Assessing Patient Participation Burden Based on Protocol Design Characteristics.

BACKGROUND: Although a number of studies have quantitatively measured investigative site burden to administer increasingly complex protocol designs, robust scholarly research has not been performed to quantify the burden that patients face as participants in clinical trials. METHODS: This paper presents the results of a cross-sectional pilot study conducted by the Tufts Center for the Study of Drug Development and ZS Associates among nearly 600 patients via an online survey conducted between February and March 2019. Respondents rated the perceived burden of 60 commonly administered protocol procedures. The association and relationship between overall patient burden-derived from aggregating mean perceived burden ratings for individual procedures-and performance (eg, screen failure and retention rates, clinical trial cycle times) for a cross-sectional sample of 137 individual protocols was assessed. Descriptive statistics, significance tests, and univariate analyses were performed. RESULTS: Strong positive, statistically significant associations were observed between a composite measure of patient burden and protocol-specific design and performance measures, most notably study visits above the tolerable mean and the study conduct duration from first patient first visit to last patient last visit. CONCLUSIONS: The study results suggest a new and viable approach to optimize protocol design and improve patient engagement.

Assessing Patient Participation Burden Based on Protocol Design Characteristics.

BACKGROUND: Although a number of studies have quantitatively measured investigative site burden to administer increasingly complex protocol designs, robust scholarly research has not been performed to quantify the burden that patients face as participants in clinical trials. METHODS: This paper presents the results of a cross-sectional pilot study conducted by the Tufts Center for the Study of Drug Development and ZS Associates among nearly 600 patients via an online survey conducted between February and March 2019. Respondents rated the perceived burden of 60 commonly administered protocol procedures. The association and relationship between overall patient burden-derived from aggregating mean perceived burden ratings for individual procedures-and performance (eg, screen failure and retention rates, clinical trial cycle times) for a cross-sectional sample of 137 individual protocols was assessed. Descriptive statistics, significance tests, and univariate analyses were performed. RESULTS: Strong positive, statistically significant associations were observed between a composite measure of patient burden and protocol-specific design and performance measures, most notably study visits above the tolerable mean and the study conduct duration from first patient first visit to last patient last visit. CONCLUSIONS: The study results suggest a new and viable approach to optimize protocol design and improve patient engagement.

An Expanded Treatment Protocol of Panobinostat Plus Bortezomib and Dexamethasone in Patients With Previously Treated Myeloma.

BACKGROUND: Panobinostat was recently approved by the US Food and Drug Administration and European Commission in combination with bortezomib and dexamethasone for patients with multiple myeloma who have received ≥ 2 regimens, including bortezomib and an immunomodulatory drug. The PANEX (panobinostat expansion) treatment protocol provided access to panobinostat and gathered additional safety data before commercial availability. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In treatment phase 1, patients received panobinostat 20 mg 3 times per week plus bortezomib 1.3 mg/m2 twice weekly with dexamethasone 20 mg on the days of and after bortezomib treatment. Patients with no change or better in treatment phase 1 proceeded to treatment phase 2, when bortezomib was reduced to once weekly. Unlike in the phase III trial, PANORAMA-1 (panobinostat or placebo with bortezomib and dexamethasone in patients with relapsed multiple myeloma), bortezomib could be administered either subcutaneously or intravenously. RESULTS: Thirty-nine patients with a median number of previous treatments of 4 (range, 1-12) were enrolled; most received subcutaneous bortezomib (87%). The overall response rate (partial response or better) was 56%. Grade 3/4 adverse events included thrombocytopenia (47%), fatigue (31%), dehydration (26%), and diarrhea (18%). Among the patients who received subcutaneous bortezomib, relatively low rates of peripheral neuropathy (all grade, 15%) and notable grade 3/4 adverse events (thrombocytopenia, 47%; diarrhea, 12%) were observed. CONCLUSION: Overall, data from the PANEX trial support regulatory approval of panobinostat plus bortezomib and dexamethasone and suggest the potential tolerability benefits of subcutaneous bortezomib in this regimen.

Phase II trial of panobinostat, an oral pan-deacetylase inhibitor in patients with primary myelofibrosis, post-essential thrombocythaemia, and post-polycythaemia vera myelofibrosis.

Myelofibrosis (MF) is a Philadelphia chromosome-negative stem cell myeloproliferative neoplasm (MPN) associated with cytopenias, splenomegaly, constitutional symptoms, and poor prognosis. MF patients commonly express JAK2 V617F mutation and activation of Janus kinase (JAK)/signal transducer and activator of transcription (STAT) signalling. Agents targeting the JAK/STAT pathway have demonstrated efficacy in patients with MF. This study evaluated panobinostat, a pan-deacetylase inhibitor that depletes JAK2 V617F levels and JAK/STAT signalling in MPN cells, in patients with primary MF, post-essential thrombocythaemia MF, and post-polycythaemia vera MF. Patients received panobinostat 40 mg administered three times per week. Dose reductions were permitted for toxicities. The primary endpoint was response rate at 6 months using International Working Group for Myelofibrosis Research and Treatment (IWG-MRT) consensus criteria. Analyses of peripheral blood cells from treated patients revealed that panobinostat inhibited JAK/STAT signalling, decreased inflammatory cytokine levels, and decreased JAK2 V617F allelic burden. However, panobinostat was poorly tolerated at the dose and schedule evaluated, and only 16 of 35 patients completed ≥2 cycles of treatment. One patient (3%) achieved an IWG-MRT response. Common adverse events were thrombocytopenia (71.4%) and diarrhoea (80.0%). Although molecular correlative analyses suggested that panobinostat inhibits key intracellular targets, limited clinical activity was observed because of poor tolerance.