Citizen science to improve patient and public involvement in GUideline Implementation in oral health and DEntistry (the GUIDE platform).

BACKGROUND: Citizen science is a way to democratise science by involving groups of citizens in the research process. Clinical guidelines are used to improve practice, but their implementation can be limited. Involving patients and the public can enhance guideline implementation, but there is uncertainty about the best approaches to achieve this. Citizen science is a potential way to involve patients and the public in improving clinical guideline implementation. We aimed to explore the application of citizen science methods to involve patients and the public in the dissemination and implementation of clinical guidelines in oral health and dentistry. METHODS: We developed GUIDE (GUideline Implementation in oral health and DEntistry), a citizen science online platform, using a participatory approach with researchers, oral health professionals, guideline developers and citizens. Recruitment was conducted exclusively online. The platform focused on prespecified challenges related to oral health assessment guidelines, and asked citizens to generate ideas, as well as vote and comment on other citizens' ideas to improve those challenges. Citizens also shared their views via surveys and two online synchronous group meetings. Data were collected on participant's demographics, platform engagement and experience of taking part. The most promising idea category was identified by an advisory group based on engagement, feasibility and relevance. We presented quantitative data using descriptive statistics and analysed qualitative data using inductive and deductive thematic analysis. RESULTS: The platform was open for 6 months and we recruited 189 citizens, from which over 90 citizens actively engaged with the platform. Most citizens were over 34 years (64%), female (58%) and had a university degree (50%). They generated 128 ideas, 146 comments and 248 votes. The challenge that led to most engagement was related to prevention and oral health self-care. To take this challenge forward, citizens generated a further 36 ideas to improve a pre-existing National Health Service oral care prevention leaflet. Citizens discussed motivations to take part in the platform (understanding, values, self-care), reasons to stay engaged (communication and feedback, outputs and impact, and relevance of topics discussed) and suggestions to improve future platforms. CONCLUSION: Citizen science is an effective approach to generate and prioritise ideas from a group of citizens to improve oral health and dental services. Prevention and oral health self-care were of particular interest to citizens. More research is needed to ensure recruitment of a diverse group of citizens and to improve retention in citizen science projects. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: This project was inherently conducted with the input of public partners (citizen scientists) in all key aspects of its conduct and interpretation. In addition, two public partners were part of the research team and contributed to the design of the project, as well as key decisions related to its conduct, analysis, interpretation and dissemination and are co-authors of this manuscript.

Tazemetostat for tumors harboring SMARCB1/SMARCA4 or EZH2 alterations: results from NCI-COG pediatric MATCH APEC1621C.

BACKGROUND: National Cancer Institute-Children's Oncology Group Pediatric Molecular Analysis for Therapy Choice assigns patients aged 1-21 years with refractory solid tumors, brain tumors, lymphomas, and histiocytic disorders to phase II trials of molecularly targeted therapies based on detection of predefined genetic alterations. Patients whose tumors harbored EZH2 mutations or loss of SMARCB1 or SMARCA4 by immunohistochemistry were treated with EZH2 inhibitor tazemetostat. METHODS: Patients received tazemetostat for 28-day cycles until disease progression or intolerable toxicity (max 26 cycles). The primary endpoint was objective response rate; secondary endpoints included progression-free survival and tolerability of tazemetostat. RESULTS: Twenty patients (median age = 5 years) enrolled, all evaluable for response and toxicities. The most frequent diagnoses were atypical teratoid rhabdoid tumor (n = 8) and malignant rhabdoid tumor (n = 4). Actionable alterations consisted of SMARCB1 loss (n = 16), EZH2 mutation (n = 3), and SMARCA4 loss (n = 1). One objective response was observed in a patient with non-Langerhans cell histiocytosis with SMARCA4 loss (26 cycles, 1200 mg/m2/dose twice daily). Four patients with SMARCB1 loss had a best response of stable disease: epithelioid sarcoma (n = 2), atypical teratoid rhabdoid tumor (n = 1), and renal medullary carcinoma (n = 1). Six-month progression-free survival was 35% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 15.7% to 55.2%) and 6-month overall survival was 45% (95% CI = 23.1% to 64.7%). Treatment-related adverse events were consistent with prior tazemetostat reports. CONCLUSIONS: Although tazemetostat did not meet its primary efficacy endpoint in this population of refractory pediatric tumors (objective response rate = 5%, 90% CI = 1% to 20%), 25% of patients with multiple histologic diagnoses experienced prolonged stable disease of 6 months and over (range = 9-26 cycles), suggesting a potential effect of tazemetostat on disease stabilization.

Expanding access to early phase trials: the CATCH-UP.2020 experience.

BACKGROUND: Disparities in cancer outcomes persist for underserved populations; one important aspect of this is limited access to promising early phase clinical trials. To address this, the National Cancer Institute-funded Create Access to Targeted Cancer Therapy for Underserved Populations (CATCH-UP.2020) was created. We report the tools developed and accrual metrics of the initial year of CATCH-UP.2020 with a focus on racial, ethnic, geographic, and socioeconomically underserved populations. METHODS: CATCH-UP.2020 is a P30 supplement awarded to 8 National Cancer Institute-designated cancer centers with existing resources to rapidly open and accrue to Experimental Therapeutics Clinical Trials Network (ETCTN) trials with emphasis on engaging patients from underserved populations. Sites used patient-based, community-based, investigator-based, and program-based tools to meet specific program goals. RESULTS: From September 2020 to August 2021, CATCH-UP.2020 sites opened 45 ETCTN trials. Weighted average trial activation time for the 7 sites reporting this was 107 days. In the initial year, sites enrolled 145 patients in CATCH-UP.2020 with 68 (46.9%) representing racial, ethnic, rural, and socioeconomically underserved populations using the broader definition of underserved encompassed in the grant charge. During the initial year of CATCH-UP.2020, a time impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, 15.8% (66 of 417) and 21.4% (31 of 145) of patients enrolled to ETCTN trials at network and at CATCH-UP sites, respectively, were from racial and ethnic minority groups, a more limited definition of underserved for which comparable data are available. CONCLUSION: Targeted funding accelerated activation and accrual of early phase trials and expanded access to this therapeutic option for underserved populations.

Implementing Modernized Eligibility Criteria in US National Cancer Institute Clinical Trials.

In 2018, the Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program (CTEP) at the US National Cancer Institute published new protocol template language that focused on organ function and prior and concurrent cancers in an effort to modernize eligibility criteria for cancer treatment trials. We conducted an analysis of CTEP-supported trials to evaluate the uptake and incorporation of the new language. The analysis included evaluation of 122 protocols approved in the years 2018-2020 for inclusion of the modernized eligibility criteria and consistency with new protocol template language related to 7 major eligibility criteria. These were cardiac function, liver function, kidney function, HIV status, prior and/or concurrent malignancies, treated and/or stable brain metastasis, and new and/or progressive brain metastases. Overall, CTEP trials evaluated in this period demonstrated that eligibility criteria were implemented to a relatively high degree ranging from a low of 54.1% for prior and/or concurrent malignancies to a high of 93.4% for eligibility criteria related to HIV infection. The findings demonstrate that modernized eligibility criteria can be successfully implemented but that consistent implementation requires sustained focused effort. As a result of these findings, CTEP began a new initiative in January 2022 that incorporates a specific review of eligibility criteria for new protocols to promote and improve consistency with the modernization effort.

Phase II Study of Selumetinib in Children and Young Adults With Tumors Harboring Activating Mitogen-Activated Protein Kinase Pathway Genetic Alterations: Arm E of the NCI-COG Pediatric MATCH Trial.

PURPOSE: The NCI-COG Pediatric MATCH trial assigns patients age 1-21 years with relapsed or refractory solid tumors, lymphomas, and histiocytic disorders to phase II studies of molecularly targeted therapies on the basis of detection of predefined genetic alterations. Patients with tumors harboring mutations or fusions driving activation of the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway were treated with the MEK inhibitor selumetinib. METHODS: Patients received selumetinib twice daily for 28-day cycles until disease progression or intolerable toxicity. The primary end point was objective response rate; secondary end points included progression-free survival and tolerability of selumetinib. RESULTS: Twenty patients (median age: 14 years) were treated. All were evaluable for response and toxicities. The most frequent diagnoses were high-grade glioma (HGG; n = 7) and rhabdomyosarcoma (n = 7). Twenty-one actionable mutations were detected: hotspot mutations in KRAS (n = 8), NRAS (n = 3), and HRAS (n = 1), inactivating mutations in NF1 (n = 7), and BRAF V600E (n = 2). No objective responses were observed. Three patients had a best response of stable disease including two patients with HGG (NF1 mutation, six cycles; KRAS mutation, 12 cycles). Six-month progression-free survival was 15% (95% CI, 4 to 34). Five patients (25%) experienced a grade 3 or higher adverse event that was possibly or probably attributable to study drug. CONCLUSION: A national histology-agnostic molecular screening strategy was effective at identifying children and young adults eligible for treatment with selumetinib in the first Pediatric MATCH treatment arm to be completed. MEK inhibitors have demonstrated promising responses in some pediatric tumors (eg, low-grade glioma and plexiform neurofibroma). However, selumetinib in this cohort with treatment-refractory tumors harboring MAPK alterations demonstrated limited efficacy, indicating that pathway mutation status alone is insufficient to predict response to selumetinib monotherapy for pediatric cancers.

Actionable Tumor Alterations and Treatment Protocol Enrollment of Pediatric and Young Adult Patients With Refractory Cancers in the National Cancer Institute-Children's Oncology Group Pediatric MATCH Trial.

PURPOSE: The National Cancer Institute-Children's Oncology Group Pediatric MATCH trial aimed to facilitate evaluation of molecular-targeted therapies in biomarker-selected cohorts of childhood and young adult patients with cancer by screening tumors for actionable alterations. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Tumors from patients age 1-21 years with refractory solid tumors, lymphomas, or histiocytic disorders were subjected to cancer gene panel sequencing and limited immunohistochemistry to identify actionable alterations for assignment to phase II treatment arms. The rates of treatment arm assignment and enrollment were compared between clinical and demographic groups. RESULTS: Testing was completed for 94.7% of tumors submitted. Actionable alterations were detected in 31.5% of the first 1,000 tumors screened, with treatment arm assignment and enrollment occurring in 28.4% and 13.1% of patients, respectively. Assignment rates varied by tumor histology and were higher for patients with CNS tumors or enrolled at Pediatric Early Phase Clinical Trials Network sites. A reported history of prior clinical molecular testing was associated with higher assignment and enrollment rates. Actionable alterations in the mitogen-activated protein kinase signaling pathway were most frequent (11.2%). The most common reasons provided for not enrolling on treatment arms were patients receiving other treatment or poor clinical status. CONCLUSION: The Pediatric MATCH trial has proven the feasibility of a nationwide screening Protocol for identification of actionable genetic alterations and assignment of pediatric and young adult patients with refractory cancers to trials of molecularly targeted therapies. These data support the early use of tumor molecular screening for childhood patients with cancer whose tumors have not responded to standard treatments.

Network for Biomarker Immunoprofiling for Cancer Immunotherapy: Cancer Immune Monitoring and Analysis Centers and Cancer Immunologic Data Commons (CIMAC-CIDC).

PURPOSE: Immunoprofiling to identify biomarkers and integration with clinical trial outcomes are critical to improving immunotherapy approaches for patients with cancer. However, the translational potential of individual studies is often limited by small sample size of trials and the complexity of immuno-oncology biomarkers. Variability in assay performance further limits comparison and interpretation of data across studies and laboratories. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: To enable a systematic approach to biomarker identification and correlation with clinical outcome across trials, the Cancer Immune Monitoring and Analysis Centers and Cancer Immunologic Data Commons (CIMAC-CIDC) Network was established through support of the Cancer MoonshotSM Initiative of the National Cancer Institute (NCI) and the Partnership for Accelerating Cancer Therapies (PACT) with industry partners via the Foundation for the NIH. RESULTS: The CIMAC-CIDC Network is composed of four academic centers with multidisciplinary expertise in cancer immunotherapy that perform validated and harmonized assays for immunoprofiling and conduct correlative analyses. A data coordinating center (CIDC) provides the computational expertise and informatics platforms for the storage, integration, and analysis of biomarker and clinical data. CONCLUSIONS: This overview highlights strategies for assay harmonization to enable cross-trial and cross-site data analysis and describes key elements for establishing a network to enhance immuno-oncology biomarker development. These include an operational infrastructure, validation and harmonization of core immunoprofiling assays, platforms for data ingestion and integration, and access to specimens from clinical trials. Published in the same volume are reports of harmonization for core analyses: whole-exome sequencing, RNA sequencing, cytometry by time of flight, and IHC/immunofluorescence.

COVID-19, Social Justice, and Clinical Cancer Research.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and related socioeconomic events have markedly changed the environment in which cancer clinical trials are conducted. These events have resulted in a substantial, immediate-term decrease in accrual to both diagnostic and therapeutic cancer investigations as well as substantive alterations in patterns of oncologic care. The sponsors of clinical trials, including the US National Cancer Institute, as well as the cancer centers and community oncology practices that conduct such studies, have all markedly adapted their models of care, usage of healthcare personnel, and regulatory requirements in the attempt to continue clinical cancer investigations while maintaining high levels of patient safety. In doing so, major changes in clinical trials practice have been embraced nationwide. There is a growing consensus that the regulatory and clinical research process alterations that have been adopted in response to the pandemic (such as the use of telemedicine visits to reduce patient travel requirements and the application of remote informed consent procedures) should be implemented long term. The COVID-19 outbreak has also refocused the oncologic clinical trials community on the need to bring clinical trials closer to patients by dramatically enhancing clinical trial access, especially for minority and underserved communities that have been disproportionately affected by the pandemic. In this commentary, changes to the program of clinical trials supported by the National Cancer Institute that could improve clinical trial availability, effectiveness, and diversity are proposed.

Biostatistical and Logistical Considerations in the Development of Basket and Umbrella Clinical Trials.

Oncology clinical trials are undergoing transformation to evaluate targeted therapies addressing a wider variety of biologically defined cancer subgroups. Multiarm basket and umbrella trials conducted under master protocols have become more prominent mechanisms for the clinical evaluation of promising new biologically driven anticancer therapies that are integral to precision oncology medicine. These new trial designs permit efficient clinical evaluation of multiple therapies in a variety of histologically and biologically defined cancers. These complex trials require extensive planning and attention to many factors, including choice of biomarker assay platform, mechanism for processing clinicopathologic and biomarker data to assign patients to substudies, and statistical design, monitoring, and analysis of substudies. Trial teams have expanded to include expertise in the interface between biology, clinical oncology, bioinformatics, and statistics. Strategies for the design, conduct, and analysis of these complex trials will continue to evolve to meet new challenges and opportunities in precision oncology medicine.

Meeting the Challenge: The National Cancer Institute's Central Institutional Review Board for Multi-Site Research.

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) issued a new policy that requires a single institutional review board (IRB) of record be used for all protocols funded by the NIH that are carried out at more than one site in the United States, effective January 2018. This policy affects several hundred clinical trials opened annually across the NIH. Limited data exist to compare the use of a single IRB to that of multiple local IRBs, so some institutions are resistant to or distrustful of single IRBs. Since 2001, the National Cancer Institute (NCI) has funded a central IRB (CIRB) that provides human patient reviews for its extensive national cancer clinical trials program. This paper presents data to show the adoption, efficiencies gained, and satisfaction of the CIRB among NCI trial networks and reviews key lessons gleaned from 16 years of experience that may be informative for others charged with implementation of the new NIH single-IRB policy.

Mindfulness and Climate Change Action: A Feasibility Study.

Pro-environmental behaviors and the cultural shifts that can accompany these may offer solutions to the consequences of a changing climate. Mindfulness has been proposed as a strategy to initiate these types of behaviors. In 2017, we pilot-tested Mindful Climate Action (MCA), an eight-week adult education program that delivers energy use, climate change, and sustainability content in combination with training in mindfulness meditation, to 16 individuals living in Madison, WI. At baseline and at different times across the study period, we collected data regarding participants, household energy use, transportation, diet, and health and happiness. This pilot study aimed to evaluate the feasibility of the various MCA study practices including measurement tools, outcome assessment, curriculum and related educational materials, and especially the mindfulness-based climate action trainings. MCA was well-received by participants as evidenced by high adherence rate, high measures of participant satisfaction, and high participant response rate for surveys. In addition, we successfully demonstrated feasibility of the MCA program, and have estimated participant's individual carbon footprints related to diet, transportation, and household energy.

A Randomized Controlled Study Comparing the National Cancer Institute's Original and Revised Consent Form Templates.

Since 1998, the National Cancer Institute (NCI) has mandated that researchers use its consent form template in developing consent forms for their NCI-funded clinical trials. The template was substantially revised in 2013 to aid in the development of simpler, more concise consent forms. The NCI conducted a randomized controlled trial with cancer survivors (N = 153) to assess the revised template's effect on individuals' knowledge, satisfaction, clarity, and likelihood of joining a trial in the future. We found that the revised template resulted in equally high knowledge and satisfaction scores as the original template, but with fewer words and pages. The likelihood that an individual would participate in a trial diminished after he or she reviewed either the original or revised consent form, yet having knowledge about trials before reviewing the consent forms resulted in increased satisfaction. To ensure an informed decision-making process, we recommend using the revised NCI consent form template along with using educational interventions aimed at increasing the understanding potential participants have of a trial before they receive a consent form.

Mindful Climate Action: Health and Environmental Co-Benefits from Mindfulness-Based Behavioral Training.

Greenhouse gases from human activities are causing climate change, creating risks for people around the globe. Behaviors involving transportation, diet, energy use, and purchasing drive greenhouse gas emissions, but are also related to health and well-being, providing opportunity for co-benefits. Replacing shorter automobile trips with walking or cycling, or eating plants rather than animals, for example, may increase personal health, while also reducing environmental impact. Mindfulness-based practices have been shown to enhance a variety of health outcomes, but have not been adapted towards environmental purposes. We designed the Mindful Climate Action (MCA) curriculum to help people improve their health while simultaneously lowering their carbon footprints. Combining mindfulness-based practices with the Stages of Change theory, the MCA program aims to: (1) improve personal health and well-being; (2) decrease energy use; (3) reduce automobile use; (4) increase active transport; (5) shift diet towards plant-based foods; and (6) reduce unnecessary purchasing. Mindfulness practices will foster attentional awareness, openness, and response flexibility, supporting positive behavior change. We plan to test MCA in a randomized controlled trial, with rigorous assessment of targeted outcomes. Our long-term goal is to refine and adapt the MCA program to a variety of audiences, in order to enhance public health and environmental sustainability.

ALCHEMIST Trials: A Golden Opportunity to Transform Outcomes in Early-Stage Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

The treatment of patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is slowly evolving from empirical cytotoxic chemotherapy to personalized treatment based on specific molecular alterations. Despite this 10-year evolution, targeted therapies have not been studied adequately in patients with resected NSCLC who have clearly defined actionable mutations. The advent of next-generation sequencing has now made it possible to characterize genomic alterations in unprecedented detail. The efforts begun by The Cancer Genome Atlas project to understand the complexities of the genomic landscape of lung cancer will be supplemented further by studying a large number of tumor specimens. The Adjuvant Lung Cancer Enrichment Marker Identification and Sequencing Trial (ALCHEMIST) is an NCI-sponsored national clinical trials network (NCTN) initiative to address the needs to refine therapy for early-stage NSCLC. This program will screen several thousand patients with operable lung adenocarcinoma to determine whether their tumors contain specific molecular alterations [epidermal growth factor receptor mutation (EGFR) and anaplastic lymphoma kinase rearrangement (ALK)], making them eligible for treatment trials that target these alterations. Patients with EGFR mutation or ALK gene rearrangement in their tumor will be randomized to placebo versus erlotinib or crizotinib, respectively, after completion of their standard adjuvant therapy. ALCHEMIST will also contain a large discovery component that will provide an opportunity to incorporate genomic studies to fully understand the clonal architecture, clonal evolution, and mechanisms of resistance to therapy. In this review, we describe the concept, rationale, and outline of ALCHEMIST and the plan for genomic studies in patients with lung adenocarcinoma. Clin Cancer Res; 21(24); 5439-44. ©2015 AACR.

Designing therapeutic clinical trials for older and frail adults with cancer: U13 conference recommendations.

A majority of cancer diagnoses and deaths occur in patients age ≥ 65 years. With the aging of the US population, the number of older adults with cancer will grow. Although the coming wave of older patients with cancer was anticipated in the early 1980s, when the need for more research on the cancer-aging interface was recognized, many knowledge gaps remain when it comes to treating older and/or frailer patients with cancer. Relatively little is known about the best way to balance the risks and benefits of existing cancer therapies in older patients; however, these patients continue to be underrepresented in clinical trials. Furthermore, the available clinical trials often do not include end points pertinent to the older adult population, such as preservation of function, cognition, and independence. As part of its ongoing effort to advance research in the field of geriatric oncology, the Cancer and Aging Research Group held a conference in November 2012 in collaboration with the National Cancer Institute, the National Institute on Aging, and the Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology. The goal was to develop recommendations and establish research guidelines for the design and implementation of therapeutic clinical trials for older and/or frail adults. The conference sought to identify knowledge gaps in cancer clinical trials for older adults and propose clinical trial designs to fill these gaps. The ultimate goal of this conference series is to develop research that will lead to evidence-based care for older and/or frail adults with cancer.

National Cancer Institute's Precision Medicine Initiatives for the new National Clinical Trials Network.

The promise of precision medicine will only be fully realized if the research community can adapt its clinical trials methodology to study molecularly characterized tumors instead of the traditional histologic classification. Such trials will depend on adequate tissue collection, availability of quality controlled, high throughput molecular assays, and the ability to screen large numbers of tumors to find those with the desired molecular alterations. The National Cancer Institute's (NCI) new National Clinical Trials Network (NCTN) is well positioned to conduct such trials. The NCTN has the ability to seamlessly perform ethics review, register patients, manage data, and deliver investigational drugs across its many sites including both in cities and rural communities, academic centers, and private practices. The initial set of trials will focus on different questions: (1) Exceptional Responders Initiative-why do a minority of patients with solid tumors or lymphoma respond very well to some drugs even if the majority do not?; (2) NCI MATCH trial-can molecular markers predict response to targeted therapies in patients with advanced cancer resistant to standard treatment?; (3) ALCHEMIST trial-will targeted epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) inhibitors improve survival for adenocarcinoma of the lung in the adjuvant setting?; and (4) Lung Cancer Master Protocol trial for advanced squamous cell lung cancer-is there an advantage to developing drugs for small subsets of molecularly characterized tumors in a single, multiarm trial design? These studies will hopefully spawn a new era of treatment trials that will carefully select the tumors that may respond best to investigational therapy.

Comparison of FOLFIRI with or without cetuximab in patients with resected stage III colon cancer; NCCTG (Alliance) intergroup trial N0147.

BACKGROUND: Two arms with FOLFIRI, with or without cetuximab, were initially included in the randomized phase III intergroup clinical trial NCCTG (North Central Cancer Treatment Group) N0147. When other contemporary trials demonstrated no benefit to using irinotecan as adjuvant therapy, the FOLFIRI-containing arms were discontinued. We report the clinical outcomes for patients randomized to FOLFIRI with or without cetuximab. PATIENTS AND METHODS: After resection, patients were randomized to 12 biweekly cycles of FOLFIRI, with or without cetuximab. KRAS (Kirsten rat sarcoma viral oncogene homolog) mutation status was retrospectively determined in a central lab. The primary end point was disease-free survival (DFS). Secondary end points included overall survival (OS) and toxicity. RESULTS: One hundred and six patients received FOLFIRI and 40 received FOLFIRI plus cetuximab. Median follow-up was 5.95 years (range, 0.1-7.0 years). The addition of cetuximab showed a trend toward improved DFS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.53; 95% CI, 0.26-1.1; P = .09) and OS (HR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.17-1.16; P = .10) in the overall group, regardless of KRAS status, and in patients with wild type KRAS. Grade ≥ 3 nonhematologic adverse effects were significantly increased in the cetuximab versus FOLFIRI-alone arm (68% vs. 46%; P = .02). Adjuvant FOLFIRI resulted in a 3-year DFS less than that expected for FOLFOX. CONCLUSION: In this small randomized subset of patients with resected stage III colon cancer, the addition of cetuximab to FOLFIRI was associated with a nonsignificant trend toward improved DFS and OS. Nevertheless, considering the limitations of this analysis, FOLFOX without the addition of a biologic agent remains the standard of care for adjuvant therapy in resected stage III colon cancer.

Implementation of timeline reforms speeds initiation of National Cancer Institute-sponsored trials.

BACKGROUND: The National Cancer Institute (NCI) organized the Operational Efficiency Working Group in 2008 to develop recommendations for improving the speed with which NCI-sponsored clinical trials move from the idea stage to a protocol open to patient enrollment. METHODS: Given the many stakeholders involved, the Operational Efficiency Working Group advised a multifaceted approach to mobilize the entire research community to improve their business processes. New staff positions to monitor progress, protocol-tracking Web sites, and strategically planned conference calls were implemented. NCI staff and clinical teams at Cooperative Groups and Cancer Centers strived to achieve new target timelines but, most important, agreed to abide by absolute deadlines. For phase I-II studies and phase III studies, the target timelines are 7 months and 10 months, whereas the absolute deadlines were set at 18 and 24 months, respectively. Trials not activated by the absolute deadline are automatically disapproved. RESULTS: The initial experience is encouraging and indicates a reduction in development times for phase I-II studies from the historical median of 541 days to a median of 442 days, an 18.3% decrease. The experience with phase III studies to date, although more limited (n = 25), demonstrates a 45.7% decrease in median days. CONCLUSIONS: Based upon this progress, the NCI and the investigator community have agreed to reduce the absolute deadlines to 15 and 18 months for phase I-II and III trials, respectively. Emphasis on initiating trials rapidly is likely to help reduce the time it takes for clinical trial results to reach patients in need of new treatments.

Effect of oxaliplatin, fluorouracil, and leucovorin with or without cetuximab on survival among patients with resected stage III colon cancer: a randomized trial.

CONTEXT: Leucovorin, fluorouracil, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) is the standard adjuvant therapy for resected stage III colon cancer. Adding cetuximab to FOLFOX benefits patients with metastatic wild-type KRAS but not mutated KRAS colon cancer. OBJECTIVE: To assess the potential benefit of cetuximab added to the modified sixth version of the FOLFOX regimen (mFOLFOX6) in patients with resected stage III wild-type KRAS colon cancer. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A randomized trial of 2686 patients aged 18 years or older at multiple institutions across North America enrolled following resection and informed consent between February 10, 2004, and November 25, 2009. The primary randomized comparison was 12 biweekly cycles of mFOLFOX6 with and without cetuximab. KRAS mutation status was centrally determined. The trial was halted after a planned interim analysis of 48% of predicted events (246/515) occurring in 1863 (of 2070 planned) patients with tumors having wild-type KRAS. A total of 717 patients with mutated KRAS and 106 with indeterminate KRAS were accrued. The 2070 patients with wild-type KRAS provided 90% power to detect a hazard ratio (HR) of 1.33 (2-sided α = .05), with planned interim efficacy analyses after 25%, 50%, and 75% of expected relapses. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Disease-free survival in patients with wild-type KRAS mutations. Secondary end points included overall survival and toxicity. RESULTS: Median (range) follow-up was 28 (0-68) months. The trial demonstrated no benefit when adding cetuximab. Three-year disease-free survival for mFOLFOX6 alone was 74.6% vs 71.5% with the addition of cetuximab (HR, 1.21; 95% CI, 0.98-1.49; P = .08) in patients with wild-type KRAS, and 67.1% vs 65.0% (HR, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.86-1.46; P = .38) in patients with mutated KRAS, with no significant benefit in any subgroups assessed. Among all patients, grade 3 or higher adverse events (72.5% vs 52.3%; odds ratio [OR], 2.4; 95% CI, 2.1-2.8; P < .001) and failure to complete 12 cycles (33% vs 23%; OR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.4-1.9; P < .001) were significantly higher with cetuximab. Increased toxicity and greater detrimental differences in all outcomes were observed in patients aged 70 years or older. CONCLUSION: Among patients with stage III resected colon cancer, the use of cetuximab with adjuvant mFOLFOX6 compared with mFOLFOX6 alone did not result in improved disease-free survival. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00079274.