Health-related quality of life in early-stage Hodgkin lymphoma: a longitudinal analysis of the ABVD arm in the randomized controlled trial HD.6.

Early-stage Hodgkin lymphoma has become one of the most curable hematologic malignancies. Depending upon the disease location, possible toxicities, and patient preference, chemotherapy alone with ABVD remains an accepted treatment modality for this disease. There remains a paucity of data regarding the longitudinal trajectory of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients treated for HL. The impact of disease and treatment on HRQoL is increasingly important to understand as the number of long-term survivors increases. We report the longitudinal HRQoL using data prospectively collected from diagnosis up to 10 years post-treatment in the ABVD arm of the HD.6 randomized controlled trial for early-stage HL patients (N=169). We analyzed HRQoL using the EORTC QLQ-C30 collected at baseline, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months after completion of chemotherapy and yearly up to year 10. Clinically and statistically significant improvements were noted for specific domains including emotional (3 months post-treatment), social (12 months post-treatment) and financial functioning (2 years post-treatment), and the specific symptom of fatigue (6 months post-treatment) during the follow-up period. To our knowledge, this is the first prospective, longitudinal analysis of HRQoL specifically among patients with early-stage HL treated with ABVD therapy alone. Although improvements were noted, sustained clinically and statistically significant improvements were noted only in select symptoms emphasizing the need to better understand and optimize HRQoL among this patient group.

Validating Restricted Mean Survival Time Estimates From Reconstructed Kaplan-Meier Data Against Original Trial Individual Patient Data From Trials Conducted by the Canadian Cancer Trials Group.

OBJECTIVES: The development of novel cancer therapies, including immuno-oncology agents, has increased interest in reconstructed individual patient data (IPD) based restricted mean survival time (RMST) analyses. Additionally, reconstructed IPD-based RMST is recommended in cost-effectiveness analyses when original trial IPD are not available. Nevertheless, recently concerns regarding potential bias of reconstructed-IPD RMST have been presented, because reconstructed-IPD RMSTs have not been validated and previous validation endpoints may not capture the entire Kaplan-Meier (KM) curve, especially the "tail." Our study aims to validate the recommended method of IPD reconstruction by comparing reconstructed IPD- and original trial IPD-based RMST. METHODS: Canadian Cancer Trials Group trials from 1990 to 2017 were included. Overall survival and progression-free survival IPD were reconstructed based on published KM curves using the Guyot method. Analysts were blinded to original trial IPD. RMST was calculated at 1 year and over the entire KM curve. Reconstructed-IPD and original trial-IPD (gold-standard) RMSTs were compared for accuracy and predictive error via mean deviation, mean absolute error (MAE), mean percentage bias, and Bland-Altman plots and across KM curve quality (vector traced or bitmapped). RESULTS: We identified 39 trials. The mean deviation, MAE, and mean percentage bias of RMST between the reconstructed IPD and original trial IPD were small. In particular, the mean deviation was -0.01 months and -0.04 months, MAE was 0.19 months and 0.24 months, and mean percentage bias was 0.82% and 0.84% in overall survival KM curves in control and experimental arms, respectively. Accuracy was generally not associated with KM curve quality. CONCLUSIONS: RMST derived from reconstructed IPD displayed excellent accuracy and predictive error compared with the gold standard. Reconstructed IPD could be used to calculate RMST in lieu of original trial IPD, to facilitate decision making for clinicians, researchers, and policy makers.

Minimization of resource utilization data collected within cost-effectiveness analyses conducted alongside Canadian Cancer Trials Group phase III trials.

BACKGROUND: Cost-effectiveness analyses embedded within randomized trials allow for evaluation of value alongside conventional efficacy outcomes; however, collection of resource utilization data can require considerable trial resources. METHODS: We re-analyzed the results from four phase III Canadian Cancer Trials Group trials that embedded cost-effectiveness analyses to determine the impact of minimizing potential cost categories on the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. For each trial, we disaggregated total costs into component incremental cost categories and recalculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios using (1) only the top 3 cost categories, (2) the top 5 cost categories, and (3) all cost components. Using individual trial-level data, confidence intervals for each incremental cost-effectiveness ratio simulation were generated by bootstrapping and descriptively presented with the original confidence intervals (and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios) from the publications. RESULTS: Drug acquisition costs represented the highest incremental cost category in three trials, while hospitalization costs represented the other consistent cost driver and the top incremental cost category in the fourth trial. Recalculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios based on fewer cost components (top 3 and top 5) did not differ meaningfully from the original published results. Based on conventional willingness-to-pay thresholds (US$50,000-US$100,000 per quality-adjusted life-year), none of the re-analyses would have changed the original perception of whether the experimental therapies were considered cost-effective. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that the collection of resource utilization data within cancer trials could be narrowed. Omission of certain cost categories that have minimal impact on incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, such as routine laboratory investigations, could reduce the costs and undue burden associated with the collection of data required for cancer trial cost-effectiveness analyses.

Advantages of the net benefit regression framework for trial-based economic evaluations of cancer treatments: an example from the Canadian Cancer Trials Group CO.17 trial.

BACKGROUND: Economic evaluations commonly accompany trials of new treatments or interventions; however, regression methods and their corresponding advantages for the analysis of cost-effectiveness data are not widely appreciated. METHODS: To illustrate regression-based economic evaluation, we review a cost-effectiveness analysis conducted by the Canadian Cancer Trials Group's Committee on Economic Analysis and implement net benefit regression. RESULTS: Net benefit regression offers a simple option for cost-effectiveness analyses of person-level data. By placing economic evaluation in a regression framework, regression-based techniques can facilitate the analysis and provide simple solutions to commonly encountered challenges (e.g., the need to adjust for potential confounders, identify key patient subgroups, and/or summarize "challenging" findings, like when a more effective regimen has the potential to be cost-saving). CONCLUSIONS: Economic evaluations of patient-level data (e.g., from a clinical trial) can use net benefit regression to facilitate analysis and enhance results.

Pilot study of the ability to probabilistically link clinical trial patients to administrative data and determine long-term outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials are important but extremely costly. Utilization of routinely collected administrative data may simplify and enhance clinical trial data collection. PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to test the feasibility of use of administrative databases in Ontario, Canada, for long-term clinical trial follow-up, specifically (a) to determine whether limited patient identifiers held by the Canadian Cancer Trials Group can be used to probabilistically link with individuals in the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences databases and if so, (b) the level of concordance between the two data sets. METHODS: This retrospective study was conducted through collaboration of established health service (Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences) and clinical trial (Canadian Cancer Trials Group) research groups in the province of Ontario, Canada, where healthcare is predominantly funded by the government. Adults with pre-treated metastatic colorectal cancer previously enrolled in the Canadian Cancer Trials Group CO.17 and CO.20 randomized phase III trials were included, limited to those in Ontario. The main outcomes were rate of successful probabilistic linkage and concordance of survival data, stated a priori. RESULTS: Probabilistic linkage was successful in 266/293 (90.8%) participants. In those patients for whom linkage was successful, the Canadian Cancer Trials Group (trial) and the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences (administrative) data sets were concordant with regard to the occurrence of death during the period of clinical trial follow-up in 206/209 (98.6%). Death was recorded in the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, but not the Canadian Cancer Trials Group, for 57 cases, where the event occurred after the clinical trial cut-off dates. The recorded date of death matched closely between both databases. During the period of clinical trial conduct, administrative databases contained details of hospitalizations and emergency room visits not captured in the clinical trial electronic database. CONCLUSION: Prospective use of administrative data could enhance clinical trial data collection, both for long-term follow-up and resource utilization for economic analyses and do so less expensively than current primary data collection. Recording a unique identifier (e.g. health insurance number) in trial databases would allow deterministic linkage for all participants.

Mrs. Robinson's Revenge: Pete Seeger, Earl Robinson, and the Medicare Protest Song.

In 1962, Pete Seeger recorded "The Ballad of Doctor Dearjohn" about Canadian Medicare and the Saskatchewan doctors' strike of the same year. How had this New Yorker, recently relieved of a jail sentence, learned of Medicare in the distant prairie province? And why was his song never released? This paper traces the ballad's fortunes through the papers of composer Earl Robinson (University of Washington) and the archives of the American Medical Association. It is situated in the historiography of folk revival and the expatriate adventures of artistic Americans persecuted in the McCarthy era.

En 1962, Pete Seeger a enregistré « La ballade du docteur Dearjohn ¼ à propos de l'assurance-maladie canadienne et de la grève des médecins en Saskatchewan la même année. Comment ce New-Yorkais, récemment libéré de prison, a-t-il eu connaissance des événements survenant dans une province éloignée ? Et pourquoi sa chanson n'a-t-elle jamais été commercialisée ? Cet article retrace le parcours de la ballade à travers les archives du compositeur Earl Robinson (Université de Washington) et les archives de l'American Medical Association (Chicago). Il se situe dans l'historiographie du renouveau folk et des aventures d'artistes américains expatriés suite aux persécutions vécues à l'époque du maccarthysme.

Mrs. Robinson's Revenge: Pete Seeger, Earl Robinson, and the Medicare Protest Song.

In 1962, Pete Seeger recorded "The Ballad of Doctor Dearjohn" about Canadian Medicare and the Saskatchewan doctors' strike of the same year. How had this New Yorker, recently relieved of a jail sentence, learned of Medicare in the distant prairie province? And why was his song never released? This article traces the ballad's fortunes through the papers of composer Earl Robinson (University of Washington) and the archives of the American Medical Association. It is situated in the historiography of folk revival and the expatriate adventures of artistic Americans persecuted in the McCarthy era.

The impact of registration of clinical trials units: the UK experience.

BACKGROUND: Over the last decade, the United Kingdom has invested significant resources in its clinical trial infrastructure. Clinical research networks have been formed, and some general oversight functions for clinical research have been centralised. One of the initiatives is a registration programme for Clinical Trials Units involved in the coordination of clinical trials. An international review panel of experts in clinical trials has been convened for three reviews over time, reviewing applications from Clinical Trials Units in the United Kingdom. The process benefited from earlier work by the National Cancer Research Institute that developed accreditation procedures for trials units involved in cancer trials. This article describes the experience with the three reviews of UK Clinical Trials Units which submitted applications. PURPOSE: This article describes the evolution and impact of this registration process from the perspective of the current international review panel members, some of whom have served on all reviews, including two done by the National Cancer Research Institute. PROCESS: Applications for registration were invited from all active, non-commercial Clinical Trials Units in the United Kingdom. The invitations were issued in 2007, 2009 and 2012, and applicants were asked to describe their expertise and staffing levels in specific areas. To ensure that the reviews were as objective as possible, a description of expected core competencies was developed and applicants were asked to document their compliance with meeting these. The review panel assessed each Clinical Trials Unit against the competencies. The Clinical Trials Unit registration process has evolved over time with each successive review benefiting from what was learned in earlier ones. RESULTS: The review panel has seen positive changes over time, including an increase in the number of units applying, a greater awareness on the part of host institutions about the trials activity within their organisations, more widespread development of Standard Operating Procedures in key areas and improvements in information technology systems used to host clinical trials databases. Key funders are awarding funds only to registered units, and host institutions are implementing procedures and structures to ensure improved communication between all parties involved in trials within their organisation. CONCLUSION: The registration process developed in the United Kingdom has helped to ensure that trials units in the United Kingdom are compliant with regulatory standards and can meet acceptable standards of quality in their conduct of clinical trials. There is an increased awareness among funders, host institutions and Clinical Trials Units themselves of the required competencies, and communication between all those involved in trials has increased. The registration process is an effective and financially viable way of ensuring that objective standards are met at a national level.

A Canadian Prospective Study of Linkage of Randomized Clinical Trial to Cancer and Mortality Registry Data.

In a prospective study, we sought to determine acceptability of linkage of administrative and clinical trial data among Canadian patients and Research Ethics Boards (REBs). The goal is to develop a more harmonized approach to data, with potential to improve clinical trial conduct through enhanced data quality collected at reduced cost and inconvenience for patients. On completion of the original LY.12 randomized clinical trial in lymphoma (NCT00078949), participants were invited to enrol in the Long-term Innovative Follow-up Extension (LIFE) component. Those consenting to do so provided comprehensive identifying information to facilitate linkage with their administrative data. We prospectively designed a global assessment of this innovative approach to clinical trial follow-up including rates of REB approval and patient consent. The pre-specified benchmark for patient acceptability was 80%. Of 16 REBs who reviewed the research protocol, 14 (89%) provided approval; two in Quebec declined due to small patient numbers. Of 140 patients invited to participate, 115 (82%, 95% CI 76 to 88%) from across 9 Canadian provinces provided consent and their full name, date of birth, health insurance number and postal code to facilitate linkage with their administrative data for long-term follow-up. Linkage of clinical trial and administrative data is feasible and acceptable. Further collaborative work including many stakeholders is required to develop an optimized secure approach to research. A more coordinated national approach to health data could facilitate more rapid testing and identification of new effective treatments across multiple jurisdictions and diseases from diabetes to COVID-19.

Application of Value Frameworks to the Design of Clinical Trials: The Canadian Cancer Trials Group Experience.

BACKGROUND: Use of value framework thresholds in the design of clinical trials may increase the proportion of randomized controlled trials that identify clinically meaningful advances for patients. Existing frameworks have not been applied to the research output of a cooperative cancer trials group. We apply value frameworks to the randomized controlled trial output of the Canadian Cancer Trials Group (CCTG). METHODS: Statistical design, study characteristics, and results of all published phase III trials of CCTG were abstracted. We applied the European Society for Medical Oncology-Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS) and American Society of Clinical Oncology Net Health Benefit to study results and the statistical power calculations to identify the proportion of all trials that were designed to detect a substantial clinical benefit. RESULTS: During 1979 to 2017, CCTG published 113 phase III trials; 52.2% (59 of 113) of these trials were positive. One-half (50.4%, 57 of 113) of the trials were conducted in the palliative setting. In 37.2% (42 of 113) of trials, the primary endpoint was overall survival; disease-free survival or progression-free survival was used in 38.9% (44 of 113) of trials. The ESMO-MCBS could be applied to the power calculation for 69 trials; 73.9% (51 of 69) of these trials were designed to detect an effect size that could meet ESMO-MCBS thresholds for substantial benefit. Among the 51 positive trials for which the ESMO-MCBS could be applied, 41.1% (21 of 51) met thresholds for substantial benefit. CONCLUSIONS: Most CCTG phase III trials were designed to detect clinically meaningful differences in outcome, although less than one-half of positive trials met the threshold for substantial benefit. Application of value frameworks to the design of clinical trials is practical and may improve research efficiency and treatment options for patients.

Drug-induced Thrombotic Microangiopathy with Concurrent Proteasome Inhibitor Use in the Treatment of Multiple Myeloma: A Case Series and Review of the Literature.

Thrombotic microangiopathy (TMA) is a life-threatening clinical syndrome characterized by hemolytic anemia, thrombocytopenia, and microvascular thrombosis, resulting in ischemia and organ damage. Multiple myeloma (MM) is a neoplasm arising from clonal plasma cells within the bone marrow. The treatment frequently includes multi-agent immunochemotherapy, often with the use of proteasome inhibitors (PIs) such as bortezomib, carfilzomib, or ixazomib. There are increasing reports of TMA in association with PI exposure. This review summarizes the epidemiology, pathogenesis, and diagnosis of PI-related drug-induced TMA. We will outline the definition and diagnosis of TMA and explore an important cause of hemolysis in patients with MM: drug-induced TMA after PI exposure, an increasingly recognized therapeutic complication. This will be emphasized through the description of 3 novel cases of TMA. These illustrative cases occurred after treatment with high-dose weekly carfilzomib, cyclophosphamide, and dexamethasone as part of the MCRN003/MYX1 phase II clinical trial (NCT02597062) in relapsed MM.

Cardiovascular risk of celecoxib in 6 randomized placebo-controlled trials: the cross trial safety analysis.

BACKGROUND: Observational studies and randomized trials have reported increased cardiovascular risk associated with cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors. Prior placebo-controlled randomized studies had limited ability to assess the relationship of either celecoxib dose or pretreatment cardiovascular status to risk associated with celecoxib. Our aim was to assess the cardiovascular risk associated with celecoxib in 3 dose regimens and to assess the relationship between baseline cardiovascular risk and effect of celecoxib on cardiovascular events. METHODS AND RESULTS: We performed a patient-level pooled analysis of adjudicated data from 7950 patients in 6 placebo-controlled trials comparing celecoxib with placebo for conditions other than arthritis with a planned follow-up of at least 3 years. Patients were administered celecoxib in 3 dose regimens: 400 mg QD, 200 mg BID, or 400 mg BID. From the pooled data, we calculated a hazard ratio for all dose regimens combined and individual hazard ratios for each dose regimen and examined whether celecoxib-related risk was associated with baseline cardiovascular risk. The primary end point was the combination of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, heart failure, or thromboembolic event. With 16,070 patient-years of follow-up, the hazard ratio for the composite end point combining the tested doses was 1.6 (95% CI, 1.1 to 2.3). The risk, which increased with dose regimen (P=0.0005), was lowest for the 400-mg-QD dose (hazard ratio, 1.1; 95% CI, 0.6 to 2.0), intermediate for the 200-mg-BID dose (hazard ratio, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.1 to 3.1), and highest for the 400-mg-BID dose (hazard ratio, 3.1; 95% CI, 1.5 to 6.1). Patients at highest baseline risk demonstrated disproportionately greater risk of celecoxib-related adverse events (P for interaction=0.034). CONCLUSIONS: We observed evidence of differential cardiovascular risk as a function of celecoxib dose regimen and baseline cardiovascular risk. By further clarifying the extent of celecoxib-related cardiovascular risk, these findings may help guide treatment decisions for patients who derive clinical benefit from selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibition.

Can Administrative Data Improve the Performance of Cancer Clinical Trial Economic Analyses?

PURPOSE: Trial economic analyses, such as cost-effectiveness analysis, often rely on trial-collected data, which are burdensome and expensive to collect and may be incomplete. In contrast, administrative databases systematically collect health system encounters. We investigated whether administrative data could improve the performance of cancer trial economic analysis. METHODS: Health administrative data were probabilistically linked to Ontario patient data from the Canadian Cancer Trials Group CO.17 trial (n = 572), which evaluated cetuximab plus best supportive care (75 linked Ontario patients) versus best supportive care alone (73 patients) in previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer. Trial-collected resource utilization data and vital status were compared with administrative data. Cost effectiveness in 2007 Canadian dollars was determined with bootstrap incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) CIs. RESULTS: Up to trial date of last contact, administrative data vital status was concordant in more than 96%. Twenty-nine subsequent deaths occurred. Up to trial last contact, there were 50 net additional hospitalizations in administrative data and 33 net additional emergency department visits. Total costs were $3,023,034 for the cetuximab group and $1,191,118 for the control group up to trial last contact. The ICER was $211,128 per life-year gained (90% CI, $101,396 to $694,950) up to trial last contact and $164,378 (90% CI, -$138,260 to $644,555) up to administrative data last contact. ICER estimates were similar to the analysis using trial-collected data. CONCLUSION: Administrative data were more complete than trial data for hospital encounters, a key cost driver in economic analysis. There was a longer follow-up. This demonstrates the potential of administrative data to relieve the burden of collecting key data in cancer trials, which represents a considerable effort and expense.

Erlotinib in lung cancer - molecular and clinical predictors of outcome.

BACKGROUND: A clinical trial that compared erlotinib with a placebo for non-small-cell lung cancer demonstrated a survival benefit for erlotinib. We used tumor-biopsy samples from participants in this trial to investigate whether responsiveness to erlotinib and its impact on survival were associated with expression by the tumor of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and EGFR gene amplification and mutations. METHODS: EGFR expression was evaluated immunohistochemically in non-small-cell lung cancer specimens from 325 of 731 patients in the trial; 197 samples were analyzed for EGFR mutations; and 221 samples were analyzed for the number of EGFR genes. RESULTS: In univariate analyses, survival was longer in the erlotinib group than in the placebo group when EGFR was expressed (hazard ratio for death, 0.68; P=0.02) or there was a high number of copies of EGFR (hazard ratio, 0.44; P=0.008). In multivariate analyses, adenocarcinoma (P=0.01), never having smoked (P<0.001), and expression of EGFR (P=0.03) were associated with an objective response. In multivariate analysis, survival after treatment with erlotinib was not influenced by the status of EGFR expression, the number of EGFR copies, or EGFR mutation. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with non-small-cell lung cancer who receive erlotinib, the presence of an EGFR mutation may increase responsiveness to the agent, but it is not indicative of a survival benefit.

A randomized trial of letrozole in postmenopausal women after five years of tamoxifen therapy for early-stage breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: In hormone-dependent breast cancer, five years of postoperative tamoxifen therapy--but not tamoxifen therapy of longer duration--prolongs disease-free and overall survival. The aromatase inhibitor letrozole, by suppressing estrogen production, might improve the outcome after the discontinuation of tamoxifen therapy. METHODS: We conducted a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial to test the effectiveness of five years of letrozole therapy in postmenopausal women with breast cancer who have completed five years of tamoxifen therapy. The primary end point was disease-free survival. RESULTS: A total of 5187 women were enrolled (median follow-up, 2.4 years). At the first interim analysis, there were 207 local or metastatic recurrences of breast cancer or new primary cancers in the contralateral breast--75 in the letrozole group and 132 in the placebo group--with estimated four-year disease-free survival rates of 93 percent and 87 percent, respectively, in the two groups (P< or =0.001 for the comparison of disease-free survival). A total of 42 women in the placebo group and 31 women in the letrozole group died (P=0.25 for the comparison of overall survival). Low-grade hot flashes, arthritis, arthralgia, and myalgia were more frequent in the letrozole group, but vaginal bleeding was less frequent. There were new diagnoses of osteoporosis in 5.8 percent of the women in the letrozole group and 4.5 percent of the women in the placebo group (P=0.07); the rates of fracture were similar. After the first interim analysis, the independent data and safety monitoring committee recommended termination of the trial and prompt communication of the results to the participants. CONCLUSIONS: As compared with placebo, letrozole therapy after the completion of standard tamoxifen treatment significantly improves disease-free survival.

Evaluating health-related quality of life in cancer clinical trials: the National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group experience.

INTRODUCTION: The National Cancer Institute of Canada (NCIC) Clinical Trials Group (CTG) Quality of Life (QOL) Committee was initiated in 1986. PURPOSE: The purpose of this review is to describe the evolution of the Committee's work and to highlight key developments such as the formulation of a policy regarding health-related quality-of-life (HRQOL) assessment, the provision of guidelines to ensure completion of HRQOL data within the protocol requirements, the rationale behind the choice of HRQOL instruments, the timing of assessments and the development of data analytic methods. These developments are illustrated with examples from CTG studies. RECOMMENDATIONS: There is a lack of concordance between conventional toxicity data and HRQOL data and comparative studies designed to elucidate these differences are to be encouraged. Also, more studies are required to compare different analytic strategies and to determine how much missing data is acceptable, particularly in oncology studies where attrition is inevitable.

A phase III randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study evaluating dextromethorphan plus slow-release morphine for chronic cancer pain relief in terminally ill patients.

This multicenter trial examined the efficacy and safety of dextromethorphan (DM) as an enhancer of analgesia and modulator of opioid tolerance in cancer patients with pain. Eligible patients were randomized to slow-release morphine plus DM or slow-release morphine plus placebo. The initial DM dose was 60 mg four times daily for seven days, with an increase to 120 mg four times daily, if tolerated, for another seven days. During the study, patients recorded medications and scores for pain, nausea, drowsiness, and insomnia. Sixty-five patients were randomized. Although average pain scores (12.6 vs. 15.8), number of breakthrough doses (9 vs. 11.3), and change in total morphine consumption (550.9 mg vs. 597.1mg) were less in the DM group than placebo group, the differences were not statistically significant (P=0.31-0.33). Side-effect scores were not statistically significantly different. Dizziness was greater in the DM (58%) than placebo (36%) group. This study showed a statistically nonsignificant enhancement of analgesia or modulation of opioid tolerance in cancer patients with pain when DM was added to morphine. Participants receiving the DM also had more toxicity, particularly dizziness. This toxicity and the limited evidence of effect do not support the use of DM to enhance opioid analgesia or to modulate opioid tolerance in cancer patients.

Assessment of quality of life in MA.17: a randomized, placebo-controlled trial of letrozole after 5 years of tamoxifen in postmenopausal women.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the impact of letrozole compared with placebo after adjuvant tamoxifen on quality of life (QOL) in the MA.17 trial. METHODS: Patients completed the Short Form 36-item Health Survey (SF-36) and the Menopause Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire (MENQOL) at baseline, 6 months, and annually. Mean change scores from baseline were compared between groups for summary measures and domains. A response analysis compared the proportion of patients who demonstrated an important change in QOL. RESULTS: Of 5,187 randomly assigned women in the trial, 3,612 (69.9%) participated in the QOL substudy: 1,799 were allocated to placebo and 1,813 were allocated to letrozole. No differences were seen between groups in mean change scores from baseline for the SF-36 physical and mental component summary scores at 6, 12, 24, and 36 months. Small (< 0.2 standard deviations) but statistically significant differences in mean change scores from baseline were seen for the SF-36 domains of physical functioning (12 months), bodily pain (6 months) and vitality (6 and 12 months), and the MENQOL vasomotor (6, 12, and 24 months) and sexual domains (12 and 24 months). On the response analysis, a significant difference was seen between groups for the bodily pain domain (percentage of patients reporting a worsening of QOL, 47% placebo v 51% letrozole; P = .009) and the vasomotor domain (22% placebo v 29% letrozole; P = .001). CONCLUSION: Letrozole did not have an adverse impact on overall QOL. Small effects were seen in some domains consistent with a minority of patients experiencing changes in QOL compatible with a reduction in estrogen synthesis.

Enrollment of older patients in cancer treatment trials in Canada: why is age a barrier?

PURPOSE: To evaluate the enrollment of older patients (>/= 65 years) in Canadian cancer treatment trials and compare accrual of older patients in Canada and the United States. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis of the number of older patients enrolled in National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group (NCIC CTG) treatment trials between 1993 and 1996 was performed. These rates were compared with the corresponding rates in the general population of patients who were >/= 65 years old and had cancer, obtained from Statistics Canada, and those published by the Southwest Oncology Group (SWOG) in the United States. RESULTS: Between 1993 and 1996, 4,174 patients were enrolled onto 69 NCIC CTG trials of 16 tumor types. Older patients accounted for 22% of trial enrollees, compared with 58% of the Canadian population with cancer. This discrepancy existed in all cancer types except for multiple myeloma. The percentages of older patients enrolled were also analyzed by study type: 15% in adjuvant trials, 25% in metastatic trials, 29% in investigational new drug trials, 24% in phase I trials, and 21% in supportive care trials. The overall proportion of older patients enrolled onto Canadian trials (22%) was slightly lower than that in SWOG trials (25%). CONCLUSION: Age remains a barrier for accrual onto cancer treatment trials, even when reimbursement is not an issue. Strategies to overcome this barrier, including the implementation of trials specifically tailored to patients aged >/= 65 years, are prudent in light of our aging population.

Factors affecting workload of cancer clinical trials: results of a multicenter study of the National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group.

PURPOSE: Increasingly, cancer treatment centers need to be able to estimate specific costs and resources associated with clinical trials. Because the time requirements of trial coordination and data collection are not well known, the Clinical Research Associates (CRA) Committee of the National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group carried out a multicenter study to measure trials' task times and evaluate the effects of certain factors. METHODS: A data collection instrument was designed and validated before its implementation in the study. Eighty-three CRAs from 24 cancer treatment institutions across Canada collected timing observations of 41 tasks (156 subtasks). Information from all stages of trials activity (protocol management, eligibility and entry, treatment, and follow-up and final stage) was obtained, from initial negotiations to follow-up after study closure. RESULTS: After controlling for stage, phase and sponsor were found to be significant independent factors. Analysis within the stages showed similar patterns. New drug inclusion as a factor was confounded with phase. Industry-sponsored studies had significantly higher overall mean times than did local and cooperative group studies. Early-phase studies required more time than did phase III trials. External sponsorship of any kind increased CRA time more than that necessary for locally coordinated studies, except during the protocol management stage. The burden of a phase I study increased to greater than average once underway and accruing patients. CONCLUSION: Our data demonstrated that sponsor and study phase are important factors to be taken into consideration when estimating clinical trial costs and resource use.