Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome-Based Symptom Management Versus Usual Care After Lung Cancer Surgery: Long-Term Results of a Multicenter, Randomized, Controlled Trial.

Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned co-primary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical Trial Updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported.We previously reported superior symptom control of electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO)-based symptom management after lung cancer surgery for up to 1 month postdischarge. Here, we present the long-term results (1-12 months) of this multicenter, randomized trial, where patients were assigned 1:1 to receive postoperative ePRO-based symptom management or usual care daily postsurgery, twice weekly postdischarge until 1 month, and at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months postdischarge. Long-term patient-reported outcomes were assessed with MD Anderson Symptom Inventory-Lung Cancer module. Per-protocol analyses were performed with 55 patients in the ePRO group and 57 in the usual care group. At 12 months postdischarge, the ePRO group reported significantly fewer symptom threshold events (any of the five target symptom scored ≥4; median [IQR], 0 [0-0] v 0 [0-1]; P = .040) than the usual care group. From 1 to 12 months postdischarge, the ePRO group consistently reported significantly lower composite scores for physical interference (estimate, -0.86 [95% CI, -1.32 to -0.39]) and affective interference (estimate, -0.70 [95% CI, -1.14 to -0.26]). Early intensive ePRO-based symptom management after lung cancer surgery reduced symptom burden and improved functional status for up to 1 year postdischarge, supporting its integration into standard care.

Protocol of an iterative qualitative study to develop a molecular testing decision aid for shared decision-making in patients with lung cancer after surgery.

INTRODUCTION: Although molecular testing is crucial for many patients with lung cancer, the decision to carry out molecular testing is not easy to make in actual clinical scenarios. Using a specific decision aid (DA) to conduct shared decision-making (SDM) may help ameliorate this problem. However, no DA currently exists for lung cancer molecular testing (DA_LCMT). We aim to develop an evidence-based, iteratively refined DA, which may facilitate SDM and improve the quality of SDM. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: After considering the Ottawa Decision Support Framework, International Patient Decision Aid Standards and Food and Drug Administration guidance about methods to identify what is important to patients, semistructured interviews with qualitative research methods will be used to generate the decision-making needs of patients with lung cancer diagnosed with lung adenocarcinoma by intraoperative frozen pathological sections. Input will be provided by patients and other stakeholders, including thoracic surgeons, nurses, hospital administrators, molecular testing company staff and insurance company staff. Then, a modified Delphi method will be used to develop the DA_LCMT V.1.0 (DA_LCMT 1.0). Structured interviews with qualitative research methods will be used in the cognitive debriefing (alpha tests) and field testing (beta tests) to revise and improve the DA_LCMT from version 1.0 to the final version, version 3.0. Descriptive statistics will be used to summarise the baseline characteristics of the patients and other stakeholders. Qualitative data will be analysed using the three steps of grounded theory: generate a codebook, update the codebook and create a comprehensive list of related items. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics Committee for Medical Research and New Medical Technology of Sichuan Cancer Hospital approved this study. This protocol is based on the latest version 1.0, dated 31 October 2021. The study was also approved by the Ethics Committees of The Third People's Hospital of Chengdu, Zigong First People's Hospital and Jiangyou People's Hospital. The results of this study will be presented at medical conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05191485.

Patient-Reported Outcome-Based Symptom Management Versus Usual Care After Lung Cancer Surgery: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial.

PURPOSE: We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and feasibility of patient-reported outcome (PRO)-based symptom management in the early period after lung cancer surgery. METHODS: Before surgery, patients with clinically diagnosed lung cancer were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive postoperative PRO-based symptom management or usual care. All patients reported symptoms on MD Anderson Symptom Inventory-Lung Cancer presurgery, daily postsurgery, and twice a week after discharge for up to 4 weeks via an electronic PRO system. In the intervention group, treating surgeons responded to overthreshold electronic alerts driven by any of the five target symptom scores (score ≥ 4 on a 0-10 scale for pain, fatigue, disturbed sleep, shortness of breath, and coughing). The control group patients received usual care and no alerts were generated. The primary outcome was the number of symptom threshold events (any target symptom with a score of ≥ 4) at discharge. Per-protocol analyses were conducted. RESULTS: Of the 166 participants, 83 were randomly allocated to each group. At discharge, the intervention group reported fewer symptom threshold events than the control group (median [interquartile range], 0 [0-2] v 2 [0-3]; P = .007). At 4 weeks postdischarge, this difference was maintained between the intervention and control groups (median [interquartile range], 0 [0-0] v 0 [0-1]; P = .018). The intervention group had a lower complication rate than the control group (21.5% v 40.6%; P = .019). Surgeons spent a median of 3 minutes managing an alert. CONCLUSION: PRO-based symptom management after lung cancer surgery showed lower symptom burden and fewer complications than usual care for up to 4 weeks postdischarge.

Neutralization titer biomarker for antibody-mediated prevention of HIV-1 acquisition.

The Antibody Mediated Prevention trials showed that the broadly neutralizing antibody (bnAb) VRC01 prevented acquisition of human immunodeficiency virus-1 (HIV-1) sensitive to VRC01. Using AMP trial data, here we show that the predicted serum neutralization 80% inhibitory dilution titer (PT80) biomarker-which quantifies the neutralization potency of antibodies in an individual's serum against an HIV-1 isolate-can be used to predict HIV-1 prevention efficacy. Similar to the results of nonhuman primate studies, an average PT80 of 200 (meaning a bnAb concentration 200-fold higher than that required to reduce infection by 80% in vitro) against a population of probable exposing viruses was estimated to be required for 90% prevention efficacy against acquisition of these viruses. Based on this result, we suggest that the goal of sustained PT80 <200 against 90% of circulating viruses can be achieved by promising bnAb regimens engineered for long half-lives. We propose the PT80 biomarker as a surrogate endpoint for evaluatinon of bnAb regimens, and as a tool for benchmarking candidate bnAb-inducing vaccines.

Booster of mRNA-1273 Strengthens SARS-CoV-2 Omicron Neutralization.

The Omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2 is raising concerns because of its increased transmissibility and potential for reduced susceptibility to antibody neutralization. To assess the potential risk of this variant to existing vaccines, serum samples from mRNA-1273 vaccine recipients were tested for neutralizing activity against Omicron and compared to neutralization titers against D614G and Beta in live virus and pseudovirus assays. Omicron was 41-84-fold less sensitive to neutralization than D614G and 5.3-7.4-fold less sensitive than Beta when assayed with serum samples obtained 4 weeks after 2 standard inoculations with 100 µg mRNA-1273. A 50 µg boost increased Omicron neutralization titers and may substantially reduce the risk of symptomatic vaccine breakthrough infections.

Using patient-reported outcomes to manage postoperative symptoms in patients with lung cancer: protocol for a multicentre, randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Surgery is one of the primary treatments for lung cancer. The postoperative symptom burden experienced by patients with lung cancer is substantial, seriously delaying their recovery from surgery and impairing their quality of life. Patient-reported outcome (PRO)-based symptom management is increasingly regarded as an optimal model for patient-centred care. Currently, clinical trial-based evidence involving early-phase (immediately after surgery for up to 1 month) symptom management of lung cancer is lacking. We propose a randomised trial to evaluate the effect of a PRO-based symptom-monitoring programme with overthreshold alerts and responses for postoperative recovery in patients with lung cancer. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The study will recruit 160 patients with lung cancer from six hospitals. The patients will be randomly allocated to the intervention group or control group in a ratio of 1:1. Patients in the intervention group will receive PRO-based symptom management from the specialists when their reported target symptom (pain, coughing, fatigue, disturbed sleep and shortness of breath) scores reach the preset threshold (score ≥4). Patients in the control group will not generate alerts and will follow the standard procedures for symptom management. All patients will receive symptom assessments via the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory-lung cancer module on the day before surgery, daily after surgery and twice a week after discharge until 4 weeks or the start of postoperative oncological treatment. The primary outcome-mean symptom threshold events-will be compared between the intervention and control group via independent sample Student's t-test. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Sichuan Cancer Hospital on 22 November 2018 (No. SCCHEC-02-2018-045). This manuscript is based on V.2.0, 9 May 2019 of the protocol. The study results will be disseminated in publications in peer-reviewed journals and presentations at academic conferences. TRIALS REGISTRATION NUMBER: ChiCTR1900020846.

Developing and validating utility parameters to establish patient-reported outcome-based perioperative symptom management in patients with lung cancer: a multicentre, prospective, observational cohort study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Patient-reported outcome-based symptom monitoring and alerting have been attractive for patient care after a tumour-removal surgery. However, the implementation parameters of this patient-centred symptom management system in perioperative patients with lung cancer are still lacking. We aim to develop a perioperative symptom scale (PSS) for monitoring, to determine the optimal time points for symptom assessment and to define the alert thresholds for medical intervention. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study will prospectively recruit 300 patients undergoing lung cancer surgery in six hospitals. The MD Anderson Symptom Inventory-Lung Cancer Module (MDASI-LC) is used to collect longitudinal symptom data preoperatively, daily postoperatively during in-hospital stay and weekly after discharge until 4 weeks or the start of postoperative oncological therapy. Symptoms that change significantly over time will be generated as the PSS. We will determine the optimal time points for follow-up using the generalised linear mixed-effects models. The MDASI-LC interference-measured functional status will be used as the anchor for the alert thresholds. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics Committee of Sichuan Cancer Hospital approved this study on 16 October 2017 (No. SCCHEC-02-2017-042). The manuscript is based on the latest protocol of Version 3.0, 15 September 2019. The results of this study will be presented at medical conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals. TRIALS REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03341377.

A cell fractionation approach for the quantitative analysis of subcellular drug disposition.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this work was to develop and validate a method that can be used to quantify drugs associated with intracellular compartments. METHODS: The human leukemic cell line U-937 was used to evaluate the distribution of model compounds with known and different subcellular distribution profiles. Lysotracker Red is a lysosomal vital stain and doxorubicin is an anticancer agent with a strong propensity for nuclear accumulation in U-937 cells. After incubation with compounds, cells were separated into fractions containing nuclei, cytosol, and cytoplasmic organelles (lysosomes, mitochondria, Golgi apparatus). Compounds contained within isolated fractions were subsequently extracted and analyzed by high-performance liquid chromatography. Diffusion of compounds from isolated organelles was also investigated. RESULTS: Using this approach we have shown that the model compounds Lysotracker Red and doxorubicin preferentially accumulated within lysosomes and nuclei, respectively. We have reproducibly determined concentrations of these compounds in each of the cellular fractions. We have also shown that diffusion of these compounds from isolated cellular compartments was minimal during the time required to complete the experimental procedure. CONCLUSIONS: The analytical approach described in this manuscript yielded reproducible quantitative data regarding the intracellular distribution of model compounds in U-937 cells. With the aid of a relatively sensitive analytical assay, this technique should be useful for most drugs that have a specific concentrative mechanism for organelle accumulation similar to Dox and LTR.