient and ED setting and resulted in additional care. Expanding therapeutic approaches to treat the causes of eye pain may reduce the burden on the health care system and optimize outcomes.