Methodology of the SORENTO clinical trial: a prospective, randomised, active-controlled phase 3 trial assessing the efficacy and safety of high exposure octreotide subcutaneous depot (CAM2029) in patients with GEP-NET.

BACKGROUND: The current standard of care (SoC) for the initial treatment of unresectable or metastatic well-differentiated gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumours (GEP-NET) requires initiation of first-generation somatostatin receptor ligand (SRL) therapy, octreotide and lanreotide, which provide safe and efficacious tumour/symptom control in most patients. However, disease progression can occur with SoC SRL treatment and the optimal dose response of SRL remains unknown. Octreotide subcutaneous depot (CAM2029) is a novel, long-acting, high-exposure formulation that has shown greater bioavailability and improved administration than octreotide long-acting release (LAR) with a well-tolerated safety profile. Retrospective data have highlighted a potential benefit of high-exposure SRL for improved disease control in patients who did not adequately respond to the current SoC SRL treatment. This trial will investigate the efficacy and tolerability of CAM2029 compared to the current SoC, including octreotide LAR and lanreotide autogel (ATG). METHODS: SORENTO is a prospective, multicentre, randomised, active-controlled, open-label phase 3 trial aiming to demonstrate superiority of treatment with 20 mg octreotide subcutaneous depot (CAM2029) every 2 weeks (Q2W) compared to treatment with the Investigator's choice of SRL therapy at standard doses for tumour control (octreotide LAR 30 mg or lanreotide ATG 120 mg every 4 weeks [Q4W]) as assessed by progression-free survival (PFS) in approximately 300 patients with unresectable/metastatic and well-differentiated GEP-NET. Upon confirmation of disease progression (determined by a Blinded Independent Review Committee [BIRC] and defined as per RECIST 1.1), patients may enter an open-label extension treatment period with once weekly dosing, to investigate the effects of higher frequency dosing. Overall survival follow-up will end a maximum of 2 years after primary analysis. The primary endpoint will be analysed after 194 confirmed PFS events. DISCUSSION: This is the first trial investigating the efficacy of CAM2029 versus SoC SRL therapy using a head-to-head, superiority trial design. It is expected to be the first trial to investigate the efficacy of increased dosing frequency of a high-exposure SRL. A BIRC will limit bias and measurement variability and ensure high-quality efficacy data. Additionally, inclusion of patients with well-differentiated Grade 3 NET may elucidate treatment strategies for this rarely investigated patient population. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05050942. Registered on 21st September 2021.

Researcher Experience and Comfort With Telemedicine and Remote Patient Monitoring in Cancer Treatment Trials.

BACKGROUND: Since the onset of COVID-19, oncology practices across the US have integrated telemedicine (TM) and remote patient monitoring (RPM) into routine care and clinical trials. The extent of provider experience and comfort with TM/RPM in treatment trials, however, is unknown. We surveyed oncology researchers to assess experience and comfort with TM/RPM. METHODS: Between April 10 and June 1, 2022, we distributed email surveys to US-based members of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) whose member records indicated interest or specialization in clinical research. We collected respondent demographic data, clinical trial experience, workplace characteristics, and comfort and experience with TM/RPM use across trial components in phase I and phase II/III trials. TM/RPM was defined as clinical trial-related healthcare and monitoring for patients geographically separated from trial site. RESULTS: There were 141 surveys analyzed (5.1% response rate). Ninety percent of respondents had been Principal Investigators, 98% practiced in a norural site. Most respondents had enrolled patients in phase I (82%) and phase II/III trials (99%). Across all phases and trial components, there was a higher frequency of researcher comfort compared to experience. Regarding remote care in treatment trials, 75% reported using TM, RPM, or both. Among these individuals, 62% had never provided remote care to trial patients before the pandemic. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 spurred the rise of TM/RPM in cancer treatment trials, and some TM/RPM use continues in this context. Among oncology researchers, higher levels of comfort compared with real-world experience with TM/RPM reveal opportunities for expanding TM/RPM policies and guidelines in oncology research.

Systemic Therapy for Tumor Control in Metastatic Well-Differentiated Gastroenteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors: ASCO Guideline.

PURPOSE: To develop recommendations for systemic therapy for well-differentiated grade 1 (G1) to grade 3 (G3) metastatic gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP-NETs). METHODS: ASCO convened an Expert Panel to conduct a systematic review of relevant studies and develop recommendations for clinical practice. RESULTS: Eight randomized controlled trials met the inclusion criteria for the systematic review. RECOMMENDATIONS: Somatostatin analogs (SSAs) are recommended as first-line systemic therapy for most patients with G1-grade 2 (G2) metastatic well-differentiated GI-NETs. Observation is an option for patients with low-volume or slow-growing disease without symptoms. After progression on SSAs, peptide receptor radionuclide therapy (PRRT) is recommended as systematic therapy for patients with somatostatin receptor (SSTR)-positive tumors. Everolimus is an alternative second-line therapy, particularly in nonfunctioning NETs and patients with SSTR-negative tumors. SSAs are standard first-line therapy for SSTR-positive pancreatic (pan)NETs. Rarely, observation may be appropriate for asymptomatic patients until progression. Second-line systemic options for panNETs include PRRT (for SSTR-positive tumors), cytotoxic chemotherapy, everolimus, or sunitinib. For SSTR-negative tumors, first-line therapy options are chemotherapy, everolimus, or sunitinib. There are insufficient data to recommend particular sequencing of therapies. Patients with G1-G2 high-volume disease, relatively high Ki-67 index, and/or symptoms related to tumor growth may benefit from early cytotoxic chemotherapy. For G3 GEP-NETs, systemic options for G1-G2 may be considered, although cytotoxic chemotherapy is likely the most effective option for patients with tumor-related symptoms, and SSAs are relatively ineffective. Qualifying statements are provided to assist with treatment choice. Multidisciplinary team management is recommended, along with shared decision making with patients, incorporating their values and preferences, potential benefits and harms, and other characteristics and circumstances, such as comorbidities, performance status, geographic location, and access to care.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/gastrointestinal-cancer-guidelines.

Consideration of quality of life in the treatment decision-making for patients with advanced gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors.

INTRODUCTION: Gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP-NETs) are a complex and heterogenous family of solid malignancies that originate from neuroendocrine tissue in the gastrointestinal tract or pancreas. Most patients diagnosed with GEP-NETs present with advanced or metastatic disease, and quality of life (QoL) is often an important priority when selecting treatments for these patients. Patients with advanced GEP-NETs often experience a substantial and persistent symptom burden that undermines their QoL. Addressing a patient's individual symptoms through judicious selection of treatment may improve QoL. AREAS COVERED: The objectives of this narrative review are to summarize the impact of advanced GEP-NETs on patient QoL, assess the potential value of current treatments for maintaining or improving patient QoL, and offer a clinical framework for how these QoL data can be translated to inform clinical decision-making for patients with advanced GEP-NETs. EXPERT OPINION: Patients with advanced GEP-NETs experience a significant and persistent symptom burden that impacts their daily lifestyle, activities, work life, and financial health, leading to erosion of their QoL. Ongoing and future studies incorporating longitudinal QoL assessments and head-to-head treatment evaluations will further inform the incorporation of QoL into clinical decision-making.

Patient Advocates and Researchers as Partners in Cancer Research: A Winning Combination.

Inclusion of advocates as partners in research is now required by numerous international funding agencies. The role of advocates has expanded in recent years to include all areas of research, including basic cancer research, translational research, and clinical trial design and development. The involvement of advocates as partners in cancer research can be challenging for the advocate and for the researchers, but this collaboration is beneficial to all involved. Herein, we will define patient advocacy, explore advocate engagement, and share information on programs that train advocates and researchers to work together as partners.

Practical considerations when providing palliative care to patients with neuroendocrine tumors in the context of routine disease management or hospice care.

This serves as a white paper by the North American Neuroendocrine Tumor Society (NANETS) on the practical considerations when providing palliative care to patients with neuroendocrine tumors in the context of routine disease management or hospice care. The authors involved in the development of this manuscript represent a multidisciplinary team of patient advocacy, palliative care, and hospice care practitioners, endocrinologist, and oncologists who performed a literature review and provided expert opinion on a series of questions often asked by our patients and patient caregivers affected by this disease. We hope this document serves as a starting point for oncologists, palliative care teams, hospice medical teams, insurers, drug manufacturers, caregivers, and patients to have a frank, well-informed discussion of what a patient needs to maximize the quality of life during a routine, disease-directed care as well as at the end-of-life.

Education Competencies for Integrative Oncology-Results of a Systematic Review and an International and Interprofessional Consensus Procedure.

Integrative oncology is a burgeoning field and typically provided by a multiprofessional team. To ensure cancer patients receive effective, appropriate, and safe care, health professionals providing integrative cancer care should have a certain set of competencies. The aim of this project was to define core competencies for different health professions involved in integrative oncology. The project consisted of two phases. A systematic literature review on published competencies was performed, and the results informed an international and interprofessional consensus procedure. The second phase consisted of three rounds of consensus procedure and included 28 experts representing 7 different professions (medical doctors, psychologists, nurses, naturopathic doctors, traditional Chinese medicine practitioners, yoga practitioners, patient navigators) as well as patient advocates, public health experts, and members of the Society for Integrative Oncology. A total of 40 integrative medicine competencies were identified in the literature review. These were further complemented by 18 core oncology competencies. The final round of the consensus procedure yielded 37 core competencies in the following categories: knowledge (n = 11), skills (n = 17), and abilities (n = 9). There was an agreement that these competencies are relevant for all participating professions. The integrative oncology core competencies combine both fundamental oncology knowledge and integrative medicine competencies that are necessary to provide effective and safe integrative oncology care for cancer patients. They can be used as a starting point for developing profession-specific learning objectives and to establish integrative oncology education and training programs to meet the needs of cancer patients and health professionals.

A Framework for Patient-Centered Pathways of Care for Radiopharmaceutical Therapy: An ASTRO Consensus Document.

Radiopharmaceutical therapy (RPT) is an area of projected growth and importance with several agents in clinical use, new agents in late-phase clinical trials, and many others under testing and development. This article proposes a framework for developing pathways of care that can be broadly applied to all RPTs, representing the current status of RPT. It suggests foundational elements for many pathways of care for patients with cancer and concludes with areas in active development and the future horizon for RPT treatment centers. Developing a framework for patient-centered pathways of care is a critical step in establishing RPT as standard therapy for patients with a diverse spectrum of cancers. This expected increase in RPT treatment options will affect a much larger population of patients with complex cancer. It will also require enhanced coordination and collaboration among appropriately qualified personnel with diverse expertise in image acquisition, image interpretation, quantitative imaging, dosimetry calculation, radiation quality assurance and safety as well as oncology care and RPT-induced sequelae and response assessment. The essential role of this evolving RPT care team within multidisciplinary oncology care is a cornerstone of this framework for a patient-centered pathway of care for RPT. Given the status of current RPT practice and the horizon for future applications, this patient-centered pathway of care guidance is timely and should help inform future clinical RPT practice paradigms. A task force was recruited from the Theranostic Working Group of the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) in May 2019 with equal representation from the nuclear medicine community. The task force expanded on a framework that was originally conceived by the Working Group for patient-centered care. This framework was developed to incorporate the strengths of both radiation oncologists and nuclear medicine physicians. The manuscript was then developed by the task force and posted on the ASTRO website for a 6-week public comment period ending in July 2020. Comments were adjudicated, and the draft was sent to external organizations for potential endorsement. This document was sent to the ASTRO Board of Directors in October 2020 for approval.

A Comprehensive Definition for Integrative Oncology.

Background: Integrative oncology, which is generally understood to refer to the use of a combination of complementary medicine therapies in conjunction with conventional cancer treatments, has been defined in different ways, but there is no widely accepted definition. We sought to develop and establish a consensus for a comprehensive definition of the field of integrative oncology. Methods: We used a mixed-methods approach that included a literature analysis and a consensus procedure, including an interdisciplinary expert panel and surveys, to develop a comprehensive and acceptable definition for the term "integrative oncology." Results: The themes identified in the literature and from the expert discussion were condensed into a two-sentence definition. Survey respondents had very positive views on the draft definition, and their comments helped to shape the final version. The final definition for integrative oncology is: "Integrative oncology is a patient-centered, evidence-informed field of cancer care that utilizes mind and body practices, natural products, and/or lifestyle modifications from different traditions alongside conventional cancer treatments. Integrative oncology aims to optimize health, quality of life, and clinical outcomes across the cancer care continuum and to empower people to prevent cancer and become active participants before,during, and beyond cancer treatment." Conclusions: This short and comprehensive definition for the term integrative oncology will facilitate a better understanding and communication of this emerging field. This definition will also drive focused and cohesive effort to advance the field of integrative oncology.