24.12.2012 Views

Annual Meeting Proceedings Part 1 - American Society of Clinical ...

Annual Meeting Proceedings Part 1 - American Society of Clinical ...

Annual Meeting Proceedings Part 1 - American Society of Clinical ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

404s Health Services Research<br />

6089 General Poster Session (Board #7F), Mon, 1:15 PM-5:15 PM<br />

Use and duration <strong>of</strong> chemotherapy (CT) in patients (pts) with metastatic breast<br />

cancer (MBC) according to tumor subtype (TS) and line <strong>of</strong> therapy (tx).<br />

Presenting Author: Davinia Shien Seah, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston,<br />

MA<br />

Background: Benefits <strong>of</strong> CT vary widely in MBC pts. We aimed to describe the impact<br />

<strong>of</strong> breast cancer TS and line <strong>of</strong> tx on the duration <strong>of</strong> CT. Methods: In a retrospective<br />

analysis, we identified 205 pts treated with CT for MBC at the Dana-Farber Cancer<br />

Institute between 2005-8. TS were classified as hormone receptor (HR)� (ER�/PR�/<br />

HER2-), triple negative (TN) (ER-/PR-/HER2-) or HER2� (HER2�, any HR). CT<br />

duration was defined as �time from start <strong>of</strong> one CT line to the start <strong>of</strong> the next CT.�<br />

Chi-square, Kruskal-Wallis, and Kaplan-Meier methods were used. Results: Median<br />

follow-up was 54 months (m). Most pts had received adjuvant tx, though 23% had<br />

MBC at diagnosis. Almost all HER2� pts had concurrent anti-HER2 tx. CT duration<br />

was longest in 1st line with consecutive stepwise decrease. The proportion <strong>of</strong> pts<br />

who received CT beyond the 3rd line varied by TS: 52% <strong>of</strong> HER2� pts received � 4<br />

CT lines, compared with 37% <strong>of</strong> HR� and 29% <strong>of</strong> TN pts. Duration in later CT lines<br />

also differed by TS. Median CT duration in HER2� pts was � 4 m in all 6 lines, but<br />

HR� and TN pts had a median CT duration <strong>of</strong> �4m from the 4th line onwards.<br />

Quartile estimates suggested a substantial fraction <strong>of</strong> HER2� and HR� pts<br />

receiving �6m <strong>of</strong> CT in 5th and 6th line; by contrast, CT duration for TN pts were<br />

consistently brief in later CT lines. Conclusions: TS determines the likely duration<br />

and number <strong>of</strong> lines <strong>of</strong> CT for MBC. Among HR� and HER2� pts who receive CT<br />

beyond 3rd line, there are substantial rates <strong>of</strong> prolonged tx suggesting clinical<br />

benefit. For TN pts, the opportunity for additional lines and the CT duration declined<br />

more dramatically. The true role <strong>of</strong> advanced (� 3rd) CT lines for all MBC in<br />

improving quality <strong>of</strong> life, survival, and the predictors <strong>of</strong> such benefit, warrant further<br />

study.<br />

CT characteristics.<br />

HR� TN HER2�<br />

No. <strong>of</strong> pts, N (%) 102 49 45 22 58 28<br />

No. <strong>of</strong> CT lines<br />

median, min, xax<br />

Pts receiving nth CT line<br />

N, %<br />

3 1 9 3 1 8 4 1 9<br />

1 102 100 45 100 58 100<br />

2 79 77 36 80 44 76<br />

3 56 55 26 58 40 69<br />

4 38 37 13 29 30 52<br />

5 24 24 8 18 24 40<br />

6<br />

CT duration<br />

Median, 1st, 3rd quartile<br />

9 9 6 13 19 33<br />

1 6.5 2.9 12.0 5.8 2.8 10.7 9.0 4.3 13.1<br />

2 4.4 2.6 7.9 3.3 2.0 6.3 5.1 2.8 11.3<br />

3 3.6 1.9 6.0 2.8 2.1 6.8 6.3 2.9 8.3<br />

4 4.0 2.1 7.3 3.4 1.8 8.1 4.7 2.7 8.9<br />

5 3.5 1.9 6.5 2.6 1.9 3.2 4.0 2.3 7.0<br />

6 3.3 2.1 7.4 2.0 1.8 2.3 4.2 1.9 6.1<br />

6091 General Poster Session (Board #7H), Mon, 1:15 PM-5:15 PM<br />

Recruitment <strong>of</strong> cancer patients to National Institute for Health research<br />

cancer research network portfolio studies between 2001 and 2011.<br />

Presenting Author: Matthew Cooper, National Institute for Health Research<br />

Cancer Research Network, Leeds, United Kingdom<br />

Background: The National Institute for Health Research Cancer Research<br />

Network (NCRN) was established in 2001 in England, United Kingdom to<br />

improve cancer patient outcomes by improving the coordination, integration<br />

and speed <strong>of</strong> cancer research. Methods: Baseline recruitment <strong>of</strong> cancer<br />

patients in England to clinical studies was around 4% <strong>of</strong> incident<br />

population. Research Networks were established initially in England<br />

(NCRN) and then across the UK, co-terminus with clinical cancer service<br />

networks, and a per capita based funding model used to provide a research<br />

infrastructure to support recruitment to a nationally defined research<br />

portfolio. Results: Within 3 years, as the networks were established,<br />

recruitment <strong>of</strong> patients to studies doubled from 10,000 to 20,000 cancer<br />

patients per year. Recruitment has continued to increase year on year,<br />

supported initially by underspend that had accrued from earlier years in the<br />

life <strong>of</strong> NCRN, and more recently from additional resources invested via the<br />

NIHR comprehensive networks. Data for 2010/11 show that over 45,000<br />

cancer patients are now recruited into portfolio studies in England each<br />

year, with over 50,000 across the whole <strong>of</strong> the UK. Conclusions: Dedicated,<br />

targeted, clinician-led National Health Service investment into supporting<br />

national portfolio studies, has delivered an unprecedented five-fold increase<br />

in recruitment <strong>of</strong> cancer patients into clinical trials across the<br />

United Kingdom. This required coordinated research infrastructure, close<br />

cooperation with research funders, particularly Cancer Research UK and<br />

the National Cancer Research Institute, and the enthusiasm and hard work<br />

<strong>of</strong> many clinicians, patients and others working to deliver clinical cancer<br />

care in the National Health Service in the United Kingdom.<br />

6090 General Poster Session (Board #7G), Mon, 1:15 PM-5:15 PM<br />

Health-related quality <strong>of</strong> life assessment in EORTC cancer clinical trials.<br />

Presenting Author: Efstathios Zikos, European Organisation for Research<br />

and Treatment <strong>of</strong> Cancer Headquarters, Brussels, Belgium<br />

Background: Over the last three decades health-related quality <strong>of</strong> life<br />

(HRQOL) has become an important part <strong>of</strong> the randomised controlled trials<br />

(RCTs) conducted by the European Organisation for Research and Treatment<br />

<strong>of</strong> Cancer (EORTC). This review aims to undertake a descriptive<br />

database evaluation <strong>of</strong> all the HRQOL studies conducted in EORTC since<br />

1980. Methods: The EORTC protocol database (n�785) was reviewed,<br />

restricting the search to between 1980 and 2011 (n�735). We investigated<br />

the number <strong>of</strong> HRQOL studies conducted in EORTC trials, the RCTs’<br />

status and the use <strong>of</strong> HRQOL tools since 1980. Results: 157 protocols with<br />

HRQOL assessment were identified involving 70,903 patients. 73 studies<br />

ended as defined in the protocol; 27 studies closed early due to poor<br />

accrual; 17 are at the final analysis <strong>of</strong> the primary end point stage; 14<br />

studies are still open to recruitment; 11 are closed to patient entry; and 15<br />

new RCTs are pending activation with HRQOL. The majority <strong>of</strong> phase III<br />

(n�135) and phase II/III (n�9) RCTs have HRQOL as secondary endpoint.<br />

EORTC also conducted a number <strong>of</strong> large scale field studies (n�11), where<br />

HRQOL was the primary endpoint. During the early period <strong>of</strong> 1980 to 1989<br />

HRQOL was assessed in 12 EORTC RCTs by using a small number <strong>of</strong><br />

HRQOL items, but from 1990 to 2000, HRQOL was assessed in 97 RCTs<br />

using more comprehensive HRQOL tools. Between 2001 and 2011 the<br />

number <strong>of</strong> RCTs with HRQOL was 48. The EORTC clinical groups with the<br />

most RCTs containing HRQOL were Radiation Oncology (n�22), Genito-<br />

Urinary (n�20), Gynaecological (n�16), Breast Cancer (n�16), Lung<br />

(n�13), Gastrointestinal, (n�13) and Brain (n�10). The EORTC HRQOL<br />

tools were used in 90% <strong>of</strong> the trials, with other validated tools being used<br />

when required. Conclusions: Our review <strong>of</strong> EORTC RCTs has shown how<br />

patient perspective has been constantly considered <strong>of</strong> major importance in<br />

oncology during the last three decades. The inclusion <strong>of</strong> patient perspective<br />

in drug development shows that a more comprehensive HRQOL assessment<br />

has taken place over time as better instruments have become available. As<br />

the positive value <strong>of</strong> patient perspective grows to clinicians, regulatory<br />

bodies and industry, we expect that EORTC will continue its support by<br />

including HRQOL endpoints where appropriate.<br />

6092 General Poster Session (Board #8A), Mon, 1:15 PM-5:15 PM<br />

Characterizing fatigue associated with sunitinib (SU) in patients (pts) with<br />

metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Presenting Author: David Cella,<br />

Department <strong>of</strong> Medical Social Sciences, Northwestern University Feinberg<br />

School <strong>of</strong> Medicine, Chicago, IL<br />

Background: Fatigue is common in cancer pts and associated with use <strong>of</strong><br />

tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) such as SU. Limited data exist on the time<br />

pattern <strong>of</strong> fatigue with TKI therapy. Methods: Data from treatment-naïve<br />

mRCC pts in SU arms <strong>of</strong> two clinical trials were analyzed retrospectively.<br />

Study 1; 375 pts were randomized to SU 50 mg/d on a 4 weeks-on-2-weeks<strong>of</strong>f<br />

schedule (Schedule 4/2), for up to 30 cycles. Study 2; pts were<br />

randomized to SU 50 mg/d Schedule 4/2 (Group 1; n�146) or 37.5 mg/d<br />

continuous daily dosing (CDD; Group 2; n�146). In both trials, fatigue was<br />

measured with the question to pts: “I feel fatigued” over the past week<br />

(5-point rating scale, not at all-very much), and with the provider-rated<br />

Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE). In addition to<br />

descriptive pr<strong>of</strong>iles, Study 1 used two modeling approaches; repeated<br />

measures model (M1), with time as a categorical predictor; and random<br />

intercept-slope model (M2), with time as a continuous predictor. Study 2<br />

calculated mean absolute values <strong>of</strong> within-cycle rate <strong>of</strong> change (from one<br />

assessment to the next) through the first 6 treatment cycles. Results: In<br />

Study 1, representing fatigue across cycles, M1 showed that the initial<br />

increase in patient-reported fatigue was worst during Cycle 1; mean values<br />

at all subsequent cycles were numerically better. For CTCAE fatigue, M1<br />

showed that all but one <strong>of</strong> the pair-wise comparisons <strong>of</strong> the cycle means<br />

were not significantly different. M2 showed that the overall trend for<br />

patient-reported fatigue and CTCAE fatigue was not statistically different<br />

from zero. In Study 2, the mean absolute rate <strong>of</strong> change for fatigue during 6<br />

treatment cycles was greater for Group 1 (4/2) compared to Group 2 (CDD):<br />

0.042 vs. 0.032, respectively; P�0.003, t-test. Conclusions: In Study 1,<br />

pts reported notable fatigue in Cycle 1, which improved or stabilized,<br />

thereafter. In Study 2, Schedule 4/2 was associated with more within-cycle<br />

fluctuation in fatigue. These findings illustrate how SU-associated fatigue<br />

occurs early in therapy and continues with more within-cycle fluctuation<br />

associated with 4/2 dosing. This may help patient-clinician communications<br />

and interventions that support maintaining effective therapy.<br />

Visit abstract.asco.org and search by abstract for the full list <strong>of</strong> abstract authors and their disclosure information.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!