Efficacy and cost-effectiveness of an online mindfulness program (MindOnLine) to reduce fear of recurrence among people with cancer: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Fear of cancer recurrence (FCR) is a common condition among cancer survivors that can lead to significant levels of distress, anxiety and depression. Online mindfulness programmes may provide the mechanism to support cancer survivors manage FCR and distress, and improve people's well-being over the short, medium and long term. The primary aim of this study is to determine the potential efficacy of MindOnLine, a 9 session mindfulness-based programme for survivors of breast, prostate and colorectal cancer. A formal economic programme will also be conducted. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A single-blind randomised controlled trial to determine the efficacy and cost-efficacy of a MindOnLine programme for cancer survivors. A total of 400 people living with cancer will be recruited via online advertisements on social media platforms, peak consumer advocacy groups or through outpatient services at healthcare providers across Victoria, Australia. People will be randomly allocated to either the MindOnLine programme (n=200) or waitlist control (n=200). Participant assessments will occur at baseline, at 9 weeks and 9-month follow-up. The primary outcome is change in Fear of Recurrence Index Score total score between baseline and 9 weeks; secondary outcomes are changes in depression and anxiety, quality of life and mindfulness. The economic analysis comprises a cost-consequences analysis where all outcomes will be compared with costs. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval was obtained from the Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre (20-53) and Deakin University (2020-284). All participants will be required to provide written informed consent. Findings will be disseminated in peer reviewed journals and among key stakeholder organisations including hospitals, cancer and community organisations and Government. If successful the project will be rolled out nationally with a formal implementation plan. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (12620000645954); Pre-results. Registered 6 June 2020, https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=379520&isReview=true.

Evaluation of an artificial intelligence clinical trial matching system in Australian lung cancer patients.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this technical study was to evaluate the performance of an artificial intelligence (AI)-based system for clinical trials matching for a cohort of lung cancer patients in an Australian cancer hospital. METHODS: A lung cancer cohort was derived from clinical data from patients attending an Australian cancer hospital. Ten phases I-III clinical trials registered on clinicaltrials.gov and open to lung cancer patients at this institution were utilized for assessments. The trial matching system performance was compared to a gold standard established by clinician consensus for trial eligibility. RESULTS: The study included 102 lung cancer patients. The trial matching system evaluated 7252 patient attributes (per patient median 74, range 53-100) against 11 467 individual trial eligibility criteria (per trial median 597, range 243-4132). Median time for the system to run a query and return results was 15.5 s (range 7.2-37.8). In establishing the gold standard, clinician interrater agreement was high (Cohen's kappa 0.70-1.00). On a per-patient basis, the performance of the trial matching system for eligibility was as follows: accuracy, 91.6%; recall (sensitivity), 83.3%; precision (positive predictive value), 76.5%; negative predictive value, 95.7%; and specificity, 93.8%. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: The AI-based clinical trial matching system allows efficient and reliable screening of cancer patients for clinical trials with 95.7% accuracy for exclusion and 91.6% accuracy for overall eligibility assessment; however, clinician input and oversight are still required. The automated system demonstrates promise as a clinical decision support tool to prescreen a large patient cohort to identify subjects suitable for further assessment.

Exploring the feasibility and utility of exome-scale tumour sequencing in a clinical setting.

BACKGROUND: Technology has progressed from single gene panel to large-scale genomic sequencing. This is raising expectations from clinicians and patients alike. The utility and performance of this technology in a clinical setting needs to be evaluated. AIM: This pilot study investigated the feasibility of using exome-scale sequencing (ESS) to identify molecular drivers within cancers in real-time for Precision Oncology in the clinic. METHODS: Between March 2014 and March 2015, the Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre Alliance explored the feasibility and utility of ESS in a pilot study. DNA extracted from the tumour specimens underwent both ESS and targeted 'hotspot' sequencing (TS). Blood was taken for germline analysis. A multi-disciplinary molecular tumour board determined the clinical relevance of identified mutations; in particular, whether they were 'actionable' and/or 'druggable'. RESULTS: Of 23 patients screened, 15 (65%) met the tissue requirements for genomic analysis. TS and ESS were successful in all cases. ESS identified pathogenic somatic variants in 73% (11/15 cases) versus 53% (8/15 cases) using TS. Clinically focused ESS identified 63 variants, consisting of 30 somatic variants (including all 13 identified by TS) and 33 germline variants. Overall, there were 48 unique variants. ESS had a clinical impact in 53% (8/15 cases); 47% (7/15 cases) were referred to the familial cancer clinic, and 'druggable' targets were identified in 53% (8/15 cases). CONCLUSION: ESS of tumour DNA impacted clinical decision-making in 53%, with 20% more pathogenic variants identified through ESS than TS. The identification of germline variants in 47% was an unexpected finding.

Survival difference according to mutation status in a prospective cohort study of Australian patients with metastatic non-small-cell lung carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is a heterogeneous disease comprising not only different histological subtypes but also different molecular subtypes. AIM: To describe the frequency of oncogenic drivers in patients with metastatic NSCLC, the proportion of patients tested and survival difference according to mutation status in a single-institution study. METHODS: Metastatic NSCLC patients enrolled in a prospective Thoracic Malignancies Cohort Study between July 2012 and August 2016 were selected. Patients underwent molecular testing for epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) gene rearrangements, Kirsten rat sarcoma (KRAS), B-Raf proto-oncogene (BRAF) mutations and ROS1 gene rearrangements. Survival was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method for groups of interest, and comparisons were made using the log-rank test. RESULTS: A total of 392 patients were included, 43% of whom were female with median age of 64 years (28-92). Of 296 patients tested, 172 patients (58%) were positive for an oncogenic driver: 81 patients (27%) were EGFR positive, 25 patients (9%) were ALK positive, 57 patients (19%) had KRAS mutation and 9 patients (3%) were ROS1 or BRAF positive. Patients with an actionable mutation (EGFR/ALK) had a survival advantage when compared with patients who were mutation negative (hazard ratio (HR) 0.49; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.33-0.71; P < 0.01). Survival difference between mutation negative and mutation status unknown was not statistically significant when adjusted for confounding factors in a multivariate analysis (HR 1.29; 95% CI 0.97-1.78, P = 0.08). CONCLUSION: In this prospective cohort, the presence of an actionable mutation was the strongest predictor of overall survival. These results confirm the importance of molecular testing and suggest likely survival benefit of identification and treatment of actionable oncogenes.

Precision oncology using a clinician-directed, tailored approach to molecular profiling.

AIM: Precision oncology involves molecularly matching patients to targeted agents usually in early drug development (EDD) programs. Molecular profiling (MP) identifies actionable targets. Comprehensive commercial MP platforms are costly and in resource limited environments, a more practical approach to MP is necessary to support EDD and precision oncology. We adopted a clinician-directed, tailored approach to MP to enrol patients onto molecularly targeted trials. We report the feasibility of this approach. METHODS: All patients referred to the Royal Melbourne Hospital (RMH) EDD between September 2013 and September 2015 were identified in a prospective database. Key captured data included clinicopathological data, MP platform ordered (if any), molecular targets identified and subsequent enrolment onto clinical trials. EDD-clinician decisions to order MP and the platform utilized was guided by patient consultation, tumor type, trial availability and requirement for molecular information. RESULTS: We identified 377 patients referred to RMH EDD. A total of 216 (57%) had MP ordered. The remainder had known actionable targets (19%), or were inappropriate for clinical trials (24%). In those undergoing MP, 187 genetic aberrations were found in 113 patients with 98 considered actionable targets in 86 patients. Ninety-eight (25%) patients were enrolled onto a clinical trial, including 40 (11%) receiving molecularly matched treatments. Median progression-free survival was improved in patients enrolled onto molecularly matched trials compared to those on unmatched trials (3.6 months vs 1.9 months, HR 0.58 [0.38-0.89], P  =  0.013). CONCLUSION: A clinician-directed, tailored approach to the use of MP is feasible, resulting in 11% of patients enrolled onto molecularly matched trials.

Systematic Endobronchial Ultrasound-guided Mediastinal Staging Versus Positron Emission Tomography for Comprehensive Mediastinal Staging in NSCLC Before Radical Radiotherapy of Non-small Cell Lung Cancer: A Pilot Study.

Despite known limitations of positron emission tomography (PET) for mediastinal staging of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), radiation treatment fields are generally based on PET-identified disease extent. However, no studies have examined the accuracy of FDG-PET/CT on a per-node basis in patients being considered for curative-intent radiotherapy in NSCLC.In a prospective trial, patients with NSCLC being considered for definitive thoracic radiotherapy (± systemic chemotherapy) underwent minimally invasive systematic mediastinal evaluation with endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA) following noninvasive staging with integrated PET-CT.Thirty patients underwent EBUS-TBNA, with TBNA performed from a mean 2.5 lymph node (LN) stations per patient (median 3, range 1-5). Discordant findings between PET-CT and EBUS-TBNA were observed in 10 patients (33%, 95% CI 19%-51%). PET-occult LN metastases were demonstrated by EBUS in 4 patients, whereas a lesser extent of mediastinal involvement, compared with FDG-PET, was demonstrated by EBUS in 6 patients, including 2 patients downstaged from cN3 to pN2. LNs upstaged by EBUS were significantly smaller than nodes downstaged by EBUS, 7.5 mm (range 7-9) versus 12 mm (range 6-21), P = 0.005.A significant proportion of patients considered for definitive radiotherapy (+/-chemotherapy) undergoing systematic mediastinal evaluation with EBUS-TBNA in this study have an extent of mediastinal NSCLC involvement discordant with that indicated by PET-CT. Systematic EBUS-TBNA may aid in defining the extent of mediastinal involvement in NSCLC patients undergoing radiotherapy. Systematic EBUS-TBNA has the potential to contribute significantly to radiotherapy planning and delivery, by either identifying occult nodal metastases, or demonstrating FDG-avid LNs to be disease-free.