Prognostic factors of toxicity of immune checkpoint inhibitors in nonsmall cell lung cancer and small cell lung cancer patients: The ToxImmune study.

BACKGROUND: Immunotherapy alone or in combination has clearly improved the survival of patients with lung cancer. However, it may also be responsible for adverse events impacting these patients' quality of life. The ToxImmune study aims to identify prognostic factors that can help to predict immune-related adverse events. METHODS: We included all patients aged 18 years and older who had received at least one dose of immune checkpoint inhibitors, with or without other therapy, between June 2015 and December 2020 and were diagnosed with nonsmall cell lung cancer or small-cell lung cancer. Patients' baseline demographic characteristics, biological blood markers, and imaging by PET-scanner were collected from electronic medical records. All adverse events (AEs) and immune-related AEs (irAEs) were recorded (Common Terminology Criteria For Adverse Events V.5.0). RESULTS: Sixty-four patients were included, of whom 60 (94%) presented at least one irAE. The incidence of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) grade 2 and grade 3-4 was 34% and 8% respectively. Female sex, Primitive Tumor Standardized Uptake Value Max (SUVmax) <5, number of metastases ≥3 and immunotherapy received after the first line were found to be significant risk factors for immune-related adverse events. Based on the number of risk factors, the ToxImmune score predicts the risk of having a grade ≥2 adverse event (primitive tumor SUV ≥ 5 = 0 vs. primitive tumor SUV <5 = 1, number of metastases <3 = 0 vs. number of metastases ≥3 = 1 and L1 = 0 vs. L1 ≥ 1). The incidence of grade ≥2 adverse events was 20%, 55% and 90% with ToxImmune scores 0, 1 and = 2 respectively (p = .003). Median progression-free survival (PFS) times were 19.2 months, 6.64 months and 2.63 months for ToxImmune scores 0, 1 and = 2 respectively, p = .13. Median overall survival times were 22.6 months, 16.4 months and 9.8 months for ToxImmune scores 0, 1 and ≥2 respectively, p = .24. The disease control rate (DRR) was 78% in ToxIummune score 0 group, and 50% in ToxImmune score 1 and ≥2 groups (p = .363). CONCLUSION: The ToxImmune score, which is grounded on objective clinical parameters, indicates that cases with a high score had an advanced threat of severe adverse events. The ToxImmune score could therefore be used in clinical practice to identify patients treated for lung cancer with immunotherapy and at risk of severe AE.

The Use of Telemedicine in Cancer Clinical Trials: Connect-Patient-to-Doctor Prospective Study.

BACKGROUND: Telemedicine is currently being adopted for the management of patients in routine care. However, its use remains limited in the context of clinical trials. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to demonstrate the feasibility of telemonitoring and patient-reported outcomes collection in the context of clinical trials. METHODS: The patients who were included in an interventional oncology clinical trial were eligible. The patients were registered with a digital tool to respond to a patient-reported outcomes questionnaire (ePRO) based on CTCAE (The Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, National Cancer Institute), version 5.0, personalized to their pathology and treatment. An algorithm evaluated the health status of the patient based on the reported adverse events, with a classification in 4 different states (correct, compromise, state to be monitored, or critical state). The main objective was to evaluate the feasibility of remote monitoring via a connected platform of patients included in a clinical trial. RESULTS: From July 1, 2020, to March 31, 2021, 39 patients were included. The median age was 71 years (range 41-94); 74% (n=29) were male, and 59% (n=23) had metastatic disease. Out of the 969 ePRO questionnaires completed over the course of the study, 77.0% (n=746) were classified as "correct," 10.9% (n=106) as "compromised," and 12.1% (n=117) as "to be monitored" or "critical." The median response time was 7 days (IQR 7-15.5), and 76% (25/33) of the patients were compliant. Out of the 35 patients who answered a satisfaction questionnaire, 95% (n=33) were satisfied or very satisfied with the tool, and 85% (n=30) were satisfied with their relationship with the health care team. There were 5 unscheduled hospitalizations during the study period. CONCLUSIONS: Remote monitoring in clinical trials is feasible, with a high level of patient participation and satisfaction. It benefits patients, but it also ensures the high quality of the trial through the early management of adverse events and better knowledge of the tolerance profile of experimental treatments. This e-technology will likely be deployed more widely in our clinical trials.