Publications by authors named "Amylou C Dueck"

193 Publications

Electronic patient-reported outcomes monitoring during lung cancer chemotherapy: A nested cohort within the PRO-TECT pragmatic trial (AFT-39).

Lung Cancer 2021 Sep 30;162:1-8. Epub 2021 Sep 30.

Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.

Objectives: Patients with lung cancer have high symptom burden and diminished quality of life. Electronic patient-reported outcome (PRO) platforms deliver repeated longitudinal surveys via web or telephone to patients and alert clinicians about concerning symptoms. This study aims to determine feasibility of electronic PRO monitoring in lung cancer patients receiving treatment in community settings.

Methods: Adults receiving treatment for advanced or metastatic lung cancer at 26 community sites were invited to participate in a prospective trial of weekly electronic PRO symptom monitoring for 12 months (NCT03249090). Surveys assessing patients' satisfaction with the electronic PRO system were administered at 3 months. Descriptive statistics were generated for demographics, survey completion rates, symptom occurrence, and provider PRO alert management approaches. Pairwise relationships between symptom items were evaluated using intra-individual repeated-measures correlation coefficients.

Results: Lung cancer patients (n = 118) participating in electronic PROs were older (mean 64.4 vs 61.9 years, p = 0.03), had worse performance status (p = 0.002), more comorbidities (p = 0.02), and less technology experience than patients with other cancers. Of delivered weekly PRO surveys over 12 months, 91% were completed. Nearly all (97%) patients reported concerning (i.e., severe or worsening) symptoms during participation, with 33% of surveys including concerning symptoms. Pain was the most frequent and longest lasting symptom and was associated with reduced activity level. More than half of alerts to clinicians for concerning symptoms led to intervention. The majority (87%) would recommend using electronic PRO monitoring to other lung cancer patients.

Conclusions: Remote longitudinal weekly monitoring of patients with lung cancer using validated electronic PRO surveys was feasible in a multicenter, community-based pragmatic study. A high symptom burden specific to lung cancer was detected and clinician outreach in response to alerts was frequent, suggesting electronic PROs may be a beneficial strategy for identifying actionable symptoms and allow opportunities to optimize well-being in this population.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lungcan.2021.09.020DOI Listing
September 2021

Assessing concordance between patient-reported and investigator-reported CTCAE after proton beam therapy for prostate cancer.

Clin Transl Radiat Oncol 2021 Nov 15;31:34-41. Epub 2021 Sep 15.

Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.

Purpose: We report acute patient-reported outcomes using CTCAE (PRO-CTCAE) of proton beam radiotherapy for high-risk or unfavorable intermediate-risk prostate cancer in a prospective clinical trial. PRO-CTCAE were correlated with investigator reported-CTCAE (IR-CTCAE) to assess the degree of concordance.

Methods And Materials: 11 PRO-CTCAE questions assessed gastrointestinal (GI), genitourinary (GU), or erectile function side effects. The correlation scheme between PRO-CTCAE and IR-CTCAE was independently developed by two physicians. Analyses of PRO-CTCAE and IR-CTCAE were conducted using both descriptive terms and the converted grade scores. The Kappa statistic described the degree of concordance.

Results: 55 patients were included. IR-CTCAE underestimated diarrhea compared to PRO-CTCAE at the end of treatment (EOT), with a 28% rate of underestimation (11% by ≥ 2 toxicity grades). Similarly, urinary tract pain was underestimated in 45% of cases (17% by ≥ 2 grades) at EOT. Differences were less pronounced at baseline or 3 months after radiotherapy. The incidence of urinary urgency and frequency tended to be overestimated prior to treatment (36% and 24%, respectively) but underestimated at EOT (35% and 31%, respectively). The degree of interference with daily activities was consistently overestimated by investigators (45%-85%). Finally, erectile dysfunction showed a 36-56% rate of discordance by ≥ 2 toxicity grades.

Conclusions: Our study shows a low agreement between IR-CTCAE and PRO-CTCAE in the setting of proton therapy for prostate cancer. Compared to patient-reported outcomes, physicians underestimated the frequency and severity of urinary symptoms and diarrhea at the end of treatment. Continued use of PROs should be strongly encouraged.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ctro.2021.09.003DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8463742PMC
November 2021

Score equivalence of paper-, tablet-, and interactive voice response system-based versions of PROMIS, PRO-CTCAE, and numerical rating scales among cancer patients.

J Patient Rep Outcomes 2021 Sep 17;5(1):95. Epub 2021 Sep 17.

Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Mayo Clinic, 200 First St SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA.

Background: The study tests the effects of data collection modes on patient responses associated with the multi-item measures such as Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement System (PROMIS), and single-item measures such as Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE), and Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) measures.

Methods: Adult cancer patients were recruited from five cancer centers and administered measures of anxiety, depression, fatigue, sleep disturbance, pain intensity, pain interference, ability to participate in social roles and activities, global mental and physical health, and physical function. Patients were randomized to complete the measures on paper (595), interactive voice response (IVR, 596) system, or tablet computer (589). We evaluated differential item functioning (DIF) by method of data collection using the R software package, lordif. For constructs that showed no DIF, we concluded equivalence across modes if the equivalence margin, defined as ± 0.20 × pooled SD, completely surrounds 95% confidence intervals (CI's) for difference in mean score. If the 95% CI fell totally outside the equivalence margin, we concluded systematic score difference by modes. If the 95% CI partly overlaps the equivalence margin, we concluded neither equivalence nor difference.

Results: For all constructs, no DIF of any kind was found for the three modes. The scores on paper and tablet were more comparable than between IVR and other modes but none of the 95% CI's were completely outside the equivalence margins, in which we established neither equivalence nor difference. Percentages of missing values were comparable for paper and tablet modes. Percentages of missing values were higher for IVR (2.3% to 6.5% depending on measures) compared to paper and tablet modes (0.7% to 3.3% depending on measures and modes), which was attributed to random technical difficulties experienced in some centers.

Conclusion: Across all mode comparisons, there were some measures with CI's not completely contained within the margin of small effect. Two visual modes agreed more than visual-auditory pairs. IVR may induce differences in scores unrelated to constructs being measured in comparison with paper and tablet. The users of the surveys should consider using IVR only when paper and computer administration is not feasible.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41687-021-00368-0DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8448797PMC
September 2021

Missing data strategies for the Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE) in Alliance A091105 and COMET-2.

Qual Life Res 2021 Aug 21. Epub 2021 Aug 21.

Alliance Statistics and Data Center, Mayo Clinic, 13400 East Shea Boulevard, Scottsdale, AZ, 85259, USA.

Purpose: Missing scores complicate analysis of the Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE) because patients with and without missing scores may systematically differ. We focus on optimal analysis methods for incomplete PRO-CTCAE items, with application to two randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase III trials.

Methods: In Alliance A091105 and COMET-2, patients completed PRO-CTCAE items before randomization and several times post-randomization (N = 64 and 107, respectively). For each trial, we conducted between-arm comparisons on the PRO-CTCAE via complete-case two-sample t-tests, mixed modeling with contrast, and multiple imputation followed by two-sample t-tests. Because interest lies in whether CTCAE grades can inform missing PRO-CTCAE scores, we performed multiple imputation with and without CTCAE grades as auxiliary variables to assess the added benefit of including them in the imputation model relative to only including PRO-CTCAE scores across all cycles.

Results: PRO-CTCAE completion rates ranged from 100.0 to 71.4% and 100.0 to 77.1% across time in A091105 and COMET-2, respectively. In both trials, mixed modeling and multiple imputation provided the most similar estimates of the average treatment effects. Including CTCAE grades in the imputation model did not consistently narrow confidence intervals of the average treatment effects because correlations for the same PRO-CTCAE item between different cycles were generally stronger than correlations between each PRO-CTCAE item and its corresponding CTCAE grade at the same cycle.

Conclusion: For between-arm comparisons, mixed modeling and multiple imputation are informative techniques for handling missing PRO-CTCAE scores. CTCAE grades do not provide added benefit for informing missing PRO-CTCAE scores. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT02066181 (Alliance A091105); NCT01522443 (COMET-2).
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11136-021-02968-1DOI Listing
August 2021

Evaluating Treatment Tolerability Using the Toxicity Index With Patient-Reported Outcomes Data.

J Pain Symptom Manage 2021 Aug 8. Epub 2021 Aug 8.

Mayo Clinic, Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Division of Biostatistics and Clinical Trials (B.L., G.L.M., B.G., A.C.D.), Phoenix, Arizona, USA. Electronic address:

Context: Summarizing longitudinal symptomatic adverse events during clinical trials is necessary for understanding treatment tolerability. The Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE) provides insight for capturing treatment tolerability within trials. Tolerability summary measures, such as the maximum score, are often used to communicate the potential negative symptoms both in the medical literature and directly to patients. Commonly, the proportions of present and severe symptomatic adverse events are used and reported between treatment arms among adverse event types. The toxicity index is also a summary measure previously applied to clinician-reported CTCAE data.

Objectives: Apply the toxicity index to PRO-CTCAE data from the COMET-2 trial alongside the maximum score, then present and discuss considerations for using the toxicity index as a summary measure for communicating tolerability to patients and clinicians.

Methods: Proportions of maximum PRO-CTCAE severity levels and median toxicity index were computed by arm using all trial data and adjusting for baseline symptoms.

Results: Group-wise statistical differences were similar whether using severity level proportions or the toxicity index. The impact of adjusting for baseline symptoms was equivalently seen when comparing arms using severity rates or the toxicity index.

Conclusion: The toxicity index is a useful method when ranking patients from those with the least to most symptomatic adverse event burden. This study showed the toxicity index can be applied to PRO-CTCAE data. Though as a tolerability summary measure, further study is needed to provide a clear clinical or patient-facing interpretation of the toxicity index.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2021.07.031DOI Listing
August 2021

SPIRIT-PRO Extension explanation and elaboration: guidelines for inclusion of patient-reported outcomes in protocols of clinical trials.

BMJ Open 2021 06 30;11(6):e045105. Epub 2021 Jun 30.

Value Evidence and Outcomes-Patient Centered Outcomes, GSK, Collegeville, Pennsylvania, USA.

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are used in clinical trials to provide valuable evidence on the impact of disease and treatment on patients' symptoms, function and quality of life. High-quality PRO data from trials can inform shared decision-making, regulatory and economic analyses and health policy. Recent evidence suggests the PRO content of past trial protocols was often incomplete or unclear, leading to research waste. To address this issue, international, consensus-based, PRO-specific guidelines were developed: the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials (SPIRIT)-PRO Extension. The SPIRIT-PRO Extension is a 16-item checklist which aims to improve the content and quality of aspects of clinical trial protocols relating to PRO data collection to minimise research waste, and ultimately better inform patient-centred care. This SPIRIT-PRO explanation and elaboration (E&E) paper provides information to promote understanding and facilitate uptake of the recommended checklist items, including a comprehensive protocol template. For each SPIRIT-PRO item, we provide a detailed description, one or more examples from existing trial protocols and supporting empirical evidence of the item's importance. We recommend this paper and protocol template be used alongside the SPIRIT 2013 and SPIRIT-PRO Extension paper to optimise the transparent development and review of trial protocols with PROs.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-045105DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8246371PMC
June 2021

Tobacco use in the Myeloproliferative neoplasms: symptom burden, patient opinions, and care.

BMC Cancer 2021 Jun 10;21(1):691. Epub 2021 Jun 10.

Department of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Mayo Clinic, 13400 East Shea Boulevard, Scottsdale, AZ, 85259, USA.

Background: Patients with Philadelphia-negative Myeloproliferative Neoplasms (MPN) suffer from numerous symptoms and decreased quality of life. Smoking is associated with an increased symptom burden in several malignancies. The aim of this study was to analyze the association between smoking and MPN-related symptom burden and explore MPN patients' opinions on smoking.

Methods: A total of 435 patients with MPN participated in a cross-sectional internet-based survey developed by the Mayo Clinic and the Myeloproliferative Neoplasm Quality of Life Group. Patients reported their demographics, disease characteristics, tobacco use, and opinions on tobacco use. In addition, MPN-related symptoms were reported via the validated 10-item version of the Myeloproliferative Neoplasms Symptom Assessment Form.

Results: Current/former smokers reported worse fatigue (mean severity 5.6 vs. 5.0, p = 0.02) and inactivity (mean severity 4.0 vs. 3.4, p = 0.03) than never smokers. Moreover, current/former smokers more frequently experienced early satiety (68.5% vs. 58.3%, p = 0.03), inactivity (79.9% vs. 71.1%, p = 0.04), and concentration difficulties (82.1% vs. 73.1%, p = 0.04). Although not significant, a higher total symptom burden was observed for current/former smokers (mean 30.4 vs. 27.0, p = 0.07). Accordingly, overall quality of life was significantly better among never smokers than current/former smokers (mean 3.5 vs. 3.9, p = 0.03). Only 43.2% of the current/former smokers reported having discussed tobacco use with their physician, and 17.5% did not believe smoking increased the risk of thrombosis.

Conclusion: The current study suggests that smoking may be associated with increased prevalence and severity of MPN symptoms and underscores the need to enhance patient education and address tobacco use in the care of MPN patients.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12885-021-08439-7DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8194237PMC
June 2021

Randomized Phase II Trial of Capecitabine and Lapatinib with or without IMC-A12 (Cituxumumab) in Patients with HER2-Positive Advanced Breast Cancer Previously Treated with Trastuzumab and Chemotherapy: NCCTG N0733 (Alliance).

Breast Cancer Res Treat 2021 Jul 14;188(2):477-487. Epub 2021 Apr 14.

Mayo Clinic, 200 1st Street SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA.

Purpose: To compare efficacy and safety of capecitabine and lapatinib with or without IMC-A12 (cituxumumab) in patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC) previously treated with trastuzumab.

Patients And Methods: Following an initial safety run-in cohort, patients were randomized 1:2 to Arm A (capecitabine and lapatinib) or to Arm B (capecitabine, lapatinib, and cituxumumab). Given the frequency of non-hematologic grade ≥ 3 adverse events in those receiving the three-drug combination in the safety cohort, lapatinib and capecitabine doses were reduced in Arm B only. The primary objective was to determine if the addition of cituxumumab to capecitabine and lapatinib improved progression-free survival (PFS) compared with capecitabine and lapatinib. Secondary objectives included a comparison between arms of other clinical endpoints, safety, change in overall quality of life (QOL) and self-assessed fatigue, rash, diarrhea, and hand-foot syndrome.

Results: From July 2008 to March 2012, 68 patients (out of 142 planned) were enrolled and 63 were evaluable, including 8 for the safety run-in and 55 for the randomized cohort. Study enrollment was stopped early due to slow accrual. The addition of cituxumumab to capecitabine and lapatinib did not improve PFS (HR 0.93, 95% CI: 0.52-1.64). Furthermore, no difference in objective response rate or overall survival (OS) was observed. No difference between arms was observed in grade ≥ 3 adverse events, overall QOL change from baseline after 4 cycles of treatment.

Conclusion: The addition of cituxumumab to lapatinib and capecitabine did not improve PFS or OS compared with lapatinib and capecitabine in patients with HER2-positive MBC.

Clinical Trial Registry: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00684983.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10549-021-06221-8DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8262517PMC
July 2021

Evaluation of Minimal Important Difference and Responder Definition in the EORTC QLQ-PAN26 Module for Assessing Health-Related Quality of Life in Patients with Surgically Resected Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma.

Ann Surg Oncol 2021 Nov 3;28(12):7545-7554. Epub 2021 Apr 3.

Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ, USA.

Background: Although the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-PAN26 is widely used to assess health-related quality of life (HRQoL), its group-level minimal important difference (MID) and individual-level responder definition (RD) are not established; we calculated MID and RD using HRQoL data from the APACT trial in patients with surgically resected pancreatic cancer who received adjuvant chemotherapy.

Methods: HRQoL was assessed using EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-PAN26 at baseline, during treatment, at end of treatment, and during follow-up. Distribution-based MIDs were estimated using 0.5 × baseline standard deviation (SD) and reliability-based (intraclass correlation) standard error of measurement (SEM). Anchor-based MIDs and RDs (anchor, QLQ-C30 overall health) were estimated using a linear mixed model.

Results: Overall, 772 patients completed the baseline assessment. Distribution-based MIDs (0.5 × SD) for QLQ-PAN26 scales ranged from 12 to 13, except hepatic symptoms (≈8), pancreatic pain (≈10), and sexual dysfunction (≈17); those for stand-alone items ranged from 12 to 16. The SEM values were similar. Among scales/items sufficiently correlated (r > 0.30) with the anchor, MIDs ranged from 5 to 9. Within-patient QLQ-PAN26 RD estimates varied by direction (deterioration vs. improvement) and scale/item, but all values were lower than the true possible within-patient change (e.g. 16.7 points for a two-item scale) given a one-category change on the raw scale.

Conclusions: Compared with distribution-based MIDs, anchor-based MIDs were twice as sensitive in detecting group-level changes in QLQ-PAN26 scales/items. For interpreting clinically meaningful change, RDs cannot be less than the true minimum of the scale. The group-level MID may help clinicians/researchers interpret HRQoL changes.

Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01964430; Eudra CT 2013-003398-91.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1245/s10434-021-09816-zDOI Listing
November 2021

Evaluation of Therapeutic Strategies to Reduce the Number of Thrombotic Events in Patients With Polycythemia Vera and Essential Thrombocythemia.

Front Oncol 2020 16;10:636675. Epub 2021 Feb 16.

Hematology/Oncology Section, Tisch Cancer Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, United States.

Thrombosis is the largest contributor to morbidity and mortality in patients with polycythemia vera (PV) and essential thrombocythemia (ET). Our understanding of the risk factors and pathophysiology of thrombosis in PV and ET patients is developing, including recent insights into the role of aberrant platelet-neutrophil interactions, mutated endothelial cells and the pro-thrombotic inflammatory milieu. To date, few available therapies have demonstrated the ability to reduce the thrombotic burden in patients with these diseases. Although numerous therapeutic agents have been investigated in both PV and ET patients, few studies are designed to assess their impact on thrombotic events. In this review, we first describe the burden of thrombosis in patients with these myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs) and briefly explore their pathophysiologic mechanisms. We then critically assess and summarize the evidence behind currently available therapies with attention toward thrombotic endpoints. Finally, we describe a path forward for clinical research in MPNs that involves surrogate endpoint validation, biomarker development, and clinical trial design strategies in order to accurately assess reduction of thrombotic events when evaluating novel therapies.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2020.636675DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7921696PMC
February 2021

Advancing Effective Clinical Trial Designs for Myelofibrosis.

Hematol Oncol Clin North Am 2021 Apr;35(2):431-444

Department of Health Sciences Research, Division of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics, Johnson Research Building, 13400 East Shea Boulevard, Scottsdale, AZ 85259, USA. Electronic address:

Design features of phase I, II, and III clinical trials of pharmaceutical interventions in myelofibrosis (MF) are discussed. Model-assisted and model-based designs for phase I trials are useful for maximizing therapeutic benefit and include novel approaches to dose escalation. Trials in MF have shifted to accommodate new challenges following approval of JAK inhibitor therapies. Standardized response criteria exist; however, alternative measures of response when evaluating newer agents may be needed. Noninferiority and other adaptive designs can be used to incorporate design changes over time. Patient-reported outcomes, including quality-of-life and symptom assessment, should be included as outcome measures.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.hoc.2020.12.009DOI Listing
April 2021

Benefits of Digital Symptom Monitoring With Patient-Reported Outcomes During Adjuvant Cancer Treatment.

J Clin Oncol 2021 03 28;39(7):701-703. Epub 2021 Jan 28.

Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1200/JCO.20.03375DOI Listing
March 2021

Palbociclib with adjuvant endocrine therapy in early breast cancer (PALLAS): interim analysis of a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 study.

Lancet Oncol 2021 02 15;22(2):212-222. Epub 2021 Jan 15.

Orlando Health, Orlando, FL, USA.

Background: Palbociclib added to endocrine therapy improves progression-free survival in hormone-receptor-positive, HER2-negative, metastatic breast cancer. The PALLAS trial aimed to investigate whether the addition of 2 years of palbociclib to adjuvant endocrine therapy improves invasive disease-free survival over endocrine therapy alone in patients with hormone-receptor-positive, HER2-negative, early-stage breast cancer.

Methods: PALLAS is an ongoing multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 study that enrolled patients at 406 cancer centres in 21 countries worldwide with stage II-III histologically confirmed hormone-receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer, within 12 months of initial diagnosis. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance score of 0 or 1. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) in permuted blocks of random size (4 or 6), stratified by anatomic stage, previous chemotherapy, age, and geographical region, by use of central telephone-based and web-based interactive response technology, to receive either 2 years of palbociclib (125 mg orally once daily on days 1-21 of a 28-day cycle) with ongoing standard provider or patient-choice adjuvant endocrine therapy (tamoxifen or aromatase inhibitor, with or without concurrent luteinising hormone-releasing hormone agonist), or endocrine therapy alone, without masking. The primary endpoint of the study was invasive disease-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in all randomly assigned patients who started palbociclib or endocrine therapy. This report presents results from the second pre-planned interim analysis triggered on Jan 9, 2020, when 67% of the total number of expected invasive disease-free survival events had been observed. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02513394) and EudraCT (2014-005181-30).

Findings: Between Sept 1, 2015, and Nov 30, 2018, 5760 patients were randomly assigned to receive palbociclib plus endocrine therapy (n=2883) or endocrine therapy alone (n=2877). At the time of the planned second interim analysis, at a median follow-up of 23·7 months (IQR 16·9-29·2), 170 of 2883 patients assigned to palbociclib plus endocrine therapy and 181 of 2877 assigned to endocrine therapy alone had invasive disease-free survival events. 3-year invasive disease-free survival was 88·2% (95% CI 85·2-90·6) for palbociclib plus endocrine therapy and 88·5% (85·8-90·7) for endocrine therapy alone (hazard ratio 0·93 [95% CI 0·76-1·15]; log-rank p=0·51). As the test statistic comparing invasive disease-free survival between groups crossed the prespecified futility boundary, the independent data monitoring committee recommended discontinuation of palbociclib in patients still receiving palbociclib and endocrine therapy. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (1742 [61·3%] of 2840 patients on palbociclib and endocrine therapy vs 11 [0·3%] of 2903 on endocrine therapy alone), leucopenia (857 [30·2%] vs three [0·1%]), and fatigue (60 [2·1%] vs ten [0·3%]). Serious adverse events occurred in 351 (12·4%) of 2840 patients on palbociclib plus endocrine therapy versus 220 (7·6%) of 2903 patients on endocrine therapy alone. There were no treatment-related deaths.

Interpretation: At the planned second interim analysis, addition of 2 years of adjuvant palbociclib to adjuvant endocrine therapy did not improve invasive disease-free survival compared with adjuvant endocrine therapy alone. On the basis of these findings, this regimen cannot be recommended in the adjuvant setting. Long-term follow-up of the PALLAS population and correlative studies are ongoing.

Funding: Pfizer.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(20)30642-2DOI Listing
February 2021

Establishing a common metric for patient-reported outcomes in cancer patients: linking patient reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS), numerical rating scale, and patient-reported outcomes version of the common terminology criteria for adverse events (PRO-CTCAE).

J Patient Rep Outcomes 2020 Dec 10;4(1):106. Epub 2020 Dec 10.

Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, 200 First St SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA.

Background: Researchers and clinicians studying symptoms experienced by people with cancer must choose from various scales. It would be useful to know how the scores on one measure translate to another.

Methods: Using item response theory (IRT) with the single-group design, in which the same sample answers all measures, we produced crosswalk tables linking five 0-10 numeric rating scale (NRS) and 15 items from Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE, scored on a 1-5 scale) to the T-Score metric of six different scales from the NIH Patient reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS®). The constructs, for which we conducted linking, include emotional distress-anxiety, emotional distress-depression, fatigue, sleep disturbance, pain intensity, and pain interference. We tested the IRT linking assumption of construct similarity between measures by comparing item content and testing unidimensionality of item sets comprising each construct. We also investigated the correlation of the measures to be linked and, by inspecting standardized mean differences, whether the linkage is invariant across age and gender subgroups. For measures that satisfied the assumptions, we conducted linking.

Results: In general, an NRS score of 0 corresponded to about 38.2 on the PROMIS T-Score scale (mean = 50; SD = 10); whereas an NRS score of 10 corresponded to a PROMIS T-Score of approximately 72.7. Similarly, the lowest/best score of 1 on PRO-CTCAE corresponded to 39.8 on T-score scale and the highest/worst score of 5 corresponded to 72.0.

Conclusion: We produced robust linking between single item symptom measures and PROMIS short forms.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41687-020-00271-0DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7728866PMC
December 2020

Composite grading algorithm for the National Cancer Institute's Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE).

Clin Trials 2021 02 1;18(1):104-114. Epub 2020 Dec 1.

Alliance Statistics and Data Center, Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ, USA.

Background: The Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events is an item library designed for eliciting patient-reported adverse events in oncology. For each adverse event, up to three individual items are scored for frequency, severity, and interference with daily activities. To align the Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events with other standardized tools for adverse event assessment including the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, an algorithm for mapping individual items for any given adverse event to a single composite numerical grade was developed and tested.

Methods: A five-step process was used: (1) All 179 possible Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events score combinations were presented to 20 clinical investigators to subjectively map combinations to single numerical grades ranging from 0 to 3. (2) Combinations with <75% agreement were presented to investigator committees at a National Clinical Trials Network cooperative group meeting to gain majority consensus via anonymous voting. (3) The resulting algorithm was refined via graphical and tabular approaches to assure directional consistency. (4) Validity, reliability, and sensitivity were assessed in a national study dataset. (5) Accuracy for delineating adverse events between study arms was measured in two Phase III clinical trials (NCT02066181 and NCT01522443).

Results: In Step 1, 12/179 score combinations had <75% initial agreement. In Step 2, majority consensus was reached for all combinations. In Step 3, five grades were adjusted to assure directional consistency. In Steps 4 and 5, composite grades performed well and comparably to individual item scores on validity, reliability, sensitivity, and between-arm delineation.

Conclusion: A composite grading algorithm has been developed and yields single numerical grades for adverse events assessed via the Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, and can be useful in analyses and reporting.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1740774520975120DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7878323PMC
February 2021

Clinical Utility and User Perceptions of a Digital System for Electronic Patient-Reported Symptom Monitoring During Routine Cancer Care: Findings From the PRO-TECT Trial.

JCO Clin Cancer Inform 2020 10;4:947-957

Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ.

Purpose: There is increasing interest in implementing digital systems for remote monitoring of patients' symptoms during routine oncology practice. Information is limited about the clinical utility and user perceptions of these systems.

Methods: PRO-TECT is a multicenter trial evaluating implementation of electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePROs) among adults with advanced and metastatic cancers receiving treatment at US community oncology practices (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03249090). Questions derived from the Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE) are administered weekly by web or automated telephone system, with alerts to nurses for severe or worsening symptoms. To elicit user feedback, surveys were administered to participating patients and clinicians.

Results: Among 496 patients across 26 practices, the majority found the system and questions easy to understand (95%), easy to use (93%), and relevant to their care (91%). Most patients reported that PRO information was used by their clinicians for care (70%), improved discussions with clinicians (73%), made them feel more in control of their own care (77%), and would recommend the system to other patients (89%). Scores for most patient feedback questions were significantly positively correlated with weekly PRO completion rates in both univariate and multivariable analyses. Among 57 nurses, most reported that PRO information was helpful for clinical documentation (79%), increased efficiency of patient discussions (84%), and was useful for patient care (75%). Among 39 oncologists, most found PRO information useful (91%), with 65% using PROs to guide patient discussions sometimes or often and 65% using PROs to make treatment decisions sometimes or often.

Conclusion: These findings support the clinical utility and value of implementing digital systems for monitoring PROs, including the PRO-CTCAE, in routine cancer care.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1200/CCI.20.00081DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7768331PMC
October 2020

Phase 2 study of ruxolitinib and decitabine in patients with myeloproliferative neoplasm in accelerated and blast phase.

Blood Adv 2020 10;4(20):5246-5256

Tisch Cancer Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY.

Myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN) that have evolved into accelerated or blast phase disease (MPN-AP/BP) have poor outcomes with limited treatment options and therefore represent an urgent unmet need. We have previously demonstrated in a multicenter, phase 1 trial conducted through the Myeloproliferative Neoplasms Research Consortium that the combination of ruxolitinib and decitabine is safe and tolerable and is associated with a favorable overall survival (OS). In this phase 2 trial, 25 patients with MPN-AP/BP were treated at the recommended phase 2 dose of ruxolitinib 25 mg twice daily for the induction cycle followed by 10 mg twice daily for subsequent cycles in combination with decitabine 20 mg/m2 for 5 consecutive days in a 28-day cycle. Nineteen patients died during the study follow-up. The median OS for all patients on study was 9.5 months (95% confidence interval, 4.3-12.0). Overall response rate (complete remission + incomplete platelet recovery + partial remission) was 11/25 (44%) and response was not associated with improved survival. We conclude that the combination of decitabine and ruxolitinib was well tolerated, demonstrated favorable OS, and represents a therapeutic option for this high-risk patient population. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02076191.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/bloodadvances.2020002119DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7594401PMC
October 2020

Depressive symptoms and myeloproliferative neoplasms: Understanding the confounding factor in a complex condition.

Cancer Med 2020 11 25;9(22):8301-8309. Epub 2020 Sep 25.

Department of Hematology and Oncology, UT Health San Antonio MD Anderson Cancer Center, San Antonio, Portland, Texas, Oregon, USA.

Background: Philadelphia chromosome negative myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs), including essential thrombocythemia, polycythemia vera, and myelofibrosis, have severe function-limiting symptom burden that is experienced by the majority of patients. Previous studies have suggested that depression may be present in over a quarter of MPN patients, but to date no studies have evaluated the relationship between depression and other variables such as symptoms.

Methods: A 70-item internet based survey regarding fatigue and mood symptoms was developed by a multidisciplinary team of MPN investigators, patients and patient advocates including Patient Health Questionnaire and the Myeloproliferative Neoplasm Symptom Assessment Form was completed by over 1300 patients with MPN diagnosis.

Results: There were 309 respondents (23%) with PHQ-2 scores ≥ 3. In this analysis, we found worse systemic symptom burden in individuals reporting depressive symptoms.

Conclusion: This analysis suggests the importance of depression in contributing to as well as confounding symptomatology in MPN patients, and suggests that this critical variable should also be addressed by clinicians and researchers alike when comprehensively assessing symptom burden etiologies.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cam4.3380DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7666736PMC
November 2020

Expanding Beyond Maximum Grade: Chemotherapy Toxicity over Time by Age and Performance Status in Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer in CALGB 9730 (Alliance A151729).

Oncologist 2021 03 1;26(3):e435-e444. Epub 2020 Oct 1.

Alliance Statistics and Data Center, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, USA.

Background: Prior comparisons of chemotherapy adverse events (AEs) by age and performance status (PS) are limited by the traditional maximum grade approach, which ignores low-grade AEs and longitudinal changes.

Materials And Methods: To compare fatigue and neuropathy longitudinally by age (<65, ≥65 years) and PS (0-1, 2), we analyzed data from a large phase III trial of carboplatin and paclitaxel versus paclitaxel for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (CALGB 9730, n = 529). We performed multivariable (a) linear mixed models to estimate mean AE grade over time, (b) linear regression to estimate area under the curve (AUC), and (c) proportional hazards models to estimate the hazard ratio of developing grade ≥2 AE, as well as traditional maximum grade analyses.

Results: Older patients had on average a 0.17-point (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.00-0.34; p = .049) higher mean fatigue grade longitudinally compared with younger patients. PS 2 was associated with earlier development of grade ≥2 fatigue (hazard ratio [HR], 1.56; 95% CI, 1.07-2.27; p = .02). For neuropathy, older age was associated with earlier development of grade ≥2 neuropathy (HR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.00-1.97; p = .049). Patients with PS 2 had a 1.30 point lower neuropathy AUC (95% CI, -2.36 to -0.25; p = .02) compared with PS 0-1. In contrast, maximum grade analyses only detected a higher percentage of older adults with grade ≥3 fatigue and neuropathy at some point during treatment.

Conclusion: Our comparison of complementary but distinct aspects of chemotherapy toxicity identified important longitudinal differences in fatigue and neuropathy by age and PS that are missed by the traditional maximum grade approach. Clinical trial identification number: NCT00003117 (CALGB 9730) IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The traditional maximum grade approach ignores persistent low-grade adverse events (AEs) and changes over time. This toxicity over time analysis of fatigue and neuropathy during chemotherapy for advanced non-small cell lung cancer demonstrates how to use longitudinal methods to comprehensively characterize AEs over time by age and performance status (PS). We identified important longitudinal differences in fatigue and neuropathy that are missed by the maximum grade approach. This new information about how older adults and patients with PS 2 experience these toxicities longitudinally may be used clinically to improve discussions about treatment options and what to expect to inform shared decision making and symptom management.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/onco.13527DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7930405PMC
March 2021

Tolerability and toxicity of trastuzumab or trastuzumab + lapatinib in older patients: a sub-analysis of the ALTTO trial (BIG 2-06; NCCTG (Alliance) N063D).

Breast Cancer Res Treat 2021 Jan 19;185(1):107-116. Epub 2020 Sep 19.

Institut Jules Bordet, Université Libre de Bruxelles (ULB), Brussels, Belgium.

Purpose: Little is known about the use of trastuzumab or trastuzumab + lapatinib in older patients. We have performed a sub-analysis of the Adjuvant Lapatinib And/Or Trastuzumab Treatment Optimisation (ALTTO) trial focused on toxicity and treatment completion of both regimens in older patients (≥ 65 years old) METHODS: The ALTTO trial randomised 8381 patients with early HER2-positive BC in 4 arms. Eligible patients for this study were those having received at least one dose of assigned treatment in either the trastuzumab or trastuzumab + lapatinib arms. Treatment completion was evaluated through the rate of temporary treatment interruptions, permanent treatment discontinuations and lapatinib dose reductions. Toxicity was evaluated via a selected subset of adverse events of interest (AEI). Risk factors for both treatment completion outcomes and toxicity were investigated, including comorbidities and use of 5 or more co-medications at randomization.

Results: A total of 430 patients ≥ 65 year were eligible. Median age was 68 (range 65-80). In comparison with the younger cohort, older patients had a significantly higher number of comorbidities at randomization (p < 0.001). Treatment completion outcomes were worse, particularly in the trastuzumab + lapatinib arm. Adverse events of interest were likewise more common in the trastuzumab + lapatinib arm with higher AEI rates (63.4% in younger vs 78.0% in older, p < 0.001). Concomitant chemotherapy was associated with worse treatment completion outcomes among older patients.

Conclusion: Trastuzumab plus lapatinib was significantly more toxic among older patients and had worse treatment completion. Trastuzumab was generally well tolerated.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10549-020-05915-9DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8521435PMC
January 2021

Impact of adjuvant trastuzumab on locoregional failure rates in a randomized clinical trial: North Central Cancer Treatment Group N9831 (alliance) study.

Cancer 2020 12 15;126(24):5239-5246. Epub 2020 Sep 15.

Department of Hematology & Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida.

Background: The goal of this study was to assess the impact of trastuzumab on locoregional failure.

Methods: The analysis included 2763 patients with HER2-positive (HER2+) breast cancer who were randomly assigned to adjuvant doxorubicin (A), cyclophosphamide (C), paclitaxel (T) and trastuzumab (H) (arm A, AC→T [n = 922]; arm B, AC→T→H [n = 988]; arm C, AC→T+H→H [n = 853]). Radiotherapy was given after AC→T concurrently with H. Radiotherapy was given after lumpectomy (L) or after mastectomy (M) with ≥4 positive lymph nodes but was optional for 1 to 3 positive lymph nodes. Locoregional failures at 10 years (LFR10) as first events were compared using competing risk analysis.

Results: The median follow-up was 13.0 years. The first site of failure was local-only in 96 cases, locoregional in 16 cases, regional in 32 cases, and not specified in 2 cases; LFR10 was 4.8% (95% CI 4.1%-5.7%). LFR10 was 5.5% (95% CI 4.3%-7.2%), 4.9% (95% CI 3.7%-6.4%), and 2.8% (95% CI 1.9%-4.1%) in arms A, B, and C (B vs A: hazard ratio [HR] 0.91, P = .62; C vs A: HR 0.72, P = .12). For estrogen receptor-positive patients, LFR10 was 3.7% (95% CI 2.8%-4.8%) and for estrogen receptor-negative patients, it was 6.1% (95% CI 5.0%-7.4%; HR 0.61, P = .004). Local treatment included L+RT (n = 1044 [38%]), M+RT (n = 1025 [37%]), and M (n = 694 [25%]). LFR10 was 6.% (95% CI 5.0%-7.8%), 3.0% (95% CI 2.1%-4.3%), and 5.5% (95% CI 4.0%-7.4%) for L+RT, M+RT, and M, respectively (M+RT vs L+RT: HR 0.43, P < .001; M vs L+RT: HR 0.88, P = .57). For 1 to 3 positive lymph nodes, LFR10 was 6.5% (95% CI 4.8%-8.9%), 4.1% (95% CI 2.4%-7.0%), and 4.3% (95% CI 2.9%-6.5%) in L+RT, M+RT, and M, respectively (M vs L+RT: HR 0.68, P = .14; M vs M+RT: HR 1.2, P = .6).

Conclusion: Low 10-year LFRs were seen regardless of trastuzumab use. Differences in local therapy in patients with 1 to 3 positive lymph nodes did not appear to improve local control. Local therapy studies for HER2+ and other tumor characteristics are important as the role of local therapies continues to evolve.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cncr.33154DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7686244PMC
December 2020

Patient-reported quality-of-life outcomes in relation to provider-assessed adverse events during head and neck radiotherapy.

J Patient Rep Outcomes 2020 Jul 16;4(1):60. Epub 2020 Jul 16.

Division of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.

Purpose: To assess the relationship between patient-reported quality-of-life (QOL) outcomes and provider-assessed adverse events (AEs) during head-and-neck (H&N) radiotherapy (RT).

Methods: Sixty-five patients undergoing H&N RT prospectively completed 12-domain linear analogue self-assessments (LASA) at baseline, before biweekly appointments, and at last week of RT. At the same time points, provider-assessed AEs were graded using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v4.0. LASA scores were stratified by maximum-grade AE and analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis methodology. Agreement between LASA scores and maximum-grade AE was assessed using Bland-Altman analysis.

Results: Patient-reported QOL outcomes showed clinically meaningful decreases in most domains, predominantly fatigue (77.8% of patients), social activity (75.4%), and overall QOL (74.2%). Provider-assessed AEs showed 100% grade 2 AE, 35.4% grade 3 AE, and 3.1% grade 4 AE. At baseline, patients with higher grade AEs reported worse physical well-being (WB) (P = .04). At week 1, the following QOL domains were worse for patients with higher grade AEs: overall QOL (P = .03), mental WB (P = .02), and physical WB (P = .03). Bland-Altman analysis showed that QOL scores were relatively worse than AE burden at baseline and relatively better at RT completion.

Conclusions: Worse QOL was associated with higher-grade AEs at baseline and early in RT. The impact of AEs on QOL appears to lessen with time. Patient-reported QOL outcomes and provider-assessed AEs provide complementary information.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41687-020-00227-4DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7364694PMC
July 2020

Electronic Patient-Reported Outcomes as Digital Therapeutics to Improve Cancer Outcomes.

JCO Oncol Pract 2020 09 2;16(9):541-542. Epub 2020 Jun 2.

Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale AZ.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1200/OP.20.00264DOI Listing
September 2020

Longitudinal Toxicity over Time (ToxT) analysis to evaluate tolerability: a case study of lenalidomide in the CALGB 50401 (Alliance) trial.

Lancet Haematol 2020 Jun;7(6):e490-e497

Alliance Statistics and Data Center, Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ, USA.

Evaluation of tolerability is increasingly relevant for patients with haematological malignancies treated with chronically administered therapies. Adverse events from these agents might affect the ability of patients to tolerate treatment over time. Conventional toxicity tables that include the incidence of high-grade adverse events, defined by the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, do not provide information on the time profile of these adverse events or reflect the continuous, lower grade symptomatic toxicities that are particularly relevant to treatment tolerability for patients living with indolent disease. Modern approaches to the evaluation and reporting of toxicity that capture the tolerability of treatment to the patient are imperative. In this Viewpoint, we present a focused, pilot, and longitudinal Toxicity over Time analysis of adverse events from lenalidomide and lenalidomide with rituximab in patients with follicular lymphoma treated in the CALGB 50401 (Alliance; NCT00238238) trial to define the trajectory of adverse events and quantify the burden of continuous, low-grade events. Toxicity over Time analyses provided clinically relevant descriptions of neutropenia and fatigue trajectories caused by lenalidomide that were not identified by standard analysis of the maximum grade events defined by the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events. Systematic, rigorous incorporation of patient-reported outcomes in clinical trials will be crucial to our understanding of the tolerability of chronically administered therapies in patients with haematological malignancies.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S2352-3026(20)30067-3DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7457391PMC
June 2020

Investigation Into the Effects of Using Normal Distribution Theory Methodology for Likert Scale Patient-Reported Outcome Data From Varying Underlying Distributions Including Floor/Ceiling Effects.

Value Health 2020 05 6;23(5):625-631. Epub 2020 Mar 6.

Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ, USA.

Objectives: Utilization of parametric or nonparametric methods for testing Likert scale data is often debated. This 2-part simulation study aims to investigate the sampling distribution of various Likert scale distributions (including floor/ceiling effects) and analyze the effectiveness of using parametric versus nonparametric tests with varying sample sizes.

Methods: We simulated populations from parametric distributions binned into Likert scales. In study 1, replicates were sampled from each distribution with sizes ranging from 5 to 150 observations, calculating means with simulated 95% CIs at each sample size. In study 2, floor/ceiling effects were introduced such that the proportion of patients responding with the lowest rating varied from approximately 40% to 90%. Two-sample tests were then conducted for the 90% floor effect distribution against all other floor distributions to determine effectiveness of parametric versus nonparametric methods via 2-sided pooled t tests and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests. Coverage of the difference in means, realized P values, relative efficiency, measures of agreement in direction, and conclusion of tests were plotted by sample size.

Results: The sampling distributions of the 1-sample means and SDs for most distributions converged quickly to Gaussian, with 95% coverage. One- and 2-sample t tests of the mean demonstrated acceptable coverage, type I error, and agreement.

Conclusions: Simulations confirm that the sampling distribution of the mean rapidly approaches normality and appropriate tests provide adequate coverage and type I error. Two-sample t tests demonstrate appropriateness and increased statistical power gained by using parametric over nonparametric approaches, suggesting t tests should be implemented with few restrictions.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2020.01.007DOI Listing
May 2020

Landscape of Health-Related Quality of Life in Patients With Early-Stage Pancreatic Cancer Receiving Adjuvant or Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: A Systematic Literature Review.

Pancreas 2020 03;49(3):393-407

Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital, Cancer Research Institute, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea.

Objectives: Pancreatic resection is associated with postoperative morbidity and reduced quality of life (QoL). A systematic literature review was conducted to understand the patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) landscape in early-stage pancreatic cancer (PC).

Methods: Databases/registries (through January 24, 2019) and conference abstracts (2014-2017) were searched. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale/Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. Searches were for general (resectable PC, adjuvant/neoadjuvant, QoL) and supplemental studies (resectable PC, European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QoL Questionnaire [QLQ] - Pancreatic Cancer [PAN26]).

Results: Of 750 studies identified, 39 (general, 22; supplemental, 17) were eligible: 32 used QLQ Core 30 (C30) and/or QLQ-PAN26, and 15 used other PROMs. Baseline QLQ-C30 global health status/QoL scores in early-stage PC were similar to all-stage PC reference values but lower than all-stage-all-cancer values. The QoL declined after surgery, recovered to baseline in 3 to 6 months, and then generally stabilized. A minimally important difference (MID) of 10 was commonly used for QLQ-C30 but was not established for QLQ-PAN26.

Conclusions: In early-stage PC, QLQ-C30 and QLQ-PAN26 are the most commonly used PROMs. Baseline QLQ-C30 global health status/QoL scores suggested a high humanistic burden. Immediately after surgery, QoL declined but seemed stable over the longer term. The QLQ-C30 MID may elucidate the clinical impact of treatment on QoL; MID for QLQ-PAN26 needs to be established.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MPA.0000000000001507DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7077976PMC
March 2020
-->