Enrollment of adolescent and young adult patients newly diagnosed with cancer in NCI CTEP-sponsored clinical trials before and after launch of the NCI National Clinical Trials Network.

BACKGROUND: Participation of adolescents and young adults (AYAs) in oncology clinical trials is important to ensure adequate opportunities for AYA patients to contribute to, and benefit from, advances in cancer treatment. METHODS: Accrual data for National Cancer Institute (NCI) Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program (CTEP) cooperative group-led treatment trials were examined to assess enrollment of newly diagnosed AYA patients (15-39 years) during the period 2004-2019, with particular interest in comparing enrollment before launch of the NCI National Clinical Trials Network (NCTN) to after. All phase 2, 2/3, and 3 trials activated during the period between January 1, 2004, and December 31, 2019, were identified (n = 1568) and reduced to a set of 304 that met predetermined criteria to focus on cooperative group-led trials that involved therapy for newly diagnosed cancer and had age eligibility overlapping the AYA range. The proportion of AYA patients relative to total accrual, along with 95% bootstrapped CI was calculated for patients enrolled pre-NCTN and post-NCTN. RESULTS: AYA accrual comprised 9.5% (95% CI, 7.6-11.8) pre-NCTN compared with 14.0% (95% CI, 9.9-18.3) post-NCTN. The mean difference in proportions post-NCTN compared with pre-NCTN was 4.4% (0.7%-8.3%). CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate an increase in AYA participation in trials conducted within the NCTN relative to the pre-NCTN period. This suggests an awareness and utilization of NCTN trials for AYAs with cancer.

Early drug development in solid tumours: analysis of National Cancer Institute-sponsored phase 1 trials.

BACKGROUND: The low expectation of clinical benefit from phase 1 cancer therapeutics trials might negatively affect patient and physician participation, study reimbursement, and slow the progress of oncology research. Advances in cancer drug development, meanwhile, might have favourably improved treatment responses; however, little comprehensive data exist describing the response and toxicity associated with phase 1 trials across solid tumours. The aim of the study is to evaluate the trend of toxicity and response in phase 1 trials for solid tumours over time. METHODS: We analysed patient-level data from the Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program of the National Cancer Institute-sponsored investigator-initiated phase 1 trials for solid tumours, from Jan 1, 2000, to May 31, 2019. We assessed risks of treatment-related death (grade 5 toxicity ratings possibly, probably, or definitely attributable to treatment), all on-treatment deaths (deaths during protocol treatment regardless of attribution), grade 3-4 toxicity, and proportion of overall response (complete response and partial response) and complete response rate in the study periods of 2000-05, 2006-12, and 2013-2019, and evaluated their trends over time. We also analysed cancer type-specific and investigational agent-specific response, and analysed the trend of response in each cancer type over time. Univariate associations of overall response rates with patients' baseline characteristics (age, sex, performance status, BMI, albumin concentration, and haemoglobin concentration), enrolment period, investigational agents, and trial design were assessed using risk ratio based on the modified Poisson regression model. FINDINGS: We analysed 465 protocols that enrolled 13 847 patients using 261 agents. 144 (31%) trials used a monotherapy and 321 (69%) used combination therapies. The overall treatment-related death rate was 0·7% (95% CI 0·5-0·8) across all periods. Risks of treatment-related deaths did not change over time (p=0·52). All on-treatment death risk during the study period was 8·0% (95% CI 7·6-8·5). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were haematological; grade 3-4 neutropenia occurred in 2336 (16·9%) of 13 847 patients, lymphopenia in 1230 (8·9%), anaemia in 894 (6·5%), and thrombocytopenia in 979 (7·1%). The overall response rate for all trials during the study period was 12·2% (95% CI 11·5-12·8; 1133 of 9325 patients) and complete response rate was 2·7% (2·4-3·0; 249 of 9325). Overall response increased from 9·6% (95% CI 8·7-10·6) in 2000-05 to 18·0% (15·7-20·5) in 2013-19, and complete response rates from 2·5% (2·0-3·0) to 4·3% (3·2-5·7). Overall response rates for combination therapy were substantially higher than for monotherapy (15·8% [15·0-16·8] vs 3·5% [2·8-4·2]). The overall response by class of agents differed across diseases. Anti-angiogenesis agents were associated with higher overall response rate for bladder, colon, kidney and ovarian cancer. DNA repair inhibitors were associated with higher overall response rate in ovarian and pancreatic cancer. The rates of overall response over time differed markedly by disease; there were notable improvements in bladder, breast, and kidney cancer and melanoma, but no change in the low response of pancreatic and colon cancer. INTERPRETATION: During the past 20 years, the response rate in phase 1 trials nearly doubled without an increase in the treatment-related death rate. However, there is significant heterogeneity in overall response by various factors such as cancer type, investigational agent, and trial design. Therefore, informed decision making is crucial for patients before participating in phase 1 trials. This study provides updated encouraging outcomes of modern phase 1 trials in solid tumours. FUNDING: National Cancer Institute.

Major Adverse Cardiac Events With Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors: A Pooled Analysis of Trials Sponsored by the National Cancer Institute-Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program.

PURPOSE: Major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) because of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are infrequent immune-related adverse events (irAEs) that comprise a spectrum of cardiac toxicities with variable manifestations. ICI-related MACEs can lead to significant morbidity and mortality, hence the need to better define presentations of MACEs and their association with noncardiac irAEs in ICI-treated patients. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective pooled analysis of MACE captured in the serious adverse events reporting database of the National Cancer Institute-Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program for National Cancer Institute-sponsored investigational clinical trials between June 2015 and December 2019. Patients were eligible if they had been treated with anti-programmed cell death protein-1 (anti-PD-1)/programmed cell death-ligand 1 (anti-PD-L1) alone or with additional anticancer therapies. RESULTS: A total of 6,925 participants received anti-PD-(L)1-based therapies; 48% (n = 3,354) were treated with single-agent anti-PD-(L)1 therapy. Of 6,925 patients, 0.6% (n = 40) qualified as ICI-related MACE, with 77.5% (n = 31 of 40) being ≥ grade 3. Myocarditis accounted for 45% (n = 18 of 40) of total ICI-MACEs. Concurrent multisystem involvement with other noncardiac irAEs was seen in 65% (n = 26 of 40). Most patients with myocarditis (83%, n = 15 of 18) had one or more noncardiac irAEs associated. Incidence of MACE was higher with anti-PD-(L)1 + targeted therapies compared with anti-PD-(L)1 + anti-cytotoxic T-cell lymphocyte-4 combinations (2.1% v 0.9%, P = .08). There was a higher incidence of myocarditis with anti-PD-(L)1-based combination therapies versus single-agent anti-PD-(L)1 therapies (0.36%, n = 13 of 3,571 v 0.15%, n = 5 of 3,354, P = .08). Deaths related to myocarditis were identified in 22.5% (n = 4 of 18). All four patients who died had concurrent myositis. CONCLUSION: Increasing patient and prescriber awareness in understanding patterns of ICI-MACE and associated noncardiac irAEs should be emphasized. Better characterization of the risk of MACE with the concurrent use of non-ICI-based anticancer therapies with anti-PD-(L)1 treatments is needed.

Trends in Grade 5 Toxicity and Response in Phase I Trials in Hematologic Malignancy: 20-Year Experience From the Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program at the National Cancer Institute.

PURPOSE: Cancer drug development has largely shifted from cytotoxic chemotherapy to targeted treatment in the past two decades. Although previous studies have highlighted improvement in response rates in recent phase I trials, disease-focused reporting is limited. METHODS: We integrated patient-level data for patients with hematologic malignancies who participated in phase I trials sponsored by the National Cancer Institute Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program between January 2000 and May 2019 and estimated the trend of grade 5 toxicity and response by disease subtype over time. RESULTS: We analyzed 161 trials involving 3,308 patients, all of whom were assessed for toxicity and 2,404 of whom were evaluable for response to therapy. The overall rate of grade 5 toxicities was 1.81% (95% CI, 1.36 to 2.27), with no significant change in the rate over time. Baseline characteristics associated with higher risk of grade 5 toxicity were age and performance status ≥ 2 at enrollment. Overall response rate (ORR) and complete response (CR) rate for all trials during the study period were 25.1% and 14.7%, respectively. A significant increase in both ORR and CR rate was observed over time (ORR, 18.5% in 2000-2005, 25.9% in 2006-2012, and 50.6% in 2013-2019, P < .001). ORR in phase I trials varied across disease subtypes: 20.2% in acute myeloid leukemia, 9.1% in myelodysplastic syndrome, 43.2% in lymphoma, 42.9% in chronic lymphocytic leukemia, 15.1% in acute lymphoblastic leukemia, and 16.5% in myeloma. CONCLUSION: Over time, the ORR and CR rates in phase I trials for hematologic malignancy have improved meaningfully, whereas the rate of toxicity-related death remains stable. This study provides broad experience that physicians can use when discussing the potential outcomes for patients with hematologic malignancy considering participation in phase I trials.

Outcomes of Pregnancy During Immunotherapy Treatment for Cancer: Analysis of Clinical Trials Sponsored by the National Cancer Institute.

Despite expanding indications for immunotherapeutic agents, there is limited understanding about their clinical effects on pregnancy outcomes. Generally, pregnant patients with cancer are excluded from clinical trials, and inadvertent pregnancies on trial result in patients being taken off because of concerns for fetal toxicity. To answer this question of pregnancy outcomes on immunotherapy-based trials, we performed a retrospective analysis of the National Cancer Institute (NCI) Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program (CTEP)-Adverse Event Reporting System for unexpected pregnancies during NCI-CTEP-sponsored immunotherapy clinical trials between 2011 and 2020. We identified nine female patients who had unexpected pregnancies, of whom seven chose to take their pregnancies to term. All seven pregnancies resulted in vaginal births of apparently normal infants. This is the first report of pregnancy outcomes in multiple female patients exposed to immunotherapy. Our data suggest the need for further research to better evaluate and define contraception recommendations during immunotherapy treatment for cancer.

Ocular adverse events in PD-1 and PD-L1 inhibitors.

BACKGROUND: Programmed death-1 (PD-1) and programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitors can cause unique immune-related adverse effects due to non-specific immunological activation. However, less is known about adverse effects of these drugs in the eye. METHODS: Two adverse event databases were retrospectively reviewed. The two databases consisted of a routine adverse event database and a serious adverse event database of expeditiously submitted reports. Patients with any malignancy who had ocular adverse events while on PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor treatment were included. Patients received nivolumab, pembrolizumab, atezolizumab or durvalumab alone or in combination with other anticancer agents per each trial's protocol. Databases were queried up to May 19, 2020. RESULTS: In the routine adverse event database, 272 adverse events from 213 patients were reported and in the serious adverse event reporting database, 59 ocular adverse events from 47 patients were reported. A lower estimate of the prevalance from the routine adverse event database showed 259/7727 patients on study treatment arms reporting ocular adverse events (3.3% prevalence). Excluding trials that do not report lower grade adverse events to the routine adverse event database results in a higher end estimate of 242/3255 patients on study treatment arms reporting ocular adverse events (7.4% prevalence). Ocular events occurred early after drug initiation (routine database: median 6 weeks, IQR 0-16, serious adverse events database: median 11 weeks, IQR 6-21). The median Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events grade was grade 1 (mild) (IQR 1-2) and grade 2 (moderate) (IQR 2-3) for the routine database and the serious adverse events database, respectively. In-depth analysis of the serious adverse event reports revealed varying degrees of clinical workup, with 30/47 patients (64%) receiving ophthalmological evaluation and 16/47 (34%) of patients having to delay or discontinue treatment. However, 16/47 (34%) patients experienced resolution and 14/47 (30%) patients experienced at least some improvement. CONCLUSIONS: This is one of the largest analyses of ocular adverse events in patients treated with PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors in the USA. We found ocular adverse events are rare complications of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor therapy, can be severe enough to cause treatment discontinuation/delay, and may not always be appropriately evaluated by eye specialists. Standardized plans for ophthalmology evaluation and management of ocular toxicities are needed in studies of patients treated with PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors.

National Cancer Institute: Restructuring to Support the Clinical Trials of the Future.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the evolution and structure of the National Cancer Institute clinical trials programs, their notable accomplishments, nurses' roles in these accomplishments, and the essential role of nursing today and in the future. DATA SOURCES: Manuscripts, government publications, websites, and professional communications. CONCLUSION: Change is inevitable and a constant factor in the world of advancing science and clinical research. Nurses' contribution to research and evidence-based practice will continue to grow and is vital as the scientific landscape evolves. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE: As the understanding of cancer biology increases and clinical trials evolve, nurses will need to remain key team members and leaders in National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program and National Cancer Trials Network trials and their associated infrastructure.

Radiopharmaceuticals for Relapsed or Refractory Ovarian Cancers.

Targeted radiopharmaceuticals for therapeutic use deliver radionuclides directly to tumor anywhere in the body, and therefore, have renewed interest for clinical development in women with disseminated chemorefractory ovarian cancers. About two in every five women with advanced stage ovarian cancer outlive their disease after the first treatment phase, with the rest rendered incurable due to the chemorefractory nature of their disease. The National Cancer Institute (NCI) Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program conducted 67 phase I or phase Ib trials among women with relapsed or refractory ovarian cancer between 1989 and 2017 in an effort to uncover tolerable and effective drug combinations intended to increase survival rates. None of these early clinical development phase trials involved radiopharmaceuticals. Here, the NCI provides its perspective on targeted radiopharmaceutical conjugates alone or in combination with its experimental therapeutics portfolio for women with relapsed or refractory ovarian cancer. An infrastructure build for Federal radiopharmaceutical medical monitoring and adverse event reporting has begun.

Clinical Trial Electronic Portals for Expedited Safety Reporting: Recommendations from the Clinical Trials Transformation Initiative Investigational New Drug Safety Advancement Project.

BACKGROUND: Use of electronic clinical trial portals has increased in recent years to assist with sponsor-investigator communication, safety reporting, and clinical trial management. Electronic portals can help reduce time and costs associated with processing paperwork and add security measures; however, there is a lack of information on clinical trial investigative staff's perceived challenges and benefits of using portals. OBJECTIVE: The Clinical Trials Transformation Initiative (CTTI) sought to (1) identify challenges to investigator receipt and management of investigational new drug (IND) safety reports at oncologic investigative sites and coordinating centers and (2) facilitate adoption of best practices for communicating and managing IND safety reports using electronic portals. METHODS: CTTI, a public-private partnership to improve the conduct of clinical trials, distributed surveys and conducted interviews in an opinion-gathering effort to record investigator and research staff views on electronic portals in the context of the new safety reporting requirements described in the US Food and Drug Administration's final rule (Code of Federal Regulations Title 21 Section 312). The project focused on receipt, management, and review of safety reports as opposed to the reporting of adverse events. RESULTS: The top challenge investigators and staff identified in using individual sponsor portals was remembering several complex individual passwords to access each site. Also, certain tasks are time-consuming (eg, downloading reports) due to slow sites or difficulties associated with particular operating systems or software. To improve user experiences, respondents suggested that portals function independently of browsers and operating systems, have intuitive interfaces with easy navigation, and incorporate additional features that would allow users to filter, search, and batch safety reports. CONCLUSIONS: Results indicate that an ideal system for sharing expedited IND safety information is through a central portal used by all sponsors. Until this is feasible, electronic reporting portals should at least have consistent functionality. CTTI has issued recommendations to improve the quality and use of electronic portals.

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.

Steps and time to process clinical trials at the Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program.

PURPOSE: To examine the processes and document the calendar time required for the National Cancer Institute's Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program (CTEP) and Central Institutional Review Board (CIRB) to evaluate and approve phase III clinical trials. METHODS: Process steps were documented by (1) interviewing CTEP and CIRB staff regarding the steps required to activate a trial from initial concept submission to trial activation by a cooperative group, (2) reviewing standard operating procedures, and (3) inspecting trial records and documents for selected trials to identify any additional steps. Calendar time was collected from initial concept submission to activation using retrospective data from the CTEP Protocol and Information Office. RESULTS: At least 296 distinct processes are required for phase III trial activation: at least 239 working steps, 52 major decision points, 20 processing loops, and 11 stopping points. Of the 195 trials activated during the January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2007, study period, a sample of 167 (85.6%) was used for gathering timing data. Median calendar days from initial formal concept submission to CTEP to trial activation by a cooperative group was 602 days (interquartile range, 454 to 861 days). This time has not significantly changed over the past 8 years. There is a high variation in the time required to activate a clinical trial. CONCLUSION: Because of their complexity, the overall development time for phase III clinical trials is lengthy, process laden, and highly variable. To streamline the process, a solution must be sought that includes all parties involved in developing trials.

Prevalence of anemia in skilled-nursing home residents.

Anemia is a frequent problem among older persons, the prevalence of which may be particularly high in skilled-nursing facilities but recent data in this regard is lacking. The purpose of this study was to define the prevalence of anemia and its association with hospitalization in skilled-nursing home residents. We retrospectively reviewed randomly selected charts among five skilled-nursing facilities within the National Geriatrics Research Consortium (NGRC). Among 900 chronically residing patients with completed chart information, the mean and median ages were 79 years and 82 years, respectively. Eighty-seven percent of patients were 65 years or greater. Applying the World Health Organization criteria for anemia (hemoglobin <12 g/dl for women and hemoglobin <13 g/dl for men), we found a 6-month point prevalence of 48%. The hospitalization rate was higher among those with more severe anemia. Few residents were treated with recombinant erythropoietin therapy or red blood cell transfusion. Anemia is very common in the nursing home, and despite being associated with increased morbidity; it is, for the most part, untreated in this setting. With an increased understanding of erythropoiesis and the availability of recombinant growth factors, future studies should evaluate the causes and potential benefits of treatment in terms of quality of life, reduced morbidity and health economics.