Study within a trial of electronic versus paper-based Patient-Reported oUtcomes CollEction (SPRUCE): study protocol for a partially randomised patient preference study.

INTRODUCTION: Patient-reported outcomes (PRO) are currently collected from trial participants using paper questionnaires by the Clinical Trials and Statistics Unit at The Institute of Cancer Research (ICR-CTSU). Streamlining PRO collection using electronic questionnaires (ePRO) may improve data collection and patient experience. Here, we outline our protocol for a Study within a trial of electronic versus paper-based Patient-Reported oUtcomes CollEction (SPRUCE), which investigates the acceptability of ePRO in oncology clinical trials. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: SPRUCE was developed alongside patient and public contributors. SPRUCE runs in multiple host trials with a partially randomised patient preference design, allowing participants to be randomised or choose their preference of electronic or paper questionnaires. Questionnaires are scheduled in accordance with host trial follow-up. The primary objective will assess differences in return rates (compliance) between ePRO and paper PROs at the first timepoint post-host trial intervention in the randomised group. Paper PRO compliance is expected to be 90%. 244 randomised participants are required to exclude ≤80% compliance rates with ePRO (10% non-inferiority margin, with 80% power and one-sided alpha=0.05). SPRUCE aims to assess acceptability of ePRO in oncology clinical trials, establish whether ePRO is acceptable to ICR-CTSU trial participants and can capture complete PRO data, consistent with paper PROs. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The SPRUCE protocol (ICR-CTSU/2021/10074) was approved by the Coventry and Warwick Central Research Ethics Committee (21/WM/0223) on 21 October 2021. Results will be disseminated via presentations, publications and lay summaries. No participant identifiable data will be included. TRIAL REGISTRATION: SWAT169.

Dose-escalated intensity-modulated radiotherapy in patients with locally advanced laryngeal and hypopharyngeal cancers: ART DECO, a phase III randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Radical (chemo)radiotherapy offers potentially curative treatment for patients with locally advanced laryngeal or hypopharyngeal cancer. We aimed to show that dose-escalated intensity-modulated radiotherapy (DE-IMRT) improved locoregional control. METHODS: We performed a phase III open-label randomised controlled trial in patients with laryngeal or hypopharyngeal cancer (AJCC III-IVa/b, TNM 7). Patients were randomised (1:1) to DE-IMRT or standard dose IMRT (ST-IMRT) using a minimisation algorithm, balancing for centre, tumour site, nodal status and chemotherapy use. DE-IMRT was 67.2 gray (Gy) in 28 fractions (f) to the primary tumour and 56Gy/28f to at-risk nodes; ST-IMRT was 65Gy/30f to primary tumour and 54Gy/30f to at-risk nodes. Suitable patients received 2 cycles of concomitant cisplatin and up to 3 cycles of platinum-based induction chemotherapy. The primary end-point was time to locoregional failure analysed by intention-to-treat analysis using competing risk methodology. FINDINGS: Between February 2011 and October 2015, 276 patients (138 ST-IMRT; 138 DE-IMRT) were randomised. A preplanned interim futility analysis met the criterion for early closure. After a median follow-up of 47.9 months (interquartile range 37.5-60.5), there were locoregional failures in 38 of 138 (27.5%) ST-IMRT patients and 42 of 138 (30.4%) DE-IMRT patients; an adjusted subhazard ratio of 1.16 (95% confidence interval: 0.74-1.83, p = 0.519) indicated no evidence of benefit with DE-IMRT. Acute grade 2 pharyngeal mucositis was reported more frequently with DE-IMRT than with ST-IMRT (42% vs. 32%). No differences in grade ≥3 acute or late toxicity rates were seen. CONCLUSION: DE-IMRT did not improve locoregional control in patients with laryngeal or hypopharyngeal cancer. The trial is registered: ISRCTN01483375.

The 111 Study: A Single-arm, Phase 3 Trial Evaluating One Cycle of Bleomycin, Etoposide, and Cisplatin as Adjuvant Chemotherapy in High-risk, Stage 1 Nonseminomatous or Combined Germ Cell Tumours of the Testis.

BACKGROUND: Standard management in the UK for high-risk stage 1 nonseminoma germ cell tumours of the testis (NSGCTT) is two cycles of adjuvant bleomycin, etoposide (360 mg/m2), and cisplatin (BE360P) chemotherapy, or surveillance. OBJECTIVE: To test whether one cycle of BE500P achieves similar recurrence rates to two cycles of BE360P. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A total of 246 patients with vascular invasion-positive stage 1 NSGCTT or combined seminoma + NSGCTT were centrally registered in a single-arm prospective study. INTERVENTION: One cycle comprising bleomycin 30000 IU on days 1, 8, and 15, etoposide 165 mg/m2 on days 1-3, and cisplatin 50 mg/m2 on days 1-2, plus antibacterial and granulocyte colony stimulating factor prophylaxis. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The primary endpoint was 2-yr malignant recurrence (MR); the aim was to exclude a rate of ≥5%. Participants had regular imaging and tumour marker (TM) assessment for 5 yr. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The median follow-up was 49 mo (interquartile range 37-60). Ten patients with rising TMs at baseline were excluded. Four patients had MR at 6, 7, 13, and 27 mo; all received second-line chemotherapy and surgery and three remained recurrence-free at 5 yr. The 2-yr MR rate was 1.3% (95% confidence interval 0.3-3.7%). Three patients developed nonmalignant recurrences with localised teratoma differentiated, rendered disease-free after surgery. Grade 3-4 febrile neutropenia occurred in 6.8% of participants. CONCLUSIONS: BE500P is safe and the 2-yr MR rate is consistent with that seen following two BE360P cycles. The 111 study is the largest prospective trial investigating one cycle of adjuvant BE500P in high-risk stage 1 NSGCTT. Adoption of one cycle of BE500P as standard would reduce overall exposure to chemotherapy in this young population. PATIENT SUMMARY: Removing the testicle fails to cure many patients with high-risk primary testicular cancer since undetectable cancers are often present elsewhere. A standard additional treatment in Europe is two cycles of chemotherapy to eradicate these. This trial shows one cycle has few adverse effects and comparable outcomes to those seen with two cycles.