Disparities in clinical trial enrollment at a Canadian comprehensive cancer center: A 15-year retrospective study.

INTRODUCTION: Disparities in clinical trials (CTs) enrollment perpetuate inequities in treatment access and outcomes, but there is a paucity of Canadian data. The objective of this study was to examine disparities in cancer CT enrollment at a large Canadian comprehensive cancer center. METHODS: Retrospective study of CT enrollment among new patient consultations from 2006 to 2019, with follow-up to 2021 (N = 154,880), with the primary outcome of enrollment as a binary variable. Factors associated with CT enrollment were evaluated using multivariable Bayesian hierarchical logistic regression with random effects for most responsible physician (MRP) and geography, adjusted for patient characteristics (sex, age, language, geography, and primary care provider [PCP]), area-level marginalization (residential instability, material deprivation, dependency, and ethnic concentration), disease (cancer site and stage), and MRP (department, sex, language, and training). A sensitivity analysis of the cumulative incidence of enrollment was conducted to account for differences in disease type and follow-up length. RESULTS: CT enrollment was 11.2% overall, with a 15-year cumulative incidence of 18%. Lower odds of enrollment were observed in patients who were female (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 0.82; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.78-0.86), ≥65 years (AOR vs. <40, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.56-0.66), non-English speakers (0.72; 95% CI, 0.67-0.77), living ≥250 km away (AOR vs. <15 km, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.62-0.80), and without a PCP. Disease characteristics accounted for the largest proportion of observed variation (20.8%), with significantly greater odds of enrollment in patients with genitourinary cancers and late-stage disease. CONCLUSION: Significant sociodemographic disparities were observed, suggesting the need for targeted strategies to increase diversity in access to cancer CTs in Canada.

High grade adverse event reporting and enrolment in gynecologic oncology clinical trials.

OBJECTIVE: The primary objective is to assess factors associated with treatment related high grade (CTCAE grade ≥ 3) adverse event (AE) reporting among participants in gynecologic oncology clinical trials. METHODS: All AEs recorded in the Princess Margaret Clinical Trial adverse event database between 01/2016 and 12/2018 were evaluated. Gynecologic oncology clinical trials assessing systemic therapy were included. Inferential statistics on risk factors of related grade ≥ 3 adverse event reporting and GEE logistic models with Odds Ratios (OR) were performed. Multivariable analysis adjusting for age, clinical trial phase, sponsor, and therapy type. RESULTS: The gynecology cancer clinical trials accrued 317 unique patients (359 nested on trials) in 42 systemic therapy trials. In the period, 17,175 related AEs were reported in the gynecological cancer trials, 7.4% were grade ≥ 3. On multivariable analysis, no odds differences of grade ≥ 3 related AEs were detected according to study phase. Patients in immunotherapy clinical trials had lower odds of related grade ≥ 3 AEs than patients on targeted or other therapy (adjusted OR [aOR] 0.43; 95% CI 0.24-0.75). There was greater odds of related grade ≥ 3 AEs in clinical trials assessing combination vs single therapeutics (aOR 2.26, 95% CI 1.34-3.80). Patients aged ≥65 (aOR 1.77; 95% CI 1.08-2.89) had greater odds of related grade ≥ 3 AEs than patients aged 50 to 65 years. When compared to other disease sites, the odds of having a grade  ≥ 3 related AE reported in gynecology clinical trials was no different. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort, factors influencing the odds of related grade ≥ 3 AE reporting in gynecologic trials included type of therapy and age. The study phase did not correlate with odds of high-grade AE reporting.

Patient self-reporting of tolerability using PRO-CTCAE in a randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled phase II trial comparing gemcitabine in combination with adavosertib or placebo in patients with platinum resistant or refractory epithelial ovarian carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial assessed gemcitabine in combination with the wee1 inhibitor adavosertib or placebo in platinum resistant or refractory high grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSOC), demonstrating improved progression free and overall survival favouring the adavosertib/gemcitabine arm. An exploratory objective of the study included the PRO-CTCAE assessment, to capture self-reporting of frequency, severity and/or interference of symptomatic adverse events (syAEs). METHODS: PRO-CTCAE items at baseline, days 1 and 15 of each cycle and off treatment, were completed in two centres, with the objective of characterizing syAEs in the first three months of therapy. The maximum post-baseline score proportion for each syAE was tabulated per patient. The 12-week area under the curve (AUC12w) as a measure of syAE over-time and incremental AUC12w (iAUC12w) for adjustment to baseline syAEs. RESULTS: Sixty-one patients were approached for PRO-CTCAE surveys and 55 were evaluable. Among patients with HGSOC, 28 received gemcitabine/adavosertib (arm A) and 19 gemcitabine/placebo (arm B). Survey completion rates were high. The proportion of participants with positive (≥1) PRO-CTCAE scores was higher for difficulty swallowing with gemcitabine/adavosertib (arm A 35.7% vs arm B 5.3%, p = 0.02). The high score (≥3) syAEs showed more frequent diarrhea with gemcitabine/adavosertib (arm A 25% vs arm B 0%, p = 0.03). The proportions of worsening syAEs over time were higher in patients receiving gemcitabine/adavosertib for difficulty swallowing (arm A 35.7% vs arm B 5.3%; p = 0.03) and fatigue severity (arm A 71.43% vs arm B 42.1%; p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: The longitudinal assessment of patient self-reported tolerability showed greater difficulty swallowing and fatigue severity in patients receiving gemcitabine/adavosertib, compared to gemcitabine/placebo. PRO-CTCAE provides complementary and objective assessment of drug tolerability from a patient's perspective.

Care Deficiencies and Super-Organization of American Nursing Homes in Hospital Referral Region.

Super-organization has been associated with worse care quality in nursing homes. Previous research on the chain ownership of American nursing homes excluded government facilities in public-private partnerships, and focused on corporate entities. This longitudinal study proposes a novel method of demarcating the latent ownership networks of for-profit, government and non-profit nursing homes in the United States through use of open data and social network analysis. Facility characteristics and care quality measures were analyzed from an ecological cohort of 9,001 American nursing homes that had a registered organization for owner, and were reimbursed through Medicare or Medicaid. Information was obtained from the Nursing Home Compare open datasets at five semi-annual processing dates from March 2016 to March 2018. Ownership networks of American nursing homes were constructed using the exact legal name of registered organizations. As hospital discharge is a routine admission source of nursing home residents, hospital referral region was actualized to demarcate focal area. Utilizing Bayesian hierarchical models, the association between nursing home super-organization in hospital referral region (inferred by degree-based centrality and Herfindahl-Hirschman Index) to scope of cited care deficiencies (denoted by Total Weighted Health Survey Score) was explored. The percentage of nursing homes having super-organization increased from 56.8 to 56.9% over the 2-year period. During this interval, the mean size of nursing home ownership group in hospital referral region increased from 3.11 to 3.23 facilities. Overall, super-organization in hospital referral region was not associated with care deficiencies in American nursing homes. However, being part of an ownership group with more facilities was beneficial for care quality among nursing homes with super-organization.

The association between community stressors and asthma prevalence of school children in Winnipeg, Canada.

It is generally surmised that community stressors have an incubating effect for a variety of diagnoses on maternal and child health. This is of public health significance, as children of mothers facing long-term distress were found to have a 60% higher risk for asthma diagnosis at age 7 in Manitoba, Canada. Our objective was to determine the association of community stressors with childhood asthma prevalence in Winnipeg, Canada from participants who completed the Study of Asthma, Genes and the Environment (SAGE) survey administered in 2002-2003 to a birth cohort from 1995. Measures of community socioeconomic makeup and community disorder with rank ordinalized by quintile at the census tract level were obtained from the 1996 Canada Census. Crime data (annual incidence per 10,000 persons) by neighbourhood profile for 2001 was provided by the Winnipeg Police Service. Dichotomous caregiver report of child asthma along with other indicators from the geocoded SAGE survey allowed linkage to 23 neighbourhood profiles. Multilevel logistic regression analyses were performed to estimate the effect of community stressors on childhood asthma prevalence for birth and non-birth home children (N = 1472) and children resident of birth homes at age 7 or 8 (N = 698). After adjusting for individual risk factors, children resident of birth homes in a high thefts over $5,000 neighbourhood profile were twice as likely (Adjusted OR, 2.05; 95% CI, 1.11-3.81) to have report of asthma compared to children in a lower thefts over $5,000 profile, with community thefts over $5,000 explaining over half of the observed neighbourhood variation in asthma.