ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are getting widely implemented, but little is known of the impact of applying PROs in specific cancer diagnoses. We report the results of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) of the active use of PROs in patients with locally advanced or metastatic bladder cancer (BC) undergoing medical oncological treatment (MOT) with focus on determining the clinical effects of using PROs during chemo- or immunotherapy compared to standard of care. METHODS: We recruited patients from four departments of oncology from 2019 to 2021. Inclusion criteria were locally advanced or metastatic BC, initiating chemo- or immunotherapy. Patients were randomized 1:1 between answering selected PRO-CTCAE questions electronically once weekly with a built-in alert-algorithm instructing patients of how to handle reported symptoms as a supplement to standard of care for handling of side effects (intervention arm (IA)) vs standard procedure for handling of side effects (control arm (CA)). No real-time alerts were sent to the clinic when PROs exceeded threshold values. Clinicians were prompted to view the completed PROs in the IA at each clinical visit. The co-primary clinical endpoints were hospital admissions and treatment completion rate. Secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), quality of life (EORTC's QLQ-C30 and QLQ-BLM30) and dose reductions. RESULTS: 228 patients with BC were included, 76% were male. 141 (62%) of the patients had metastatic disease. 51% of patients in the IA completed treatment vs. 56% of patients in the CA, OR 0.83 (95% CI 0.47-1.44, p = 0.51). 41% of patients in the IA experienced hospitalization vs. 32% in the CA, OR 1.48 (95% CI 0.83-2.65, p = 0.17). OS was comparable between the two arms (IA: median 22.3mo (95% CI 17.0-NR) vs. CA: median 23.1mo (95% CI 17.7-NR). Patient and clinician compliance was high throughout the study period (80% vs 94%). CONCLUSIONS: This RCT did not show an effect of PRO on completion of treatment, hospitalizations or OS for BC patients during MOT despite a high level of patient and clinician compliance. The lack of real-time response to alerts remains the greatest limitation to this study.
Subject(s)
Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms , Male , Humans , Female , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms/drug therapy , Medical Oncology , Immunotherapy , Patient Reported Outcome MeasuresABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: In a phase 2 study, rucaparib, an inhibitor of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP), showed a high level of activity in patients who had metastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer associated with a deleterious BRCA alteration. Data are needed to confirm and expand on the findings of the phase 2 study. METHODS: In this randomized, controlled, phase 3 trial, we enrolled patients who had metastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer with a BRCA1, BRCA2, or ATM alteration and who had disease progression after treatment with a second-generation androgen-receptor pathway inhibitor (ARPI). We randomly assigned the patients in a 2:1 ratio to receive oral rucaparib (600 mg twice daily) or a physician's choice control (docetaxel or a second-generation ARPI [abiraterone acetate or enzalutamide]). The primary outcome was the median duration of imaging-based progression-free survival according to independent review. RESULTS: Of the 4855 patients who had undergone prescreening or screening, 270 were assigned to receive rucaparib and 135 to receive a control medication (intention-to-treat population); in the two groups, 201 patients and 101 patients, respectively, had a BRCA alteration. At 62 months, the duration of imaging-based progression-free survival was significantly longer in the rucaparib group than in the control group, both in the BRCA subgroup (median, 11.2 months and 6.4 months, respectively; hazard ratio, 0.50; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.36 to 0.69) and in the intention-to-treat group (median, 10.2 months and 6.4 months, respectively; hazard ratio, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.47 to 0.80; P<0.001 for both comparisons). In an exploratory analysis in the ATM subgroup, the median duration of imaging-based progression-free survival was 8.1 months in the rucaparib group and 6.8 months in the control group (hazard ratio, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.59 to 1.52). The most frequent adverse events with rucaparib were fatigue and nausea. CONCLUSIONS: The duration of imaging-based progression-free survival was significantly longer with rucaparib than with a control medication among patients who had metastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer with a BRCA alteration. (Funded by Clovis Oncology; TRITON3 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02975934.).
Subject(s)
Antineoplastic Agents , Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant , Humans , Male , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/therapeutic use , Indoles/therapeutic use , Progression-Free Survival , Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant/drug therapy , Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant/genetics , Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant/secondary , Poly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Androgen Antagonists/therapeutic use , Antineoplastic Agents/therapeutic use , Docetaxel/therapeutic use , Disease Progression , Genes, BRCA1 , Genes, BRCA2ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Immunotherapy with checkpoint inhibitors (CPIs) has revolutionised cancer treatment but has no convincing effect in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). It has been suggested that a combination of CPI and hypofractionated stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) may work synergistically, and recent trials have supported this. We hypothesise that adding SBRT to CPI treatment can improve response rates in patients with mCRPC. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The CheckPRO trial is an open-label, randomised, two-stage, phase II trial. We aim to enrol and randomise 80 evaluable patients with mCRPC who progressed following ≥2 lines of treatment. Enrolment started in November 2019 with 38 months expected enrolment period. The participants receive treatment for 52 weeks including four cycles of ipilimumab and nivolumab with or without concomitant SBRT (24 Gray in three fractions) to a single soft tissue or bone metastasis, followed by 10 cycles of nivolumab. Participants are followed until progression, death, or for 12 months after the end of treatment.Co-primary endpoints are the objective response rate and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response rate. Secondary endpoints include safety, radiographic progression-free survival, clinical benefit rate, duration of response, PSA-progression-free survival beyond 12 weeks, quality of life and overall survival. Exploratory endpoints include translational analyses of tumour biopsies and consecutive blood samples. Biopsies from metastatic sites are collected at baseline, before the third treatment and at the end of treatment. Blood sampling for immune monitoring and circulating tumour DNA is performed consecutively at baseline and every radiographic assessment. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study follows the Helsinki Declaration and is approved by the Danish Ethics Committee System (journal no. H-19016100). All participants must receive written and oral information and provide a signed informed consent document prior to inclusion. The study results will be published in an international peer-review journal. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: EudraCT number: 2018-003461-34. CLINICALTRIALS: gov ID NCT05655715.
Subject(s)
Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant , Radiosurgery , Male , Humans , Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant/drug therapy , Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant/radiotherapy , Prostate-Specific Antigen , Nivolumab/therapeutic use , Quality of Life , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/therapeutic use , Clinical Trials, Phase II as Topic , Randomized Controlled Trials as TopicABSTRACT
Background: Patients with bladder cancer (BC) have a high prevalence of comorbidity and low adherence to systemic anticancer treatment but it is unknown whether this is associated with sarcopenia. Objective: We aimed to investigate if the sarcopenia-defining parameters (muscle strength, muscle mass and physical performance) were associated with reduced adherence to systemic anticancer treatment in patients with BC, and if these muscle domains changed during treatment. Methods: Patients >18 years of age with BC referred for chemotherapy or immunotherapy at Department of Oncology, Rigshospitalet, Denmark were eligible for study inclusion. Measurements were performed before treatment initiation and within one week after treatment termination, and consisted of assessments of muscle strength, muscle mass, and physical performance. Data was compared with thresholds outlined by the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older Patient's (EWGSOP2) guidelines and a healthy, age-matched Danish cohort. Results: Over a period of 29 months, we included 14 patients of whom two completed follow-up measurements. The recruitment rate was <50% of planned due to logistics and Covid-19 related limitations. Consequently, a decision to prematurely terminate the study was made. No patients fulfilled EWGSOP2 criteria for sarcopenia, but the majority had reduction in one or more muscle domains compared to healthy, age-matched individuals. The majority of patients had poor treatment tolerance, leading to dose reductions and postponed treatments. Conclusions: In this prematurely terminated study, no patients fulfilled EWGSOP2 criteria for sarcopenia, yet, most patients were affected in one or more muscle domains and the majority had compromised treatment adherence.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The proportion of patients with locally advanced, unresectable or metastatic urothelial carcinoma that do not receive systemic anticancer treatment and the reasons for lack of treatment are largely unknown. The aim of this study was to investigate the prevalence and overall survival of this patient group and reasons for omission of treatment. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This retrospective, single-center cohort study from Rigshospitalet, Denmark included patients diagnosed with locally advanced, unresectable or metastatic urothelial carcinoma during the study period from 1 January 2010 to 31 March 2016 who did not receive systemic anticancer treatment. Patients were identified through the Danish Pathology Register and the electronic medical records. RESULTS: 100 patients were included, representing 34% of all patients diagnosed with locally advanced, unresectable or metastatic urothelial carcinoma at Rigshospitalet during the study period. Lack of treatment was most often due to poor physical condition (59%), decreased renal function (15%), or patient preferences (14%). Median overall survival was 1.9 months (95% CI: 1.6-2.8 months). CONCLUSION: One in three patients diagnosed with locally advanced, unresectable or metastatic urothelial carcinoma in the pre-immunotherapy era did not receive systemic anticancer treatment. Prompt identification of advanced disease and interventions to optimize these patients for treatment are essential. Our findings underscore the compelling need for novel, better tolerated treatment regimens in this frail patient group.
Subject(s)
Carcinoma, Transitional Cell , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms , Urologic Neoplasms , Humans , Carcinoma, Transitional Cell/therapy , Carcinoma, Transitional Cell/pathology , Urologic Neoplasms/therapy , Urologic Neoplasms/pathology , Retrospective Studies , Cohort Studies , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms/pathologyABSTRACT
Background: There is no high-grade evidence for surgery as primary treatment for locally advanced prostate cancer. The SPCG-15 study is the first randomized trial comparing surgical treatment with radiotherapy. Objective: To describe the baseline characteristics of the first 600 randomized men in the SPCG-15 study. The study will compare mortality and functional outcomes. Design setting and participants: This study is a Scandinavian prospective, open, multicenter phase III randomized clinical trial aiming to randomize 1200 men. Intervention: Radical prostatectomy with or without consecutive radiotherapy (experimental) and radiotherapy with neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy (standard of care). Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Cause-specific survival, metastasis-free survival, overall survival, and patient-reported bowel function, sexual health, and lower urinary tract symptoms were measured. Results and limitations: The distribution of characteristics was similar in the two study arms. The median age was 67 yr (range 45-75 yr). Among the operated men, 36% had pT3a stage of disease and 39% had pT3b stage. International Society of Urological Pathology grades 2, 3, 4, and 5 were prevalent in 21%, 35%, 7%, and 27%, respectively. Half of the men (51%) in the surgery arm had no positive lymph nodes. The main limitation is the pragmatic design comparing the best available practice at each study site leading to heterogeneity of treatment regimens within the study arms. Conclusions: We have proved that randomization between surgery and radiotherapy for locally advanced prostate cancer is feasible. The characteristics of the study population demonstrate a high prevalence of advanced disease, well-balanced comparison groups, and a demography mirroring the Scandinavian population of men with prostate cancer at large. Patient summary: This study, which has recruited >600 men, compares radiotherapy with surgery for prostate cancer, and an analysis at the time of randomization indicates that the study will be informative and generalizable to most men with locally advanced but not metastasized prostate cancer.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Enzalutamide and abiraterone acetate plus prednisone (AAP) have similar efficacy in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Herein, we compare fatigue, health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) and metabolic changes in men with mCRPC treated with enzalutamide and AAP. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this single-centre, open-labelled, phase IV trial, patients with metastatic prostate cancer progressing on androgen deprivation therapy were randomly assigned to enzalutamide (160 mg daily) or AAP (1000 mg abiraterone acetate and 10 mg prednisone daily) as first-line mCRPC treatment. The primary outcome was the difference in changed fatigue (Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue questionnaire). The secondary outcomes were differences in changed HRQoL (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate questionnaire), body composition, weight, glucose homeostasis, lipid profile and blood pressure. All outcomes were assessed at baseline and at 12-week follow-up. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrialsregister.eu (2017-000099-27). RESULTS: 170 patients were randomised (1:1) to enzalutamide or AAP. The primary outcome was positive with a clinically meaningful difference in fatigue, favouring AAP (3.4 points, 95% CI 1.2; 5.6, P = 0.003). The group difference in changed HRQoL did not reach clinical significance. The most important metabolic finding was a higher increase in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) for AAP than enzalutamide (3.4 mmol/mol, 95% CI 2.1; 4.8, P = 0.001). Eight patients developed type 2 diabetes (T2D) in the AAP group and none in the enzalutamide group. No treatment-related serious adverse event was observed. CONCLUSIONS: AAP resulted in less fatigue than enzalutamide in a randomised setting. This was at the expense of a higher HbA1c increase and incidence of T2D.
Subject(s)
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 , Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant , Abiraterone Acetate/therapeutic use , Androgen Antagonists/therapeutic use , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/adverse effects , Benzamides , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/drug therapy , Fatigue/chemically induced , Fatigue/drug therapy , Glycated Hemoglobin , Hot Temperature , Humans , Male , Nitriles/therapeutic use , Phenylthiohydantoin , Prednisone , Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant/drug therapy , Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant/pathology , Quality of Life , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
Background and purpose: The Ethos system has enabled online adaptive radiotherapy (oART) by implementing an automated treatment planning system (aTPS) for both intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc radiotherapy (VMAT) plan creation. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the quality of aTPS plans in the pelvic region. Material and Methods: Sixty patients with anal (n = 20), rectal (n = 20) or prostate (n = 20) cancer were retrospectively re-planned with the aTPS. Three IMRT (7-, 9- and 12-field) and two VMAT (2 and 3 arc) automatically generated plans (APs) were created per patient. The duration of the automated plan generation was registered. The best IMRT-AP and VMAT-AP for each patient were selected based on target coverage and dose to organs at risk (OARs). The AP quality was analyzed and compared to corresponding clinically accepted and manually generated VMAT plans (MPs) using several clinically relevant dose metrics. Calculation-based pre-treatment plan quality assurance (QA) was performed for all plans. Results: The median total duration to generate the five APs with the aTPS was 55 min, 39 min and 35 min for anal, prostate and rectal plans, respectively. The target coverage and the OAR sparing were equivalent for IMRT-APs and VMAT-MPs, while VMAT-Aps.demonstrated lower target dose homogeneity and higher dose to some OARs. Both conformity and homogeneity index were equivalent (rectal) or better (anal and prostate) for IMRT-APs compared to VMAT-MPs. All plans passed the patient-specific QA tolerance limit. Conclusions: The aTPS generates plans comparable to MPs within a short time-frame which is highly relevant for oART treatments.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Online adaptive radiotherapy (oART) potentially reduces the dose to organs at risk (OARs) as the planning target volume (PTV) margins are reduced compared to a non-adaptive approach (non-ART). This study evaluates the feasibility and dosimetric impact of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT)-guided oART of urinary bladder cancer for the first patients treated, using patient-specific margins. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixteen consecutive patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer received two or more (median = 23) fractions as oART, and remaining fractions as non-ART. The non-ART fractions were delivered with standard population-based margins, while reduced patient-specific margins based on intra-fractional variations extracted from 2-4 fractions were applied to the primary PTV (PTV-T) during the oART fractions. Target volume and coverage, and dose to OARs were compared between non-ART and oART plans, and the oART procedure time was recorded. RESULTS: In total, 297/512 fractions were delivered as oART with full re-optimization to the anatomy of the day. The median (interquartile range, IQR) oART procedure time, measured from the end of CBCT generation to completion of plan review, and quality assurance was 13.9 (11.9;16.6) min. The median (IQR) volume reduction in PTV-T volume was 33.9 (24.2;45.0)%, comparing oART and non-ART plans, resulting in median (IQR) reductions in bowel bag V45Gy of 18.8 (12.7;27.9)% and rectum V50Gy of 70.7 (35.9;94.8)%. By re-optimizing the plan to the daily anatomy, full target coverage was achieved at all oART fractions. CONCLUSIONS: oART resulted in large reductions in treatment volumes and doses to OARs, compared to non-ART, while ensuring target coverage. This indicates potential reductions in gastrointestinal toxicity.
Subject(s)
Radiotherapy, Image-Guided , Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms , Cone-Beam Computed Tomography/methods , Humans , Organs at Risk , Radiotherapy Dosage , Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted/methods , Radiotherapy, Image-Guided/methods , Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated/methods , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms/radiotherapyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to assess acute and late morbidity measured by the physician and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in high-risk prostate cancer (PC) patients receiving whole pelvic intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) in the setting of a national clinical trial. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 88 patients with adenocarcinoma of the prostate and high-risk parameters were enrolled from 2011 to 2013. All patients received 78 Gy in 39 fractions of IMRT delivering simultaneous 78 Gy to the prostate and 56 Gy to the seminal vesicles and lymph nodes. Physician-reported morbidity was assessed by CTCAE v.4.0. PROs were registered for gastro-intestinal (GI) by the RT-ARD score, genito-urinary (GU) by DAN-PSS, sexual and hormonal by EPIC-26, and quality of life (QoL) by EORTC QLQ-C30. RESULTS: Median follow-up (FU) time was 4.6 years. No persistent late CTCAE grade 3+ morbidity was observed. Prevalence of CTCAE grade 2+ GI morbidities varied from 0 to 6% at baseline throughout FU time, except for diarrhea, which was reported in 19% of the patients post-RT. PROs revealed increased GI morbidity (≥1 monthly episode) for "rectal urgency", "use of pads", "incomplete evacuation", "mucus in stool" and "bowel function impact on QoL" all remained significantly different (p < .05) at 60 months compared to baseline. CTCAE grade 2+ GU and sexual morbidity were unchanged. GU PROs on obstructive and irritative GU items (≥daily episode) increased during RT and normalized at 24 months. No clinically significant differences were found in sexual, hormonal, and QoL scores compared to baseline. CONCLUSIONS: Whole pelvic RT resulted in a mild to the moderate burden of late GI morbidities demonstrated by a relatively high prevalence of PROs. Whereas, physician-assessed morbidity revealed a low prevalence of late GI morbidity scores. This emphasizes the importance of using both PROs and physician-reported scoring scales when reporting late morbidity in clinical trials.
Subject(s)
Physicians , Prostatic Neoplasms , Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated , Humans , Male , Morbidity , Patient Reported Outcome Measures , Prostatic Neoplasms/epidemiology , Prostatic Neoplasms/radiotherapy , Quality of Life , Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated/adverse effectsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy is standard care prior to radical cystectomy in patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC). OBJECTIVE: To assess efficacy and safety of two commonly used neoadjuvant schedules with different total doses and dose-intensities of gemcitabine and cisplatin (GC). METHODS: Data were collected retrospectively from all patients treated between 2010 and 2018 with neoadjuvant chemotherapy according to clinical routine at seven centres in Sweden and Denmark. Patients in Sweden received three cycles of a 4-week schedule (GC-4w: cisplatin 70âmg/m2 day 1, gemcitabine 1000âmg/m2 days 1, 8, 15, q 28 days) and in Denmark four cycles of a 3-week schedule (GC-3w: cisplatin 70âmg/m2 day 1, gemcitabine 1000âmg/m2 days 1, 8, q 21 days). Primary endpoint was pathological response at cystectomy (pT0N0 and <âpT2N0). RESULTS: A total of 251 patients were treated with GC-4w and 455 with GC-3w. pT0N0 was significantly higher for patients treated with GC-3w compared to GC-4w, 46% versus 32% (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.80; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.16-2.80; Pâ=â0.009); and for <âpT2N0 60% versus 47% (aOR 1.08; 95% CI 0.70-1.66; Pâ=â0.743). There were no significant differences between GC-4w and GC-3w regarding survival parameters. GC-3w patients discontinued treatment more frequently and showed a higher degree of neutropenia. CONCLUSIONS: A significantly higher complete response-rate was observed in the patient group treated with the more cisplatin-dose-intense 3-week schedule. The side-effect profile was in favor of the 4-week approach while relapse-free and overall survival were similar.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Real-world treatment patterns and survival outcomes of locally advanced, unresectable, and metastatic urinary tract cancer (mUTC) patients have not previously been studied in a nationwide, population-based cohort. OBJECTIVE: To describe treatment patterns and survival outcomes in mUTC patients treated in the real-world clinical setting. DESIGN SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: This nationwide, population-based study included all mUTC patients initiating first-line chemotherapy at Danish oncology departments from January 2010 to March 2016. Data were retrospectively obtained from electronic medical records. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Outcome measurements were descriptive. Kaplan-Meier was used for survival analysis. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Of 952 patients included in the study, 46.2% initiated standard gemcitabine/cisplatin (GC) and 21.1% gemcitabine/carboplatin (CaG); the remaining patients initiated other treatment regimens. Median follow-up was 11.6 mo. The overall response rate and disease control rate were 43.0% and 61.7% in all patients, 51.4% and 69.1% in GC-treated patients, and 34.4% and 58.8% in CaG-treated patients, respectively. Median overall survival (OS) was 11.7 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 10.8-12.5) mo in all patients, 14.0 (95% CI: 12.5-15.5) mo in GC-treated patients, and 9.8 (95% CI: 8.7-10.9) mo in CaG-treated patients. Limitations include the retrospective study design. CONCLUSIONS: Real-world mUTC patients are older and less fit than patients enrolled in clinical trials; despite this, tumor responses and survival are comparable. Survival in our patient cohort is also comparable with that reported from other real-world studies in this patient group. PATIENT SUMMARY: We studied treatment patterns and survival in urinary tract cancer patients receiving chemotherapy in the real-world clinical practice. Survival in our patient cohort was comparable with that reported from clinical trials and other real-world studies in this patient group.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Addition of docetaxel to androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for the treatment of metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) has been proved to be effective with an overall survival (OS) benefit in phase III clinical trials. The effectiveness of docetaxel with ADT in the general patient population remains unknown. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to report the clinical experience in mHSPC patients treated with 3rd-weekly docetaxel plus ADT in routine practice at two Danish institutions. DESIGN SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A two-center retrospective study including consecutive mHSPC patients treated with 3rd-weekly docetaxel plus ADT was conducted. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Outcomes of interest were OS, and biochemical and clinical progression-free survival. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 173 consecutive patients with mHSPC who received docetaxel every 3rd week plus ADT between June 2015 and February 2018 were included. Most patients had high-volume disease (85%). All six planned docetaxel cycles were delivered in 149 cases (86%). Of the patients, 106 (61%) were alive at the last follow-up. At a median follow-up of 42 (37.8-58.6) mo, the median OS was 51.6 (41.5-56.3) mo. Castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) developed in 46% within 1 yr, with a median time to CRPC of 15.6 (13.0-18.1) mo. Prostate-specific antigen nadir ≤0.2 ng/l was achieved in 15% of patients after 6 mo of ADT and in 19% after 12 mo. CONCLUSIONS: The effect of docetaxel for mHSPC patients treated in routine practice appears comparable with the overall efficacy reported in the literature. Selection of patients will influence the results in clinical practice and clinical studies. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this report, we looked at the clinical effectiveness of docetaxel combined with androgen deprivation therapy in men with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) in a Danish population. We found the effect of docetaxel treatment for mHSPC in the general population to be comparable with the overall efficacy reported in published studies.
ABSTRACT
Urothelial carcinoma of the bladder is a highly aggressive disease characterised by a very heterogeneous clinical outcome. Despite cystectomy, patients still have a high recurrence risk and shortened survival. Urokinase-type plasminogen activator receptor (uPAR) is present in tumour tissue specimens from patients with urothelial carcinoma. The different uPAR forms in blood are strong prognostic markers in other cancer types. We investigate the presence of different uPAR forms in tumour tissue and test the hypothesis that preoperative plasma levels of the uPAR forms predict recurrence free survival, cancer specific survival, and overall survival in patients treated with cystectomy for urothelial carcinoma. Using Western blotting we analyse neoplasia and adjacent benign-appearing urothelium from randomly selected patients for the presence of intact and cleaved uPAR forms. Prospectively collected preoperative plasma samples from 107 patients who underwent radical cystectomy for urothelial carcinoma are analysed. The different uPAR forms are measured by time-resolved fluorescence immunoassays. uPAR in tumour tissue from patients with urothelial carcinoma is demonstrated in both an intact and cleaved form. The different uPAR forms in plasma are all significantly associated with both recurrence free survival, cancer specific survival, and overall survival, high concentrations predicting short survival. uPAR (I) has the strongest association with a HR of 2.56 for overall survival. In the multivariable survival analysis uPAR (I) is significantly associated with cancer specific survival and overall survival.
ABSTRACT
Patients with urothelial cell carcinoma (UCC) often have comorbidities, which cause trouble for the completion of oncological treatment, and little is known about their quality of life (QoL). The aim of the present study was to obtain and describe patient-reported outcomes (PRO) and QoL data from UCC patients in the treatment for locally advanced muscle-invasive or metastatic UCC. A total of 79 patients with UCC completed four questionnaires (EORTC QLQ-C30, QLQ-BLM30, HADS, and select PRO-CTCAE™ questions) once weekly during their treatment. From those, 26 patients (33%) underwent neoadjuvant treatment for local disease while 53 patients (67%) were treated for metastatic disease. Of all patients, 54% did not complete the planned treatment due to progression, nephrotoxicity, death, or intolerable symptoms during treatment. The five most prevalent PRO-CTCAE grade ≥ 2 symptoms were frequent urination (37%), fatigue (35%), pain (31%), dry mouth (23%), and swelling of the arms or legs (23%). The baseline mean overall QoL was 61 (±SD 24) for all patients (neoadjuvant (73, ±SD 19) and metastatic (54, ±SD 24)) and remained stable over the course of treatment for both groups. A stable overall QoL was observed for the patients in this study. More than half of the patients did not, however, complete the planned treatment. Further supportive care is warranted for bladder cancer patients.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Enzalutamide and abiraterone acetate plus prednisone (AAP) have similar efficacy in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), but different mechanisms of action. The aim was to compare patient-reported health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in men treated with enzalutamide vs AAP for mCRPC. METHODS: We systematically reviewed the literature in June 2020 according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) recommendations. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) until the last follow-up were summarised in a narrative synthesis. Short-term changes (12 weeks) in HRQoL, measured by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate total score (FACT-P), were compared between treatment groups and were analysed for enzalutamide and AAP in separate meta-analyses. Higher FACT-P scores indicate better HRQoL. RESULTS: Eight studies were included in the systematic review, four of which were randomised clinical trials (RCTs) eligible for the meta-analyses. The meta-analyses showed mean within-subject FACT-P changes from baseline to week 12 of -1.3 points (95% confidence interval [CI] -2.7; 0.1) for enzalutamide and 4.7 points (95% CI -0.1; 9.6) for AAP. One RCT and three non-randomised studies directly compared enzalutamide with AAP. The RCT showed better short-term HRQoL for AAP (6.8 FACT-P-points, 95% CI 1.7; 11.8) and better long-term HRQoL for AAP in men ≥75 years (7.35 FACT-P-points, 95% CI 2.59; 12.11). The non-randomised studies showed no difference in long-term HRQoL but had all a serious risk of bias. Limitations of the included studies include that the PRO in the included trials were inconsistently reported and that only one study defined the HRQoL measures in their published protocol. CONCLUSIONS: AAP seems to be associated with better short-term HRQoL than enzalutamide. This difference was not apparent at longer follow-up, but the long-term studies had serious risks of bias.
Subject(s)
Androstenes/therapeutic use , Benzamides/therapeutic use , Nitriles/therapeutic use , Phenylthiohydantoin/therapeutic use , Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant/drug therapy , Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant/pathology , Quality of Life , Humans , Male , Neoplasm Metastasis , Prednisone/therapeutic useABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The optimal timing of radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer is uncertain. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of adjuvant radiotherapy versus an observation policy with salvage radiotherapy for prostate-specific antigen (PSA) biochemical progression. METHODS: We did a randomised controlled trial enrolling patients with at least one risk factor (pathological T-stage 3 or 4, Gleason score of 7-10, positive margins, or preoperative PSA ≥10 ng/mL) for biochemical progression after radical prostatectomy (RADICALS-RT). The study took place in trial-accredited centres in Canada, Denmark, Ireland, and the UK. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to adjuvant radiotherapy or an observation policy with salvage radiotherapy for PSA biochemical progression (PSA ≥0·1 ng/mL or three consecutive rises). Masking was not deemed feasible. Stratification factors were Gleason score, margin status, planned radiotherapy schedule (52·5 Gy in 20 fractions or 66 Gy in 33 fractions), and centre. The primary outcome measure was freedom from distant metastases, designed with 80% power to detect an improvement from 90% with salvage radiotherapy (control) to 95% at 10 years with adjuvant radiotherapy. We report on biochemical progression-free survival, freedom from non-protocol hormone therapy, safety, and patient-reported outcomes. Standard survival analysis methods were used. A hazard ratio (HR) of less than 1 favoured adjuvant radiotherapy. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00541047. FINDINGS: Between Nov 22, 2007, and Dec 30, 2016, 1396 patients were randomly assigned, 699 (50%) to salvage radiotherapy and 697 (50%) to adjuvant radiotherapy. Allocated groups were balanced with a median age of 65 years (IQR 60-68). Median follow-up was 4·9 years (IQR 3·0-6·1). 649 (93%) of 697 participants in the adjuvant radiotherapy group reported radiotherapy within 6 months; 228 (33%) of 699 in the salvage radiotherapy group reported radiotherapy within 8 years after randomisation. With 169 events, 5-year biochemical progression-free survival was 85% for those in the adjuvant radiotherapy group and 88% for those in the salvage radiotherapy group (HR 1·10, 95% CI 0·81-1·49; p=0·56). Freedom from non-protocol hormone therapy at 5 years was 93% for those in the adjuvant radiotherapy group versus 92% for those in the salvage radiotherapy group (HR 0·88, 95% CI 0·58-1·33; p=0·53). Self-reported urinary incontinence was worse at 1 year for those in the adjuvant radiotherapy group (mean score 4·8 vs 4·0; p=0·0023). Grade 3-4 urethral stricture within 2 years was reported in 6% of individuals in the adjuvant radiotherapy group versus 4% in the salvage radiotherapy group (p=0·020). INTERPRETATION: These initial results do not support routine administration of adjuvant radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy. Adjuvant radiotherapy increases the risk of urinary morbidity. An observation policy with salvage radiotherapy for PSA biochemical progression should be the current standard after radical prostatectomy. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK, MRC Clinical Trials Unit, and Canadian Cancer Society.
Subject(s)
Adenocarcinoma/radiotherapy , Adenocarcinoma/surgery , Prostatectomy , Prostatic Neoplasms/radiotherapy , Prostatic Neoplasms/surgery , Adenocarcinoma/pathology , Aged , Biomarkers, Tumor/blood , Disease-Free Survival , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Neoplasm Grading , Proportional Hazards Models , Prostate-Specific Antigen/blood , Prostatic Neoplasms/pathology , Radiotherapy, Adjuvant , Salvage Therapy , Survival Analysis , Time FactorsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Electronic collection of patient-reported outcomes (ePROs) is becoming widespread in health care, but the implementation into routine cancer care during therapy remains to be seen. Especially, little is known of the use and success of electronic reporting during active cancer treatment in fragile and comorbid patients. The aim of this study was to test the feasibility of ePRO and its incorporation into routine cancer care, measured by physician compliance, for a fragile and comorbid bladder cancer (BC) population receiving chemo- or immunotherapy. METHODS: All BC patients initiating treatment for locally advanced or metastatic bladder cancer at Rigshospitalet or Herlev Hospital, Denmark, were approached during an 8 month period. Exclusion criteria were patients not speaking Danish or not being signed up for electronic communication with health authorities. Enrolled patients were prompted to complete weekly ePROs from home. Patients completed the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer's general quality of life questionnaire, QLQ-C30, and the module for muscle-invasive bladder cancer QLQ-BLM30, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, HADS, and selected items from the Patient Reported-Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria of Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE), in total 158 questions weekly. If failing to report when prompted, patients were sent two e-mail reminders. Patients were informed that the physician would have an overview of the reported ePROs at their following clinical visits. Physicians were at all clinical visits informed to look at the ePROs in a software solution separate from the medical records. Physicians were logged to check their compliance to the task. No continuous surveillance of ePROs was established. RESULTS: Of 91 patients screened for enrolment, 19 patients (21%) were not found eligible for standard treatment, eight patients (9%) were not signed up for electronic communication with the health authorities and nine patients (10%) declined participation. Another six patients did not meet other inclusion criteria. In total 49 BC patients were enrolled, 29 initiating chemotherapy and 20 initiating immunotherapy. A total of 466 electronic questionnaires were completed. The overall adherence of the patients to complete ePROs was at an expected level for an elderly cancer population (75%) and remained above 70% until the 6th cycle of treatment. The physician' compliance was in contrast low (0-52%) throughout the course of treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Electronic reporting of PROs is feasible in a fragile and comorbid population of patients during routine active cancer treatment. Despite clear implementation strategies the physician compliance remained low throughout the study proving the need for further implementation strategies.
Subject(s)
Patient Reported Outcome Measures , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms/drug therapy , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Feasibility Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Patient Compliance , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/statistics & numerical data , Quality of Life , SoftwareABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Bladder cancer (BC) patients with advanced disease have poor outcomes. The use of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) could lead to improvements in symptom management and hence quality of life (QoL). The aim of this study is to report correlations between selected PROs and QoL and thus to present symptoms that influence QoL. Identification of these symptoms during treatment can lead to earlier symptom management and thus secure improvements in QoL. METHODS: BC patients in chemo- or immunotherapy for locally advanced or metastatic disease reported weekly PROs for the duration of their treatment. The PROs included EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-BLM30 and 45 selected PRO-CTCAE items. Spearman's correlation analysis was performed for all PRO-CTCAE items and QLQ-C30 global QoL and subdomains. RESULTS: In this study, 78 BC patients reported 724 questionnaires. Spearman's analysis showed significant correlations between almost all PRO-CTCAE items and the expected domain of QoL. The PRO-CTCAE items with the strongest correlations with QoL were anxiety (F, frequency item) and emotional function (rs = -0.603, P < .0001), concentration (S, severity item) and cognitive function (rs = -0.704, P < .0001), discouraged (F) and emotional function (rs = -0.659, P < .0001), fatigue (S) and role function (rs = -0.659, P < .0001) and sad (F) and emotional function (rs = -0.711, P < .0001). The weakest correlations were found for the PRO-CTCAE items urinary frequency, incontinence and urge, all with variations in the direction and significance of the correlations. CONCLUSIONS: This study delivers information on which PROs may influence QoL for patients in clinical trials or daily clinic. Psychological issues have a strong impact on QoL and should be dealt with during treatment to secure the best possible QoL for BC patients.
Subject(s)
Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/therapeutic use , Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions/epidemiology , Patient Reported Outcome Measures , Quality of Life , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms/drug therapy , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/administration & dosage , Carboplatin/administration & dosage , Cisplatin/administration & dosage , Denmark/epidemiology , Deoxycytidine/administration & dosage , Deoxycytidine/analogs & derivatives , Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions/diagnosis , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Imidazoles/administration & dosage , Longitudinal Studies , Male , Middle Aged , Prognosis , Prospective Studies , Surveys and Questionnaires , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms/pathology , GemcitabineABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Enzalutamide and abiraterone acetate plus prednisolone (AAP) are used in combination with androgen-deprivation therapy to further suppress the androgen stimulation of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). First-line mCRPC treatment with enzalutamide and AAP yields similar overall survival and radiographic progression-free survival in phase III trials. Thus, treatment selection relies on patient choice, cost and side effects. The aim of this randomised trial is to investigate differences in fatigue, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and metabolic side effects in men with mCRPC treated with first-line enzalutamide versus AAP. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: In this ongoing open-label randomised (1:1) clinical trial, enzalutamide is compared with AAP as first-line treatment for men with mCRPC. The primary endpoint is fatigue assessed with the questionnaire Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue version 4. Secondary endpoints are changes in body composition (ie, fat mass, visceral adipose tissue, subcutaneous adipose tissue and lean body mass assessed with dual energy X-ray absorptiometry), glucose metabolism assessed with a 2-hour oral glucose tolerance test, serum lipids, blood pressure and HRQoL assessed with the questionnaire Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P). All study endpoints are assessed at baseline and 12-week postintervention. Blood and urine samples are collected at baseline and at time of progression on allocated treatment for future investigation of predictive and prognostic biomarkers in prostate cancer treatment. The planned sample size is 170 participants. All participants are recruited from Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, Denmark. Estimated last patient's last visit is February 2020. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study received project approval from the National Committee on Health Research Ethics and Danish Data Protection Agency and Danish Medicines Agency (EudraCT no.: 2017-000027-99). The results of the study will be published in peer-reviewed international journals and will be presented at national and international conferences and symposiums. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Clinicaltrialsregister.eu (2017-000099-27).