Hypoglycemic and Hyperglycemic Crises Among U.S. Adults With Diabetes and End-stage Kidney Disease: Population-Based Study, 2013-2017.

OBJECTIVE: We characterized annual trends of severe hypoglycemic and hyperglycemic crises (diabetic ketoacidosis/hyperglycemic hyperosmolar state) in patients with diabetes and end-stage kidney disease (ESKD). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This was a nationwide, retrospective study of adults (≥18 years old) with diabetes/ESKD, from the United States Renal Data System registry, between 2013 and 2017. Primary outcome was annual rates of emergency department visits or hospitalizations for hypoglycemic and hyperglycemic crises, reported as number of events/1,000 person-years. Event rates and risk factors were adjusted for patient age, sex, race/ethnicity, dialysis modality, comorbidities, treatment regimen, and U.S. region. RESULTS: Among 521,789 adults with diabetes/ESKD (median age 65 years [interquartile range 57-73], 56.1% male, and 46% White), overall adjusted rates of hypoglycemic and hyperglycemic crises were 53.64 and 18.24 per 1,000 person-years, respectively. For both hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia crises, respectively, the risks decreased with age and were lowest in older patients (≥75 vs. 18-44 years old: incidence rate ratio 0.35, 95% CI 0.33-0.37, and 0.03, 0.02-0.03), women (1.09, 1.06-1.12, and 1.44, 1.35-1.54), and those with smoking (1.36, 1.28-1.43, and 1.71, 1.53-1.91), substance abuse (1.27, 1.15-1.42, and 1.53, 1.23-1.9), retinopathy (1.10, 1.06-1.15, and 1.36, 1.26-1.47), and insulin therapy (vs. no therapy; 0.60, 0.59-0.63, and 0.44, 0.39-0.48). For hypoglycemia, specifically, additional risk was conferred by Black race (1.11, 1.08-1.15) and amputation history (1.20, 1.13-1.27). CONCLUSIONS: In this nationwide study of patients with diabetes/ESKD, hypoglycemic crises were threefold more common than hyperglycemic crises, greatly exceeding national reports in nondialysis patients with chronic kidney disease. Young, Black, and female patients were disproportionately affected.

Racial differences in survival and response to therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: A secondary analysis of CALGB/SWOG 80405 (Alliance A151931).

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to evaluate the association between self-identified race and overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and response to therapy among patients enrolled in the randomized Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB)/SWOG 80405 trial. METHODS: Patients with advanced or metastatic colorectal cancer who were enrolled in the CALGB/SWOG 80405 trial were identified by race. On the basis of covariates (treatment arm, KRAS status, sex, age, and body mass index), each Black patient was exact matched with a White patient. The association between race and OS and PFS was examined using a marginal Cox proportional hazard model for matched pairs. The interaction between KRAS status and race was tested in the model. The association between race and response to therapy and adverse events were examined using a marginal logistic regression model. RESULTS: In total, 392 patients were matched and included in the final data set. No difference in OS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.92; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73-1.16), PFS (HR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.78-1.20), or response to therapy (odds ratio [OR], 1.00; 95% CI, 0.65-1.52) was observed between Black and White patients. Patients with KRAS mutant status (HR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.02-1.67), a performance statusscore of 1 (reference, a performance status of 0; HR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.18-1.88), or ≥3 metastatic sites (reference, 1 metastatic site; HR, 1.67; 95% CI, 1.22-2.28) experienced worse OS. Black patients experienced lower rates and risk of grade ≥3 fatigue (6.6% vs 13.3%; OR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.24-0.91) but were equally likely to be treated with a dose reduction (OR, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.72-1.65). CONCLUSIONS: No difference in OS, PFS, or response to therapy was observed between Black patients and White patients in an equal treatment setting of the CALGB/SWOG 80405 randomized controlled trial. LAY SUMMARY: Despite improvements in screening and treatment, studies have demonstrated worse outcomes in Black patients with colorectal cancer. The purpose of this study was to determine whether there was a difference in cancer-specific outcomes among Black and White patients receiving equivalent treatment on the CALGB/SWOG 80405 randomized clinical trial. In this study, there was no difference in overall survival, progression-free survival, or response to therapy between Black and White patients treated on a clinical trial. These findings suggest that access to care and differences in treatment may be responsible for racial disparities in colorectal cancer.

Electronic Geriatric Assessment: Is It Feasible in a Multi-Institutional Study That Included a Notable Proportion of Older African American Patients? (Alliance A171603).

PURPOSE: This study determined whether an electronic version of the geriatric assessment is feasible in a multi-institutional, diverse setting. METHODS: Ten sites within the Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology participated. Patients who had active cancer or a history of cancer and were 65 years of age or older were eligible. The geriatric assessment was completed with an electronic data capture system that had been loaded onto iPads. Feasibility was defined a priori as completion in at least 70% of patients either with or without help. To enhance racial diversity, the original sample size was later changed and augmented by 50% with the intention of increasing enrollment of older minority patients. RESULTS: A total of one hundred fifty-four patients were registered with a median age of 72 years (range, 65-91 years). Forty-three (28%) identified themselves as African American or Black. One hundred forty-one patients (92%) completed the electronic geriatric assessment. Feasibility was observed across all subgroups, regardless of race, education, performance status, comorbidities, and cognition; 124 patients (81%) completed the geriatric assessment without help. Reasons for not completing the geriatric assessment are as follows: clinic visit did not occur (n = 6), no iPad connection to the Internet (n = 3), patient declined (n = 2), prolonged hospitalization (n = 1), and patient died (n = 1). Reasons for needing help, as reported by study personnel, were as follows: the patient preferred that research personnel ask the questions (n = 9), vision problem (n = 3), lack of comfort with the iPad (n = 2), questions were not clear (n = 1), less proficient in English (n = 1), and challenge in pressing the green button to go to the next question (n = 1). CONCLUSION: The electronic geriatric assessment is feasible in a multi-institutional setting that includes a notable proportion of African American or Black patients.

Olanzapine for the Treatment of Advanced Cancer-Related Chronic Nausea and/or Vomiting: A Randomized Pilot Trial.

Importance: Nausea and vomiting, unrelated to chemotherapy, can be substantial symptoms in patients with advanced cancer. Objective: To evaluate the utility of olanzapine for treating chronic nausea/vomiting, unrelated to chemotherapy, in patients with advanced cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: This study is a double-line, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial conducted from July 2017 through April 2019, with analysis conducted in 2019. Eligible participants were outpatients with advanced cancer who had persistent nausea/vomiting without having had chemotherapy or radiotherapy in the prior 14 days. Chronic nausea was present for at least 1 week (worst daily nausea numeric rating scores needed to be greater than 3 on a 0-10 scale). Interventions: Patients received olanzapine (5 mg) or a placebo, orally, daily for 7 days. Main Outcomes and Measures: Patient-reported outcomes were used for study end points. Data were collected at baseline and daily for 7 more days. The primary study end point (the change in nausea numeric rating scores from baseline to the last treatment day) and the study hypothesis were both identified prior to data collection. Results: A total of 30 patients (15 per arm) were enrolled; these included 16 women and 14 men who had a mean (range) age of 63 (39-79) years. Baseline median nausea scores, in all patients, were 9 out of 10 (range, 8-10). After 1 day and 1 week, the median nausea scores in the placebo arm were 9 out of 10 (range, 8-10) on both days, compared with the olanzapine arm scores of 2 out of 10 (range, 2-3) after day 1 and 1 out of 10 (range, 0-3) after 1 week. After 1 week of treatment, the reduction in nausea scores in the olanzapine arm was 8 points (95% CI, 7-8) higher than that of the placebo arm. The primary 2-sided end point P value was <.001. Correspondingly, patients in the olanzapine arm reported less emesis, less use of other antiemetic drugs, better appetite, less sedation, less fatigue, and better well-being. One patient, on the placebo, stopped treatment early owing to lack of perceived benefit. No patients receiving olanzapine reported excess sedation or any other adverse event. Conclusions and Relevance: Olanzapine, at 5 mg/d, appeared to be effective in controlling nausea and emesis and in improving other symptoms and quality-of-life parameters in the study population. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03137121.