Effect of statin treatment on the risk of cancer in patients with heart failure: A target trial emulation study.

PURPOSE: A recent observational study suggested statins could reduce cancer diagnosis in patients with heart failure (HF). The findings need to be validated using robust epidemiological methods. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of statin treatment on the risk of cancer in patients with HF. METHODS: We conducted two target trial emulations using primary care data from IQVIA Medical Research Database-UK (2000 to 2019) with a clone-censor-weight design. The first emulated trial addressed the treatment initiation effect: initiating within 1 year versus not initiating a statin after the HF diagnosis. The second emulated trial addressed the cumulative exposure effect: continuing a statin for ≤3 years, 3-6 years, and >6 years after initiation. The study outcomes were any incident cancer and site-specific cancer diagnoses. Weighted pooled logistic regression models were used to estimate 10-year risk ratios (RR). 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using non-parametric bootstrapping. RESULTS: The first emulated trial showed that, compared to no statin, statins did not reduce the cancer risk in patients with HF (RR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.94-1.15). The second emulated trial showed that, compared to treatment ≤3 years, statins with longer durations did not reduce the cancer risk (3-6 years: RR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.70-1.33. >6 years: RR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.79-1.26). No significant risk difference was observed on any site-specific cancer diagnoses. CONCLUSIONS: The results from the target trial emulations suggest that statin treatment is not associated with cancer risk in patients with HF.

A systematic review of ethnic minority participation in randomised controlled trials of systemic therapies for gynecological cancers.

OBJECTIVE: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) must include ethnic minority patients to produce generalisable findings and ensure health equity as cancer incidence rises globally. This systematic review examines participation of ethnic minorities in RCTs of licensed systemic anti-cancer therapies (SACT) for gynecological cancers, defining the research population and distribution of research sites to identify disparities in participation on the global scale. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement. Phase II and III RCTs of licensed therapies for gynecological cancers published 01/11/2012-01/11/2022 that reported patient race/ethnicity were included. Extracted data included race/ethnicity and research site location. RCT populations were aggregated and participation of groups compared. Global distribution of research sites was described. RESULTS: 26 RCTs met inclusion criteria of 351 publications included in full-text screening, representing 17,041 patients. 79.8% were "Caucasian", 9.1% "East Asian", 3.7% "Black/African American" and 6.1% "Other, Unknown, Not Reported". "Caucasian" patients participated at higher rates than all other groups. Of 5,478 research sites, 80.1% were located in North America, 13.0% in Europe, 3.4% in East Asia, 1.3% in the Middle East, 1.3% in South America and 0.8% in Australasia. CONCLUSIONS: Ethnic minorities formed smaller proportions of RCT cohorts compared to the general population. The majority of sites were located in North America and Europe, with few in other regions, limiting enrollment of South Asian, South-East Asian and African patients in particular. Efforts to recruit more ethnic minority patients should be made in North America and Europe. More sites in underserved regions would promote equitable access to RCTs and ensure findings are generalisable to diverse groups. This review assessed the global population enrolled in contemporary RCTs for novel therapies now routinely given for gynecological cancers, adding novel understanding of the global distribution of research sites.

Out-of-hours admissions in patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors and their primary management with steroids.

INTRODUCTION: The incidence of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) from immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) is well described. However, the impact on emergency care services is not. This study investigated the incidence of irAEs out-of-hours, and the management used to mitigate symptoms and side effects. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study reviewed all emergency presentations triaged by the acute oncology team between December 2021 and June 2022, between 5 pm and 9 am. Patients were identified from triage audit sheets and remaining data points were retrieved from electronic health records. Inclusion criteria included all adult patients admitted on an ICI at one tertiary centre. RESULTS: In 7 months, 970 patients called the acute oncology helpline 11% (n = 109) of patients were on an ICI treatment. After clinical review, 78% (n = 70) resulted in hospital admissions, with length of stay cumulating to 496 bed days. 56% (n = 39) of patients delayed reporting symptoms, ranging between 12 hours and 10 days from symptom onset to seeking support. 49% (n = 34) patients received steroids to manage suspected irAEs. Dexamethasone was the most common steroid used in 71% (n = 24) of patients, and variation was found in prescribed doses. CONCLUSIONS: These results underline the urgent need to address patient and staff education on adverse effects related to ICI. Patients require a comprehensive understanding of the symptoms and importance of prompt reporting. Staff education on recognition and treatment management is needed to reduce variation in practice. Further research is needed to identify barriers in symptom reporting and focus on realtime reporting to reduce the out-of-hours burden on services.

Personalising monitoring for chemotherapy patients through predicting deterioration in renal and hepatic function.

BACKGROUND: In those receiving chemotherapy, renal and hepatic dysfunction can increase the risk of toxicity and should therefore be monitored. We aimed to develop a machine learning model to identify those patients that need closer monitoring, enabling a safer and more efficient service. METHODS: We used retrospective data from a large academic hospital, for patients treated with chemotherapy for breast cancer, colorectal cancer and diffuse-large B-cell lymphoma, to train and validate a Multi-Layer Perceptrons (MLP) model to predict the outcomes of unacceptable rises in bilirubin or creatinine. To assess the performance of the model, validation was performed using patient data from a separate, independent hospital using the same variables. Using this dataset, we evaluated the sensitivity and specificity of the model. RESULTS: 1214 patients in total were identified. The training set had almost perfect sensitivity and specificity of >0.95; the area under the curve (AUC) was 0.99 (95% CI 0.98-1.00) for creatinine and 0.97 (95% CI: 0.95-0.99) for bilirubin. The validation set had good sensitivity (creatinine: 0.60, 95% CI: 0.55-0.64, bilirubin: 0.54, 95% CI: 0.52-0.56), and specificity (creatinine 0.98, 95% CI: 0.96-0.99, bilirubin 0.90, 95% CI: 0.87-0.94) and area under the curve (creatinine: 0.76, 95% CI: 0.70, 0.82, bilirubin 0.72, 95% CI: 0.68-0.76). CONCLUSIONS: We have demonstrated that a MLP model can be used to reduce the number of blood tests required for some patients at low risk of organ dysfunction, whilst improving safety for others at high risk.

Histamine-2 (H2 ) antagonists can be safely removed from standard paclitaxel premedication regimens.

AIMS: The aim of this study is to investigate the rates of hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs) in patients receiving paclitaxel chemotherapy, with and without a histamine-2 (H2 ) antagonists. METHOD: This prospective, multi-centre, cohort study compared patients receiving paclitaxel treated with premedication regimens containing chlorphenamine, dexamethasone and an H2 antagonist vs patients treated without an H2 antagonist. Rates of HSRs were described and logistic multivariable regression was used to investigate any associations with H2 antagonist treatment, adjusting for confounding variables. RESULTS: A total of 1043 individuals were included in the study; of these, 638 (61%) patients received an H2 antagonist and 405 (49%) were not given an H2 antagonist. Incidence of HSR in the cohort treated with H2 antagonists was 11.31% (n = 70) vs 9.86% (n = 41) in the cohort without. There was no statistically significant difference between the rates of HSR observed in those receiving and not receiving an H2 antagonist (odds ratio 1.04, 95% CI 0.65, 1.66, P = .9). CONCLUSIONS: Results presented within the study are consistent with other recently published evidence to suggest that H2 antagonists do not confer any advantage as part of premedication regimens in reducing the incidence of HSR in patients treated with paclitaxel.

Impact of coronavirus of 2019 on the delivery of pharmacy services to patients with cancer: An international survey of oncology pharmacy practitioners.

INTRODUCTION: The coronavirus of 2019 pandemic has necessitated vast and rapid changes in the way oncology pharmacy services are delivered around the world. METHODS/AIMS: An international survey of oncology pharmacists and technicians was conducted via the International Society of Oncology Pharmacy Practitioners and collaborating global pharmacy organisations to determine the impact that the coronavirus of 2019 has had on pharmacy service delivery, pharmacy practitioners and oncology practice. RESULTS: The survey received 862 responses from 40 different countries from September to October 2020. The majority of respondents were pharmacists (n = 841, 97.6%), with 24% involved in the direct care of patients with the coronavirus of 2019. Of the survey participants, 55% increased their time working remotely, with remote activities including dispensing, patient assessment/follow-up and attending multi-disciplinary rounds. Respondents reported a 72% increase in the use of technology to perform remote patient interaction activities and that participation in educational meetings and quality improvement projects was reduced by 68% and 44%, respectively. Workforce impacts included altered working hours (50%), cancelled leave (48%) and forced leave/furloughing (30%). During the pandemic, respondents reported reduced access to intensive care (19%) and anti-cancer (15%) medications. In addition, 39% of respondents reported reduced access to personal protective equipment, including N95 masks for chemotherapy compounding. Almost half of respondents (49%) reported that cancer treatments were delayed or intervals were altered for patients being treated with curative intent. A third of practitioners (30%) believed that patient outcomes would be adversely impacted by changes to pharmacy services. Sixty-five percent of respondents reported impacts on their mental health, with 12% utilising support services. CONCLUSION: The coronavirus of 2019 pandemic has altered the way oncology pharmacy services are delivered. These results demonstrate the adaptability of the oncology pharmacy profession and highlight the importance of formal evaluation of the varied practice models to determine the evidence-based practices that enhance pharmacy services and, thus, should be reinstated as soon as practical and reasonable.

A guideline for the outpatient management of glycaemic control in people with cancer.

Individuals with cancer are at increased risk of developing new-onset diabetes mellitus and hyperglycaemia, and an estimated 20% of people with cancer already have an underlying diagnosis of diabetes mellitus. People with both cancer and diabetes may have an increased risk of toxicities, hospital admissions and morbidity, with hyperglycaemia potentially attenuating the efficacy of chemotherapy often secondary to dose reductions and early cessation. Numerous studies have demonstrated that hyperglycaemia is prognostic of worse overall survival and risk of cancer recurrence. These guidelines aim to provide the oncology/haemato-oncology and diabetes multidisciplinary teams with the tools to manage people with diabetes commencing anti-cancer/glucocorticoid therapy, as well as identifying individuals without a known diagnosis of diabetes who are at risk of developing hyperglycaemia and new-onset diabetes.

Evidence to guide the optimal timing for pre-chemotherapy blood tests for early breast, colorectal cancer and diffuse large B-cell lymphoma.

BACKGROUND: Re-designing services and processes to meet growing demands in chemotherapy services is necessary with increasing treatments. There is little evidence guiding the timing and thresholds to be attained of pre-chemotherapy blood assessments, namely neutrophils. METHODS: A survey was developed and distributed to health professionals in the United Kingdom (UK) to examine current practice in timing and threshold values of neutrophils and platelets before treatment administration. This was followed by a retrospective cohort study, using data from electronic patient record systems; including patients initiating treatment between January 2013 and December 2018, to determine a safe timeframe for blood assessments; comparing neutrophil, platelet, creatinine and bilirubin levels at different time points. RESULTS: The survey captured 25% of hospitals in the UK and variations were apparent in both the timing of assessments and thresholds needed, particularly for neutrophils. 616 (6.5%) of 4007 patients included had neutrophil levels measured twice within 7 days of treatment (with the first level taken beyond 3 days and the second test being within 3 days of treatment- the UK standard). Of the patients that attained an acceptable neutrophil level at their first test, five of the 616 (0.8%) became ineligible for administration from the test 2 level. 23% of patients improved their grade and became eligible for treatment. Little difference was observed for platelets. CONCLUSIONS: We have demonstrated that extending the timeframe for blood tests can be safe, however, this practice may cause unnecessary delays for patients if only an early test is relied on for eligibility.

Global changes to the chemotherapy service during the covid-19 pandemic.

PURPOSE: In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, changes to chemotherapy services were implemented as a means of managing imposed workload strains within health services and protecting patients from contracting COVID-19. Given the rapidly evolving nature of the pandemic many changes were rapidly adopted and were not substantiated by robust evidence. This study aimed to describe the changes adopted internationally to chemotherapy services, which may be used to guide future changes to treatment delivery. METHODS: A survey was developed to understand the impact of COVID-19 on the delivery of systemic anti-cancer therapies (SACT). It comprised 22 questions and examined the strategies implemented during the pandemic to prioritise and protect patients receiving SACT and the participants' professional opinion of the strategies employed. The survey was available in English, Spanish and French and was distributed via professional bodies. RESULTS: 129 responses were obtained from healthcare professionals working across 17 different countries. 45% of institutions had to implement treatment prioritisation strategies and all hospitals implemented changes in the delivery of treatment, including: reduction in treatments (69%), using less immunosuppressive agents (50%), allowing treatment breaks (14%) and switching to oral therapies (45%). Virtual clinic visits were perceived by participants as the most effective strategy to protect patients. CONCLUSIONS: The pandemic has forced chemotherapy healthcare professionals to adopt new ways of working by reducing health interactions. Many areas of research are needed following this period, including understanding patients' perceptions of risks to treatment, utilisation of oral treatments and the impact of treatment breaks on cancer outcomes.

Immunotherapy and associated immune-related adverse events at a large UK centre: a mixed methods study.

BACKGROUND: The development and rapid uptake of immune checkpoint inhibitors (CPI) has changed the outlook for patients with cancer. However, CPIs have different adverse event (AE) profiles to other systemic therapies, and prompt AE management is essential to assure optimal outcomes. In order to understand what and when adverse events are experienced, reported and managed during CPI treatment, a mixed methods study was conducted, including a case note review of patients who were receiving immunotherapy and semi-structured interviews with patients to understand their experience, management and reporting of AEs after receiving immune CPI treatment. METHODS: This mixed methods study was conducted at a large cancer hospital in the United Kingdom. A case note review identified how and where patients reported AEs. Data relating to patients with lung, bladder, prostate and head & neck cancers who received CPI treatment between 01/04/2015 and 31/07/2018 were extracted from e-prescribing databases and clinical data were included for analysis at a single time point (31 July 2018). Semi-structured interviews were conducted with patients receiving CPI treatment, exploring experience of AEs and reasons for delays in AE reporting and management. RESULTS: Sixty-two patients were included in the case note review, with 78 AEs being experienced by 36 patients (58%), including one patient experiencing 10 AEs. Serious AEs were experienced by 12 patients (19%) and ten AEs (17%) required oral steroids as treatment. The majority of AEs were reported to clinicians prior to further dosing, although milder AEs were often not addressed until subsequent clinic appointments. Interviews with 13 patients yielded major themes: variability, causality, decision making and impact. CONCLUSION: Most CPI-associated AEs are manageable if reported and treated promptly. Both the case note review and interviews found that reporting of non-serious AEs is often left until routine clinic visits, despite impacting patient experience, leaving the opportunity for AEs to be left unreported and implying a potential benefit for real time monitoring. Our study highlights a need to provide patients with reminders around AEs and their timely reporting even when apparently innocuous; patients must understand that AEs can occur at any cycle and even following treatment completion.

Understanding Molecular Testing Uptake Across Tumor Types in Eight Countries: Results From a Multinational Cross-Sectional Survey.

PURPOSE: The growth in understanding of molecular biology and genomics has augmented the development of targeted cancer treatments; however, challenges exist in access to molecular testing, an essential precursor to treatment decision-making. We used data from a cross-sectional survey to evaluate the differences in uptake of molecular testing. METHODS: Using the aggregated results of a questionnaire developed and distributed to clinicians by IQVIA, including treatment details and investigations undertaken for patients, we compared proportions of patients receiving molecular testing and targeted treatment by cancer type for the United Kingdom, France, Italy, Germany, Spain, South Korea, Japan, and China. We used multivariable logistic regression methods to understand the effect of country on the odds of receiving a molecular test. RESULTS: There was a total of 61,491 cases. Across countries and cancer types, uptake rates for molecular testing ranged between 2% and 98%, with the greatest differences seen in gastric cancers (range, 23% to 70%), and significant variations were observed for both European and Asian countries. China consistently demonstrated a significantly reduced uptake for all molecular tests assessed; however; uptake of drug treatment in gastric cancers after testing positive for the human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 gene was higher than in some European countries (China, 85%; European range, 8% to 66%). The uptake of epidermal growth factor receptor gene testing was greater in some Asian countries relative to the United Kingdom, where incidence of lung cancer is higher (Japan: odds ratio, 3.1 [95% CI, 2.6 to 3.8]; South Korea: odds ratio, 2.7 [95% CI, 2 to 3.4]). CONCLUSION: We have highlighted inequity in access to molecular testing and subsequent treatments across countries, which warrants improvements.

Patient factors and their impact on neutropenic events: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Neutropenia is associated with an increased risk of mortality and hospitalisation. Strategies, including the prescribing of colony-stimulating growth factors (CSFs), are adopted when a high risk (> 20%) of neutropenic complications are seen in the clinical trial setting. With a diverse treatment population that may differ from the patient groups recruited to studies, appropriate prescribing decisions by clinicians are essential. At present, results are conflicting from studies evaluating the risks of certain patient attributes on neutropenic events; we aimed to aggregate these associations to guide future management. DESIGN: A systematic review with a meta-analysis was conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement. Studies were identified through a literature search using MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) databases from inception to December 1, 2017. Studies were included into a meta-analysis if they adjusted for confounders; analyses were conducted in STATA v 15.1 SE. RESULTS: A total of 4415 articles were retrieved by the search with 37 meeting the inclusion criteria and 12 eligible for meta-analysis. Meta-analysis was conducted for increasing age and yielded a pooled odds ratio of 1.39 (1.11, 1.76, I2 = 24.1%), in our subgroup analysis of 4814 patients. Odds ratios for studies were pooled that reported associations for one co-morbidity compared to none and resulted in an overall odds of 1.54 (CI 1.09-2.09, I2 = 13.1%), including 9189 patients in total. CONCLUSIONS: Results can enhance current guidance in prescribing primary prophylaxis for treatments that either fall marginally under the internationally recognised 20% neutropenia risk.

On the road and away from home: a systematic review of the travel experiences of cancer patients and their families.

PURPOSE: Traveling for cancer care is difficult as patients might be suffering from the side effects of treatment, need to cover additional costs, and face disruption of daily life. The aim of this review was to synthesize the evidence on travel needs and experiences during cancer treatment from the point of view of patients and their families. METHODS: This is a systematic review of the literature. The PRISMA statement was used to guide the reporting of the methods and findings. We searched for peer-reviewed articles in MEDLINE, CINAHL PLUS, and Web of Science and selected articles based on the following criteria: focused on patients and their families; presented findings from empirical studies; and examined travel and transport experiences for cancer screening, treatment, and related care. The MMAT was used to assess the quality of the studies. RESULTS: A total of 16 articles were included in the review. Most of the studies used a qualitative design, were carried out in high-income countries and were conducted more than 10 years ago. Several problems were reported regarding travel and relocation: social and physical demands of transport, travel, and relocation; life disruption and loss of daily routines; financial impact; and anxieties and support needs when returning home. CONCLUSIONS: Patients and carers consistently reported lack of support when traveling, relocating, and returning home. Future research needs to explore patient experiences under current treatment protocols and healthcare delivery models, in a wider range of geographical contexts, and different stages of the patient pathway.