Dataset Information

Patient-Reported Outcomes From Patients Receiving Immunotherapy or Chemoimmunotherapy for Metastatic Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer in Clinical Practice.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Immunotherapy and chemoimmunotherapy clinical trials for metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (mNSCLC) have generally excluded patients with poor performance status (PS) and have utilized patient-reported measures that could miss some symptoms associated with immunotherapy. The goals of this study were to describe quality of life and symptom burden among mNSCLC patients receiving immunotherapy in clinical practice, and to examine burden by Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) and age.

Patients and methods

Between 2017 and 2018, mNSCLC patients receiving immuno/chemoimmunotherapy at an academic medical center completed the European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC-QLQ-C30) and the National Cancer Institute Patient Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE). Univariate and bivariate analyses described EORTC-QLQ-C30 subscales and the proportion reporting at least moderate PRO-CTCAE symptoms, and compared scores by ECOG PS (0/1 vs. 2/3) and age (< 70 vs. ≥ 70 years).

Results

Sixty patients (60% female; 75% < 70 years old; 68% ECOG PS 0/1; 57% receiving single-agent immunotherapy) participated. The mean EORTC-QLQ-C30 global health score was 62.6; EORTC symptoms were highest for fatigue, insomnia, dyspnea, and financial concerns (all > 30). Global health and pain were worse in ECOG PS 2/3 patients. For PRO-CTCAE, 20% to 40% reported at least moderate gastrointestinal, respiratory, dermatologic, arthralgia, or myalgia symptoms. The PRO-CTCAE pain score was higher among ECOG PS 2/3 patients.

Conclusion

In clinical practice, global health was largely comparable to published clinical trials, but PRO-CTCAE items indicated a higher symptom prevalence. Closer monitoring of symptoms is warranted in ECOG PS 2/3 patients.

SUBMITTER: Steffen McLouth LE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7730068 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAtezolizumab, an immune checkpoint inhibitor, in combination with chemotherapy (chemoimmunotherapy) has become a first-line treatment option for metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are self-reported measures that have shown promise in their predictive value for survival. However, there have been no studies that have assessed the prognostic performance of PROs in an advanced NSCLC cohort initiating first-line atezolizumab based chemoimmunotherapy.MethodsThis study used individual-participant data (IPD) from the IMpower130, IMpower131 and IMpower150 clinical trials. Cox proportional hazards regression was utilized to determine the association between pre-treatment PROs with overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS). The prediction performance of PROs was assessed using the C-statistic. For the PRO measure identified as the most predictive of survival, an exploratory analysis comparing the predictive performance against Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG-PS) was conducted.ResultsPatient-reported physical function, fatigue, appetite loss, pain, role function, global health status, social function, dyspnoea, constipation, nausea and vomiting, insomnia, emotional function, cognitive function, and financial difficulty were statistically associated with OS (P<0.05). Physical function (c=0.62), fatigue (c=0.61), and appetite loss (c=0.60) were the most predictive variables for OS. Patient-reported physical function (c=0.60) also had higher predictive performance than physician-defined ECOG-PS (c=0.57).ConclusionsIn patients with advanced NSCLC who received first line atezolizumab based therapy, pre-treatment PROs were prognostic for survival outcomes. Patient-reported physical function had higher predictive performance compared to physician-defined ECOG-PS. These results suggest PROs have significant worth in clinical practice and research trials of ICIs as a stratification factors.

Project description:BACKGROUND:A randomized controlled pilot trial was conducted to assess if melanoma patients treated with immunotherapy had the number of grade 3 or 4 adverse events during treatment reduced by 50% using a tailored electronic patient-reported outcomes tool in addition to standard toxicity monitoring compared to standard monitoring alone. Secondary endpoints were: if more AEs were reported in the intervention group, if there was a difference between the two groups in the number of telephone consultations, extra out-patient visits, number of days in the hospital, days in steroid treatment and the time patients experienced grade 2 or higher toxicity. PATIENTS AND METHODS:Melanoma patients receiving immunotherapy at the Department of Oncology, Odense University Hospital, Denmark participated. Standard care included assessment of AEs by a clinician before each treatment cycle using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events. In addition, patients randomized to the intervention reported their AEs weekly by an electronic PRO-tool based on the PRO-CTCAE platform. RESULTS:One hundred forty-six melanoma patients were randomized. In this study, we did not detect a difference between the two groups in the number of grade 3 or 4 AEs (P?=?0.983), in the overall number of AEs (P?=?0.560) or in the time the patients in the two groups experienced grade 2 or higher toxicity (0.516). The number of phone contacts was significantly higher in the intervention group (P?=?0.009) and there was a tendency towards patients in the intervention group having more extra visits (P?=?0.156). CONCLUSION:It has been examined if the number of severe AEs for melanoma patients receiving immunotherapy could be reduced by involving the patients in the reporting of symptoms. The results do not justify the expansion of the pilot study into a regular phase III study with this particular set-up. However, a significant difference in the number of phone contacts was found as patients in the intervention group called more frequently, indicating that their attention to AEs was increased. Even though the use of an electronic PRO tool could not reduce the number of severe AEs in this melanoma population, a positive impact on other endpoints such as QoL, communication, or treatment-planning, cannot be excluded. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Clinicaltrials.gov NCT03073031 Registered 8 March 2017, Retrospectively registered.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The benefits of electronic patient reported outcomes (PRO) questionnaires have been demonstrated in many settings, including in hospitals and patient homes. However, it remains to be investigated how melanoma patients and their treating clinicians experience the electronic self-reporting of side effects and the derived communication. OBJECTIVE:The primary objective of this study was to examine patients' and clinicians' experiences with an eHealth intervention for weekly monitoring of side effects during treatment with immunotherapy. METHODS:An eHealth intervention based on questions from the PRO-Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) library was used and tested in a randomized clinical trial with patients receiving immunotherapy for malignant melanoma and clinicians at a university hospital in Denmark. On a weekly basis, patients reported their symptoms from home during the treatment via a provided tablet. The electronic patient reports were available to clinicians in the outpatient clinic. A mixed methods approach was applied to investigate the patients' and clinicians' experiences with the intervention. Data from patient experiences were collected in a short survey, the Patient Feedback Form. Moreover, a subset of the patients participating in the survey was interviewed about their experience. Furthermore, one focus group interview with clinicians was carried out to elucidate their views. RESULTS:A total of 57 patients completed the Patient Feedback Form, and 14 patients were interviewed. The focus group interview included 5 clinicians. Overall, patients and clinicians were satisfied with the tool. They believed it enhanced patients' awareness of side effects and increased their feeling of involvement. The patients reported that it was easy to fill out the questionnaire and that it made sense to do so. However, a minority of the patients expressed in the interviews that they did not believe that the health care professionals had seen their reports when they came to the clinic, and that the reporting did not lead to increased contact with the department. CONCLUSIONS:Overall, satisfaction with the eHealth intervention was high among patients and their treating clinicians. The tool was easy to use and contributed to greater symptom awareness and patient involvement. Thus, in terms of patient and clinician satisfaction with the tool, it makes sense to continue using the tool beyond the project period. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03073031; https://tinyurl.com/tjx3gtu.

Project description:BackgroundPredictive markers for treatment response and survival outcome have not been identified in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) receiving chemoimmunotherapy. We aimed to evaluate whether imaging biomarkers of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (18F-FDG) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) and routinely assessed clinico-laboratory values were associated with clinical outcomes in patients with advanced NSCLC receiving pembrolizumab plus platinum-doublet chemotherapy as a first-line treatment.MethodsWe retrospectively enrolled 52 patients with advanced NSCLC who underwent baseline 18F-FDG PET/CT before treatment initiation. PET/CT parameters and clinico-laboratory variables, constituting the prognostic immunotherapy scoring system, were collected. Optimal cut-off values for PET/CT parameters were determined using the maximized log-rank test for progression-free survival (PFS). A multivariate prediction model was developed based on Cox models for PFS, and a scoring system was established based on hazard ratios of the predictive factors.ResultsDuring the median follow-up period of 16.7 months (95% confidence interval: 15.7-17.7 months), 43 (82.7%) and 31 (59.6%) patients experienced disease progression and death, respectively. Objective response was observed in 23 (44.2%) patients. In the multivariate analysis, maximum standardized uptake value, metabolic tumour volume2.5, total lesion glycolysis2.5, and bone marrow-to-liver uptake ratio from the PET/CT variables and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) from the clinico-laboratory variables were independently associated with PFS. The scoring system based on these independent predictive variables significantly predicted the treatment response, PFS, and overall survival.ConclusionPET/CT variables and NLR were useful biomarkers for predicting outcomes of patients with NSCLC receiving pembrolizumab and chemotherapy as a first-line treatment, suggesting their potential as effective markers for combined PD-1 blockade and chemotherapy.

Project description:BackgroundThis study aimed to establish a comprehensive clinical prognostic risk model based on pulmonary function tests. This model was intended to guide the evaluation and predictive management of patients with resectable stage I-III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) receiving neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy.MethodsClinical pathological characteristics and prognostic survival data for 175 patients were collected. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses, and least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) regression analysis were employed to identify variables and construct corresponding models. These variables were integrated to develop a ridge regression model. The models' discrimination and calibration were evaluated, and the optimal model was chosen following internal validation. Comparative analyses between the risk scores or groups of the optimal model and clinical factors were conducted to explore the potential clinical application value.ResultsUnivariate regression analysis identified smoking, complete pathologic response (CPR), and major pathologic response (MPR) as protective factors. Conversely, T staging, D-dimer/white blood cell ratio (DWBCR), D-dimer/fibrinogen ratio (DFR), and D-dimer/minute ventilation volume actual ratio (DMVAR) emerged as risk factors. Evaluation of the models confirmed their capability to accurately predict patient prognosis, exhibiting ideal discrimination and calibration, with the ridge regression model being optimal. Survival analysis demonstrated that the disease-free survival (DFS) in the high-risk group (HRG) was significantly shorter than in the low-risk group (LRG) (P=2.57×10-13). The time-dependent receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve indicated that the area under the curve (AUC) values at 1 year, 2 years, and 3 years were 0.74, 0.81, and 0.79, respectively. Clinical correlation analysis revealed that men with lung squamous cell carcinoma or comorbid chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) were predominantly in the LRG, suggesting a better prognosis and potentially identifying a beneficiary population for this treatment combination.ConclusionThe prognostic model developed in this study effectively predicts the prognosis of patients with NSCLC receiving neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy. It offers valuable predictive insights for clinicians, aiding in developing treatment plans and monitoring disease progression.

Project description:BackgroundIn Ontario, Canada, patient-reported outcome (PRO) evaluation through the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS) has been integrated into clinical workflow since 2007. As stage IV non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is associated with substantial disease and treatment-related morbidity, this province-wide study investigated moderate to severe symptom burden in this population.Materials and methodsESAS collected from patients with stage IV NSCLC diagnosed between 2007 and 2018 linked to the Ontario provincial health care system database were studied. ESAS acquired within 12 months following diagnosis were analyzed and the proportion reporting moderate to severe scores (ESAS ≥4) in each domain was calculated. Predictors of moderate to severe scores were identified using multivariable Poisson regression models with robust error variance.ResultsOf 22,799 patients, 13,289 (58.3%) completed ESAS (84,373 assessments) in the year following diagnosis. Patients with older age, with high comorbidity, and not receiving active cancer therapy had lower ESAS completion. The majority (94.4%) reported at least one moderate to severe symptom. The most prevalent were tiredness (84.1%), low well-being (80.7%), low appetite (71.7%), and shortness of breath (67.8%). Most symptoms peaked at diagnosis and, while declining, remained high in the following year. On multivariable analyses, comorbidity, low income, nonimmigrants, and urban residency were associated with moderate to severe symptoms. Moderate to severe scores in all ESAS domains aside from anxiety were associated with radiotherapy within 2 weeks prior, whereas drowsiness, low appetite and well-being, nausea, and tiredness were associated with systemic therapy within 2 weeks prior.ConclusionThis province-wide PRO analysis showed moderate to severe symptoms were prevalent and persistent among patients with metastatic NSCLC, underscoring the need to address supportive measures in this population especially around treatments.Implications for practiceIn this largest study of lung cancer patient-reported outcomes (PROs), stage IV non-small cell lung cancer patients had worse moderate-to-severe symptoms than other metastatic malignancies such as breast or gastrointestinal cancers when assessed with similar methodology. Prevalence of moderate-to-severe symptoms peaked early and remained high during the first year of follow-up. Symptom burden was associated with recent radiation and systemic treatments. Early and sustained PRO collection is important to detect actionable symptom progression, especially around treatments. Vulnerable patients (e.g., older, high comorbidity) who face barriers in attending in-person clinic visits had lower PRO completion. Virtual PRO collection may improve completion.