Optimization of alert notifications in electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) remote symptom monitoring systems (AFT-39).

PURPOSE: Clinical benefits result from electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) systems that enable remote symptom monitoring. Although clinically useful, real-time alert notifications for severe or worsening symptoms can overburden nurses. Thus, we aimed to algorithmically identify likely non-urgent alerts that could be suppressed. METHODS: We evaluated alerts from the PRO-TECT trial (Alliance AFT-39) in which oncology practices implemented remote symptom monitoring. Patients completed weekly at-home ePRO symptom surveys, and nurses received real-time alert notifications for severe or worsening symptoms. During parts of the trial, patients and nurses each indicated whether alerts were urgent or could wait until the next visit. We developed an algorithm for suppressing alerts based on patient assessment of urgency and model-based predictions of nurse assessment of urgency. RESULTS: 593 patients participated (median age = 64 years, 61% female, 80% white, 10% reported never using computers/tablets/smartphones). Patients completed 91% of expected weekly surveys. 34% of surveys generated an alert, and 59% of alerts prompted immediate nurse actions. Patients considered 10% of alerts urgent. Of the remaining cases, nurses considered alerts urgent more often when patients reported any worsening symptom compared to the prior week (33% of alerts with versus 26% without any worsening symptom, p = 0.009). The algorithm identified 38% of alerts as likely non-urgent that could be suppressed with acceptable discrimination (sensitivity = 80%, 95% CI [76%, 84%]; specificity = 52%, 95% CI [49%, 55%]). CONCLUSION: An algorithm can identify remote symptom monitoring alerts likely to be considered non-urgent by nurses, and may assist in fostering nurse acceptance and implementation feasibility of ePRO systems.

Rechallenge With High-Dose Methotrexate After Treatment With Glucarpidase in Adult Patients With Lymphoma.

PURPOSE: Limited evidence exists regarding methotrexate (MTX) resumption after patients with lymphoma receive glucarpidase for toxic MTX levels and acute kidney injury (AKI). METHODS: This retrospective review included adults with lymphoma treated with glucarpidase after MTX at Mayo Clinic between January 31, 2020, and October 10, 2022. Descriptive statistics summarize patient characteristics and clinical outcomes. RESULTS: Of 11 patients treated with glucarpidase after MTX, seven (64%) were rechallenged with MTX. Indications for MTX rechallenge included confirmed CNS disease (n = 6, 86%) and intravascular lymphoma (n = 1, 14%). Compared with the nonrechallenged subgroup, before receiving MTX that required glucarpidase rescue, the rechallenged patients had lower median pretreatment serum creatinine (Scr; 0.7 v 1.2 mg/dL), and none had AKI with previous MTX doses, n = 0 (0%) versus n = 2 (50%). During the MTX dose requiring glucarpidase rescue, the rechallenged group had lower median peak Scr (1.26 v 3.32 mg/dL) and lower incidence of AKI stage III (n = 1 [14%] v n = 3 [75%]), and none of the rechallenged patients required renal replacement therapy (RRT; n = 0 [0%] v n = 1 [25%]). At the first rechallenge after glucarpidase administration, the median MTX dose reduction was 56% (range, 46%-75%), and the lowest used dose when prescribed according to each treatment protocol schedule was 1.5 g/m2. Two (29%) patients experienced AKI (n = 1 stage I, n = 1 stage II) after MTX rechallenge. Zero patients required RRT, and zero required another glucarpidase administration. Six (86%) patients completed all recommended MTX doses. CONCLUSION: In selected adults with lymphoma who required glucarpidase for toxic MTX levels after administration of high-dose MTX, resumption of MTX therapy at lower doses is safe. Patients selected for MTX resumption had experienced less severe AKI during the previous cycle compared with those not selected for MTX resumption.

[Special issue PRO] Considering endpoints for comparative tolerability of cancer treatments using patient report given the estimand framework.

Regulatory agencies are advancing the use of systematic approaches to collect patient experience data, including patient-reported outcomes (PROs), in cancer clinical trials to inform regulatory decision-making. Due in part to clinician under-reporting of symptomatic adverse events, there is a growing recognition that evaluation of cancer treatment tolerability should include the patient experience, both in terms of the overall side effect impact and symptomatic adverse events. Methodologies around implementation, analysis, and interpretation of "patient" reported tolerability are under development, and current approaches are largely descriptive. There is robust guidance for use of PROs as efficacy endpoints to compare cancer treatments, but it is unclear to what extent this can be relied-upon to develop tolerability endpoints. An important consideration when developing endpoints to compare tolerability between treatments is the linkage of trial design, objectives, and statistical analysis. Despite interest in and frequent collection of PRO data in oncology trials, heterogeneity in analyses and unclear PRO objectives mean that design, objectives, and analysis may not be aligned, posing substantial challenges for the interpretation of results. The recent ICH E9 (R1) estimand framework represents an opportunity to help address these challenges. Efforts to apply the estimand framework in the context of PROs have primarily focused on efficacy outcomes. In this paper, we discuss considerations for comparing the patient-reported tolerability of different treatments in an oncology trial context.

Patterns of progression after immune checkpoint inhibitors for Hodgkin lymphoma: implications for radiation therapy.

ABSTRACT: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have demonstrated remarkable response rates in relapsed or refractory Hodgkin lymphoma (HL). Still, most patients eventually progress. Patterns of progression after ICIs are not well described and are essential to defining the role of local therapies in combination with ICIs. We identified patients who received ICIs for HL between 2013 and 2022. Fludeoxyglucose-18 positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) before initiating ICI and at progression on/after ICI were reviewed, and areas of active HL were recorded. An exploratory analysis of treatable progression included patients with ≤5 sites of disease on pre-ICI FDG-PET and progression only at pre-ICI sites. Ninety patients were identified; 69 had complete records, and of these, 32 (52%) had relapsed at ICI initiation, 17 (25%) were refractory, and 16 (23%) received ICI as first-line therapy. Forty-five of 69 patients had ≤5 sites of disease (limited) on pre-ICI FDG-PET. Patients with >5 sites of disease had a higher risk of progression, and every site of disease >5 sites conferred an additional 1.2x higher chance of progression. At a median follow-up of 4.0 years, 41 of 69 patients had progressed on/after ICIs (cumulative incidence 66.4%), and of these, 22 of 41 patients progressed only at pre-ICI sites (cumulative incidence 39.4%). In an exploratory analysis, the cumulative incidence of a treatable progression among 45 patients with limited disease was 34%. The cumulative incidence of any progression among this cohort was 58.9%. More than one-third of patients with limited disease before ICIs experienced progression only at pre-ICI sites of disease. These patients could be candidates for radiation during or after ICIs.

Integrating 4 methods to evaluate physical function in patients with cancer (In4M): protocol for a prospective cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Accurate, patient-centred evaluation of physical function in patients with cancer can provide important information on the functional impacts experienced by patients both from the disease and its treatment. Increasingly, digital health technology is facilitating and providing new ways to measure symptoms and function. There is a need to characterise the longitudinal measurement characteristics of physical function assessments, including clinician-reported outcome, patient-reported ported outcome (PRO), performance outcome tests and wearable data, to inform regulatory and clinical decision-making in cancer clinical trials and oncology practice. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: In this prospective study, we are enrolling 200 English-speaking and/or Spanish-speaking patients with breast cancer or lymphoma seen at Mayo Clinic or Yale University who will receive intravenous cytotoxic chemotherapy. Physical function assessments will be obtained longitudinally using multiple assessment modalities. Participants will be followed for 9 months using a patient-centred health data aggregating platform that consolidates study questionnaires, electronic health record data, and activity and sleep data from a wearable sensor. Data analysis will focus on understanding variability, sensitivity and meaningful changes across the included physical function assessments and evaluating their relationship to key clinical outcomes. Additionally, the feasibility of multimodal physical function data collection in real-world patients with breast cancer or lymphoma will be assessed, as will patient impressions of the usability and acceptability of the wearable sensor, data aggregation platform and PROs. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has received approval from IRBs at Mayo Clinic, Yale University and the US Food and Drug Administration. Results will be made available to participants, funders, the research community and the public. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05214144; Pre-results.

The Timing, Trajectory, and Incidence of Immune-Related Adverse Events in NSCLC Treated With Atezolizumab.

Introduction: Immune-related adverse events (irAEs) due to immune checkpoint inhibitors can have complicated clinical courses. We comprehensively evaluated the timing, trajectory, and incidence of both single and multiple irAEs for NSCLC treated with atezolizumab. Methods: Data were pooled from 2457 patients who participated in the IMpower130, IMpower132, and IMpower150 clinical trials investigating the use of atezolizumab in metastatic NSCLC as part of a chemoimmunotherapy regimen. Longitudinal irAE data with landmark analysis, time-to-onset, changes in grading severity, and occurrence of multiple events were summarized. Results: In general, 1557 patients were treated with atezolizumab and 900 patients were in the control groups. Median follow-up was 32.3 and 23.5 months, respectively. In the atezolizumab group, 753 patients (48.4%) experienced at least one irAE. In the control group, 289 patients (32.1%) experienced at least one nonimmune adverse event that was attributed to an irAE. In the atezolizumab group, the most common irAEs were rash, hepatitis, and hypothyroidism. Furthermore, 13% of the patients experienced two irAEs and 4% experienced three irAEs. Within 5 months of treatment, the cumulative incidence for any irAE was 39.2%. Median time-to-onset varied from 1 to 10 months based on the specific irAE. Grade 1 to 2 irAEs increased in severity for 33% of the patients. Conclusions: We identified dynamic clinical patterns for irAEs in patients treated with atezolizumab, including variations in time-to-onset, incidence of multiple irAEs, and frequency of irAEs increasing in severity. These results can guide clinical management and future reporting of adverse events to enable comprehensive longitudinal analyses.