Analysis of Health-Related Quality of Life Reporting in Phase III RCTs of Advanced Genitourinary Tumors.

BACKGROUND: As recommended in the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) guidelines, assessment of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) should be a relevant endpoint in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) testing new anticancer therapies. However, previous publications by our group and others revealed a frequent underestimation and underreporting of HRQoL results in publication of RCTs in oncology. Herein, we systematically reviewed HRQoL reporting in RCTs testing new treatments in advanced prostate, kidney and urothelial cancers and published between 2010 and 2022. METHODS: We searched PubMed RCTs testing novel therapies in genitourinary (GU) cancers and published in fifteen selected journals (Annals of Oncology, BMC Cancer, British Journal of Cancer, Cancer Discovery, Clinical Cancer Research, Clinical Genitourinary cancer, European Journal of Cancer, European Urology, European Urology Oncology, JAMA, JAMA Oncology, Journal of clinical Oncology, Lancet, Lancet Oncology and The New England Journal of Medicine). We excluded trials investigating exclusively best supportive care or behavioral intervention, as well as subgroup or post hoc analyses of previously published trials. For each RCT, we investigated whether HRQoL assessment was performed by protocol and if results were reported in the primary manuscript or in a secondary publication. RESULTS: We found 85 eligible trials published between 2010 and 2022. Only 1/85 RCTs (1.2%) included HRQoL among primary endpoints. Of note, 25/85 (29.4%) RCTs did not include HRQoL among study endpoints. HRQoL results were non-disclosed in 56/85 (65.9%) primary publications. Only 18/85 (21.2%) publications fulfilled at least one item of the CONSORT-PRO checklist. Furthermore, 14/46 (30.4%) RCTs in prostate cancer, 12/25 (48%) in kidney cancer and 3/14 (21.4%) in urothelial cancer reported HRQoL data in primary publications. Next, HRQoL data were disclosed in primary manuscripts of 12/32 (37.5%), 5/13 (38.5%), 5/16 (31.3%) and 5/15 (33.3%) trials evaluating target therapies, chemotherapy, immunotherapy and new hormonal agents, respectively. Next, we found that HRQoL data were reported in 16/42 (38%) and in 13/43 (30.2%) positive and negative trials, respectively. Finally, the rate of RCTs reporting HRQoL results in primary or secondary publications was 55.3% (n = 47/85). CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis revealed a relevant underreporting of HRQoL in RCTs in advanced GU cancers. These results highlight the need to dedicate more attention to HRQoL in RCTs to fully assess the value of new anticancer treatments.

FOLFIRINOX or nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine in metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma: an observational study.

Aim: Comparison of first-line FOLFIRINOX (FFN) and nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine (NabGem) in patients with metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Patients & methods: The authors analyzed data from 160 patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma receiving first-line FFN (n = 43) or NabGem (n = 117). Results: FFN and NabGem were similar in median progression-free survival (24.43 vs 26.28 weeks; hazard ratio [HR]: 0.88) and medial overall survival (47.43 vs 42.86 weeks; HR: 0.90). Of the 43 patients receiving FFN, 26 (60.4%) were treated with second-line NabGem; 14/117 (12.0%) patients receiving NabGem received second-line FFN (p < 0.0001). In the FFN → NabGem and NabGem → FFN groups, median overall survival was 51.2 and 71.6 weeks (HR: 0.69; p = 0.15). In patients receiving NabGem, second-line FFN, compared with FOLFOX/CAPOX or FOLFIRI, improved median progression-free survival 2 (25.6 vs 12.1 weeks; HR: 0.47; p = 0.0067) and median overall survival 2 (39.0 vs 19.14 weeks; HR: 0.49; p = 0.032). Conclusion: First-line FFN and NabGem promote similar clinical outcomes. Second-line FFN should be considered after NabGem.

Use of FOLFIRINOX or Nab-Paclitaxel Plus Gemcitabine for the Treatment of Locally Advanced Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: A Single Institution Observational Study.

Patients with locally advanced (LA) pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) do not present distant metastases but are not eligible for surgery upfront. Chemotherapy regimens, such as FOLFIRINOX (FFN) or nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine (GemNab) in combination with loco-regional treatments are generally used in this setting. However, the best treatment choice is unknown. We retrospectively analyzed the information of 225 patients with stage II-III PDAC treated at our institution between October 2011 and December 2020. A total of 94 patients with LA PDAC who are non-eligible for surgery upfront received neoadjuvant FFN or GemNab. Of the 67 patients receiving FFN, 28 (41.8%) underwent surgery after neoadjuvant therapy. Of the 27 patients treated with GemNab, 6 (22.2%) became eligible for resection. The median overall survival (OS) was 85.1 weeks and 54.3 weeks in the FFN and GemNab groups, respectively (HR = 0.54, p = 0.0109). The median OS was 189.7 weeks and 76.4 weeks in the resected and unresected cohorts, respectively (HR = 0.25, p < 0.0001). Neutropenia (37.3%), anemia (6.0%), and diarrhea (6.0%) in the FFN group and neutropenia (22.2%) and thrombocytopenia (18.5%) in the GemNab groups were the most frequent grade 3-4 side effects. Higher rates of thrombocytosis (p < 0.0001) and peripheral edema (p < 0.0001) were observed in the GemNab group. Our results suggest that the use of FFN is associated with more favorable clinical outcomes than GemNab for patients with LA PDAC. Future randomized and controlled clinical trials are needed to further elucidate the role of these regimens and loco-regional treatments in this setting.