Dataset Information

Quality of Life and Performance Status From a Substudy Conducted Within a Prospective Phase 3 Randomized Trial of Concurrent Accelerated Radiation Plus Cisplatin With or Without Cetuximab for Locally Advanced Head and Neck Carcinoma: NRG Oncology Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 0522.

ABSTRACT: PURPOSE:To analyze the quality of life (QOL) and performance status (PS) (secondary outcome) in patients with stage III to IV head and neck cancer (HNC) enrolled on a prospective randomized phase 3 trial comparing radiation-cisplatin without cetuximab (CIS) or with cetuximab (CET/CIS). The QOL hypothesis proposed a between-arm difference in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Head and Neck (FACT-HN) total score of ?10% of the instrument range from baseline to 1 year. METHODS AND MATERIALS:Patients who gave consent to the QOL/PS study completed the FACT-HN, Performance Status Scale for HNC (PSS-HN), and EuroQol (EQ-5D) at baseline through to 5 years. The pretreatment QOL/PS scores were correlated with outcome and p16 status in patients with oropharyngeal cancer (OPC). RESULTS:Of 818 analyzable patients, the 1-year change from baseline score for FACT-HN total was -0.41 (CIS arm) and -5.11 (CET/CIS arm) (P=.016), representing a 3.2% between-arm change of the FACT-HN total score. The mean EQ-5D index and PSS-HN scores were not significantly different between arms. The p16-positive OPC patients had significantly higher baseline and 1-year scores for PSS-HN, FACT-HN total, physical and functional subscales, and 2-years for the EQ-5D index compared with p16-negative OPC patients. Higher pretreatment PSS-HN diet, PSS-HN eating, FACT-HN, and EQ-5D index scores were associated with better overall survival (OS) and progression-free (PFS) survival on multivariate analysis. Higher baseline FACT-HN total, functional, physical subscale, and EQ-5D index scores were associated with improved OS and PFS in p16-positive OPC patients but not in p16-negative and non-OPC patients. CONCLUSION:There was no clinically meaningful difference in QOL/PS between arms. The p16-positive OPC patients had significantly higher QOL/PS than did p16-negative patients. Pretreatment QOL/PS is a significant independent predictor of outcome in locally advanced HNC.

SUBMITTER: Truong MT

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5303682 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Quality of Life and Performance Status From a Substudy Conducted Within a Prospective Phase 3 Randomized Trial of Concurrent Accelerated Radiation Plus Cisplatin With or Without Cetuximab for Locally Advanced Head and Neck Carcinoma: NRG Oncology Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 0522.

Truong Minh Tam MT Zhang Qiang Q Rosenthal David I DI List Marcie M Axelrod Rita R Sherman Eric E Weber Randal R Nguyen-Tân Phuc Felix PF El-Naggar Adel A Konski André A Galvin James J Schwartz David D Trotti Andy A Silverman Craig C Singh Anurag A Godette Karen K Bonner James A JA Jones Christopher U CU Garden Adam S AS Shenouda George G Matthiesen Chance C Le Quynh-Thu QT Bruner Deborah D

International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics 20160812 4

<h4>Purpose</h4>To analyze the quality of life (QOL) and performance status (PS) (secondary outcome) in patients with stage III to IV head and neck cancer (HNC) enrolled on a prospective randomized phase 3 trial comparing radiation-cisplatin without cetuximab (CIS) or with cetuximab (CET/CIS). The QOL hypothesis proposed a between-arm difference in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Head and Neck (FACT-HN) total score of ≥10% of the instrument range from baseline to 1 year.<h4>Methods and m ...[more]

PMID: 27727066

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeCombining cisplatin or cetuximab with radiation improves overall survival (OS) of patients with stage III or IV head and neck carcinoma (HNC). Cetuximab plus platinum regimens also increase OS in metastatic HNC. The Radiation Therapy Oncology Group launched a phase III trial to test the hypothesis that adding cetuximab to the radiation-cisplatin platform improves progression-free survival (PFS).Patients and methodsEligible patients with stage III or IV HNC were randomly assigned to receive radiation and cisplatin without (arm A) or with (arm B) cetuximab. Acute and late reactions were scored using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (version 3). Outcomes were correlated with patient and tumor features and markers.ResultsOf 891 analyzed patients, 630 were alive at analysis (median follow-up, 3.8 years). Cetuximab plus cisplatin-radiation, versus cisplatin-radiation alone, resulted in more frequent interruptions in radiation therapy (26.9% v. 15.1%, respectively); similar cisplatin delivery (mean, 185.7 mg/m2 v. 191.1 mg/m2, respectively); and more grade 3 to 4 radiation mucositis (43.2% v. 33.3%, respectively), rash, fatigue, anorexia, and hypokalemia, but not more late toxicity. No differences were found between arms A and B in 30-day mortality (1.8% v. 2.0%, respectively; P = .81), 3-year PFS (61.2% v. 58.9%, respectively; P = .76), 3-year OS (72.9% v. 75.8%, respectively; P = .32), locoregional failure (19.9% v. 25.9%, respectively; P = .97), or distant metastasis (13.0% v. 9.7%, respectively; P = .08). Patients with p16-positive oropharyngeal carcinoma (OPC), compared with patients with p16-negative OPC, had better 3-year probability of PFS (72.8% v. 49.2%, respectively; P < .001) and OS (85.6% v. 60.1%, respectively; P < .001), but tumor epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) expression did not distinguish outcome.ConclusionAdding cetuximab to radiation-cisplatin did not improve outcome and hence should not be prescribed routinely. PFS and OS were higher in patients with p16-positive OPC, but outcomes did not differ by EGFR expression.

Project description:PurposeNRG/RTOG 0841 assessed the feasibility of a depression screening procedure in patients receiving radiation therapy (RT). As a secondary endpoint, availability and barriers to psychosocial care data were collected in hopes of providing recommendations for improved psychosocial care among patients receiving RT.Methods and materialsPatients starting RT were prospectively recruited and assessed with self-reported distress screening tools. Patients exceeding a validated cutoff and a sample of patients who screened negative received the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV (SCID) mood disorder modules via telephone. During that SCID evaluation, patients completed a validated scale ranking interview on barriers to psychosocial care and interest in various psychosocial intervention modalities.ResultsA total of 463 patients from 35 community-based and 2 academic RT oncology sites were recruited. Of the 455 eligible, 75 (16%) exceeded screening cutoffs for depressive symptoms. From this group, 78 patients completed the SCID; most were female (76%), white (88%), and had breast cancer (55%). Overall, the most common barriers to treatment, regardless of insurance, were costs (58%), daily responsibilities (44%), and physical health symptoms (38%). Patients from RT facilities without mental health services were significantly more likely to report difficulty with physical health problems, specifically serious illness and walking, compared with those treated at RT facilities with services (P = .013 and P = .039, respectively). Overall, there was interest in obtaining psychosocial services with face-to-face counseling at the cancer center and printed educational materials as the most commonly preferred interventions. Patients with difficult barriers to psychosocial interventions were significantly less interested in support away from the cancer center (P = .016), telephone and Internet counseling (P = .0062 &P = .011), and Internet support (P = .0048).ConclusionRadiation oncology patients are interested in obtaining psychosocial services but face barriers to access to mental health services including cost, debilitating symptoms, and time constraints that prevent adequate care.

Project description:PURPOSE:Only retrospective data are available for low-dose-rate (LDR) salvage prostate brachytherapy for local recurrence after external beam radiation therapy (EBRT). The primary objective of this prospective phase 2 trial (NCT00450411) was to evaluate late gastrointestinal and genitourinary adverse events (AEs) after salvage LDR brachytherapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS:Eligible patients had low- or intermediate-risk prostate cancer before EBRT and biopsy-proven recurrence >30 months after EBRT, with prostate-specific antigen levels <10 ng/mL and no regional/distant disease. The primary endpoint was grade 3 or higher late treatment-related gastrointestinal or genitourinary AEs occurring 9 to 24 months after brachytherapy. These AEs were projected to be ?10%, with ?20% considered unacceptable. All events were graded with National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 3.0. Multivariate analyses investigated associations of pretreatment or treatment variables with AEs. RESULTS:One hundred patients from 20 centers were registered from May 2007 to January 2014. The 92 analyzable patients had a median follow-up of 54 months (range, 4-97) and a median age of 70 years (interquartile range [IQR], 65-74). The initial Gleason score was 7 in 48% of patients. The median dose of EBRT was 74 Gy (IQR, 70-76) at a median interval of 85 months previously (IQR, 60-119). Only 16% had androgen deprivation at study entry. Twelve patients (14%) had late grade 3 gastrointestinal/genitourinary AEs, with no treatment-related grade 4 or 5 AEs. No pretreatment variable predicted late AEs, including prior EBRT dose and elapsed interval. Higher V100 (percentage of prostate enclosed by prescription isodose) predicted both occurrence of late AEs (odds ratio, 1.24; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-1.52; P = .03) and earlier time to first occurrence (hazard ratio, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.03-1.34; P = .02). CONCLUSIONS:This prospective multicenter trial reports outcomes of salvage LDR brachytherapy for post-EBRT recurrence. The rate of late grade 3 AEs did not exceed the unacceptable threshold. The only factor predictive of late AEs was implant dosimetry reflected by V100. Efficacy outcomes will be reported at a minimum of 5-year follow-up.

Project description:Importance:The role of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibition in chemoradiation strategies in the nonoperative treatment of patients with esophageal cancer remains uncertain. Objective:To evaluate the benefit of cetuximab added to concurrent chemoradiation therapy for patients undergoing nonoperative treatment of esophageal carcinoma. Design, Setting, and Participants:A National Cancer Institute (NCI) sponsored, multicenter, phase 3, randomized clinical trial open to patients with biopsy-proven carcinoma of the esophagus. The study accrued 344 patients from 2008 to 2013. Interventions:Patients were randomized to weekly concurrent cisplatin (50 mg/m2), paclitaxel (25 mg/m2), and daily radiation of 50.4 Gy/1.8 Gy fractions with or without weekly cetuximab (400 mg/m2 on day 1 then 250 mg/m2 weekly). Main Outcomes and Measures:Overall survival (OS) was the primary endpoint, with a study designed to detect an increase in 2-year OS from 41% to 53%; 80% power and 1-sided ??=?.025. Results:Between June 30, 2008, and February 8, 2013, 344 patients were enrolled. This analysis used all data received at NRG Oncology through April 12, 2015. Sixteen patients were ineligible, resulting in 328 evaluable patients, 159 in the experimental arm and 169 in the control arm. Patients were well matched between the treatment arms for patient and tumor characteristics: 263 (80%) with T3 or T4 disease, 215 (66%) N1, and 62 (19%) with celiac nodal involvement. Incidence of grade 3, 4, or 5 treatment-related adverse events at any time was 71 (46%), 35 (23%), or 6 (4%) in the experimental arm and 83 (50%), 28 (17%), or 2 (1%) in the control arm, respectively. A clinical complete response (cCR) rate of 81 (56%) was observed in the experimental arm vs 92 (58%) in the control arm (Fisher exact test, P?=?.66). No differences were seen in cCR between treatment arms for either histology (adenocarcinoma or squamous cell). Median follow-up for all patients was 18.6 months. The 24- and 36-month local failure for the experimental arm was 47% (95% CI, 38%-57%) and 49% (95% CI, 40%-59%) vs 49% (95% CI, 41%-58%) and 49% (95% CI, 41%-58%) for the control arm (HR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.66-1.28; P?=?.65). The 24- and 36-month OS rates for the experimental arm were 45% (95% CI, 37%-53%) and 34% (95% CI, 26%-41%) vs 44% (95% CI, 36%-51%) and 28% (95% CI, 21%-35%) for the control arm (HR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.70-1.16; P?=?.47). Conclusions and Relevance:The addition of cetuximab to concurrent chemoradiation did not improve OS. These phase 3 trial results point to little benefit to current EGFR-targeted agents in an unselected patient population, and highlight the need for predictive biomarkers in the treatment of esophageal cancer. Trial Registration:clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00655876.

Dataset Information

Quality of Life and Performance Status From a Substudy Conducted Within a Prospective Phase 3 Randomized Trial of Concurrent Accelerated Radiation Plus Cisplatin With or Without Cetuximab for Locally Advanced Head and Neck Carcinoma: NRG Oncology Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 0522.

Publications

Quality of Life and Performance Status From a Substudy Conducted Within a Prospective Phase 3 Randomized Trial of Concurrent Accelerated Radiation Plus Cisplatin With or Without Cetuximab for Locally Advanced Head and Neck Carcinoma: NRG Oncology Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 0522.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets