Search

PURPOSE: We determine how stakeholders prioritize the importance of oncologic outcomes, patient-reported outcomes (PROs), and cancer-related health care costs. METHODS: A survey was distributed to the National Clinical Trials Network Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology cooperative group membership from May 14 to June 30, 2022. Respondents were asked to rate (5-point Likert scale) and rank (1-9) evidence-based value domains: overall survival, treatment toxicities/complications, quality of life (QOL), financial toxicity, access to care, compliance with evidence-based care, health system performance, scientific discovery and innovation, and cost to the health care system. RESULTS:A total of 514 members responded, including researchers (24.7%), nurses (19.5%), medical oncologists (17.9%), administrators (9.3%), surgical and radiation oncologists (9.1%), patient advocates (3.1%), and nonphysician providers (16.4%). Participants represented various practice settings including National Cancer Institute–designated cancer centers (29.8%), university-affiliated academic cancer centers (21%), hospital-owned oncology practices (21.8%), and others (27.4%). There was agreement in how respondents prioritized value domains (W = 0.39, P = 001). Respondents ranked patient QOL (mean rank: 2.6 ± 1.9) as most important above all other metrics including survival (mean rank: 3.5 ± 0.3) and access to care (mean rank: 3.5 ± 2.1; P = .001). Members engaged in direct patient care also ranked access to care of higher importance than nonclinicians (P = 026). Cost to the health care system (mean rank: 7.5 ± 2.1) and health system performance (mean rank: 7 ± 2) were ranked as least important (P < 001). Inclusion of PROs into therapeutic assessment (59.3%) was the most frequently selected priority of future cooperative group initiatives. CONCLUSION: Oncology community stakeholders deemed patient-centered value domains as most important and considered patient QOL the highest priority. Inclusion of PROs into clinical trials was endorsed as an important component of therapeutic assessment. These findings can be taken into consideration when creating a value framework for inclusion in cancer clinical trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Sacituzumab Govitecan (also known by the brand name TRODELVY®) is a new and available treatment for metastatic triple-negative breast cancer, or mTNBC for short. Metastatic breast cancer means the breast cancer has spread to other parts of the body. Triple negative means the breast cancer does not have 3 common proteins on the cell surface called receptors. This is a summary of the ASCENT study, published in the New England Journal of Medicine in April 2021. This study compared Sacituzumab Govitecan with standard chemotherapy. Chemotherapy is a treatment that kills cancer cells or stops them from dividing. 529 people with mTNBC took part in the study across 7 countries. All who took part had already received 2 previous chemotherapies, which stopped working for their cancer. The study showed that patients who took Sacituzumab Govitecan lived longer than those who took a different chemotherapy while on the study. Tumors shrank in more patients who took Sacituzumab Govitecan than in patients who took chemotherapy. In general, patients who took Sacituzumab Govitecan experienced more side effects. This included low levels of a type of white blood cell known as neutrophils (neutropenia) and loose or watery stool (diarrhea). Use of supportive care lessened these side effects. This summary also includes insights and perspectives from 2 breast cancer patient advocates. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT number: NCT02574455. To read the full Plain Language Summary of this article, click on the View Article button above and download the PDF.Link to original article here. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]