Search

Background: Cancer-associated venous thromboembolism (VTE) management guideline recommendations include continued therapeutic anticoagulation while active cancer persists. The Federal Drug Administration label for apixaban for secondary VTE prevention includes a dose reduction to 2.5 mg twice daily after 6 months of treatment., Objectives: The study's purpose was to determine whether this dose reduction is advisable for cancer-associated VTE., Methods: A randomized, double-blind trial compared apixaban 2.5 mg with 5 mg twice daily for 12 months among cancer patients with VTE who had completed 6 to 12 months of anticoagulation therapy. The primary outcome was combined major bleeding plus clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding., Results: Of 370 patients recruited, 360 were included in the intention-to-treat analyses. Major plus clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding occurred in 16 of 179 patients (8.9%) in the apixaban 2.5 mg group compared with 22 of 181 patients (12.2%) in the 5 mg group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.72; 95% CI, 0.38-1.37; P = .39). Major bleeding occurred in 2.8% of the apixaban 2.5 mg group and in 2.2% of the 5 mg group (HR, 1.26; 95% CI, 0.34-4.66; P = .73). Recurrent VTE or arterial thrombosis occurred in 9 of 179 patients (5.0%) in the apixaban 2.5 mg group and 9 of 181 patients (5.0%) in the 5 mg group (HR, 1.0; 95% CI, 0.40-2.53; P = 1.00). All-cause mortality rates were similar between groups, 13% vs 12% (HR, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.63-2.04; P = .67)., Conclusion: For secondary prevention of cancer-associated VTE, apixaban 2.5 mg compared with 5 mg twice daily did not lower combined bleeding events (EVE trial NCT03080883)., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interests The authors declare no competing financial interests., (Copyright © 2024 International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Individuals diagnosed with cancer between 15 and 39 years (adolescent and young adult [AYA]) face unique vulnerability. Detail is lacking about care delivery for these patients, especially those with ALL. We address these knowledge gaps by describing AYA ALL care delivery details at National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP) (sub)affiliates by model of care., Methods: Participating institutions treated at least one AYA with ALL from 2012 to 2016. Study-specific criteria were used to determine the number of unique clinical facilities (CFs) per NCORP and their model of care (adult/internal medicine [IM], pediatric, mixed [both]). Surveys completed by NCORPs for each CF by model of care captured size, resources, services, and communication., Results: Among 84 participating CFs (adult/IM, n=47; pediatric, n=15; mixed, n=24), 34% treated 5-10 AYAs with ALL annually; adult/IM CFs more often treated <5 (adult/IM, 60%; pediatric, 40%; mixed, 29%). Referral decisions were commonly driven by an age/diagnosis combination (58%), with frequent ALL-specific age minimums (87%) or maximums (80%). Medical, navigational, and social work services were similar across models while psychology was available at more pediatric CFs (pediatric, 80%; adult/IM, 40%; mixed, 46%-54%). More pediatric or mixed CFs reported oncologists interacting with pediatric/adult counterparts via tumor boards (pediatric, 93%; adult/IM, 26%; mixed, 96%) or initiating contact (pediatric, 100%; adult/IM, 77%; mixed 96%); more pediatric CFs reported an affiliated counterpart (pediatric, 53%; adult, 19%). Most CFs reported no AYA-specific resources (79%) or meetings (83%-98%)., Conclusion: System-level aspects of AYA ALL care delivery have not been examined previously. At NCORPs, these characteristics differ by models of care. Additional work is ongoing to investigate the impact of these facility-level factors on guideline-concordant care in this population. Together, these findings can inform a system-level intervention for diverse practice settings.

Introduction: Older adults with cancer have unique fall risk factors related to their disease and treatment such as polypharmacy and neurotoxic treatments. In this secondary analysis, we identified modifiable risk factors associated with future falls among older adults with advanced cancers., Materials and Methods: Data were from the COACH study (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02107443; PI: Mohile). Patients were age ≥ 70, had stage III/IV solid tumor or lymphoma, ≥1 geriatric assessment impairment, and were receiving palliative intent treatment. Falls were self-reported at baseline (in the past six months), four to six weeks, three months, and six months. We generated inverse probability weights to account for mortality-related loss to follow-up and applied these in generalized linear mixed models to estimate incidence rate ratios., Results: Of 541 patients (mean age: 77, standard deviation [SD]: 5.27), 140 (26%) reported prior falls at baseline, and 467 (86%) had falls data for ≥1 follow-up timepoint. Of those, 103 (22%) reported at least one fall during the follow-up period, and 112 (24%) had incomplete follow-up due to death. In fully adjusted models, prior falls and impaired Timed Up and Go score were associated with higher incidence of falls over 6 months., Discussion: We identified several potentially modifiable fall risk factors in older adults with advanced cancers. Future studies should consider ways to integrate fall risk assessment into ongoing cancer care and intervene to reduce falls in this population., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest Dr. Loh has served as a consultant to Pfizer and Seattle Genetics and has received honoraria from Pfizer. Dr. Ramsdale has received honoraria from Flatiron Health. Dr. Wildes reports receiving consulting fees from Carevive Systems, Sanofi, and Pfizer., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

The National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute-funded National MDS Natural History Study (NCT02775383) is a prospective cohort study enrolling patients with cytopenia with suspected myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) to evaluate factors associated with disease. Here, we sequenced 53 genes in bone marrow samples harvested from 1298 patients diagnosed with myeloid malignancy, including MDS and non-MDS myeloid malignancy or alternative marrow conditions with cytopenia based on concordance between independent histopathologic reviews (local, centralized, and tertiary to adjudicate disagreements when needed). We developed a novel 2-stage diagnostic classifier based on mutational profiles in 18 of 53 sequenced genes that were sufficient to best predict a diagnosis of myeloid malignancy and among those with a predicted myeloid malignancy, predict whether they had MDS. The classifier achieved a positive predictive value (PPV) of 0.84 and negative predictive value (NPV) of 0.8 with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of 0.85 when classifying patients as having myeloid vs no myeloid malignancy based on variant allele frequencies (VAFs) in 17 genes and a PPV of 0.71 and NPV of 0.64 with an AUROC of 0.73 when classifying patients as having MDS vs non-MDS malignancy based on VAFs in 10 genes. We next assessed how this approach could complement histopathology to improve diagnostic accuracy. For 99 of 139 (71%) patients (PPV of 0.83 and NPV of 0.65) with local and centralized histopathologic disagreement in myeloid vs no myeloid malignancy, the classifier-predicted diagnosis agreed with the tertiary pathology review (considered the internal gold standard)., (Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), permitting only noncommercial, nonderivative use with attribution.)

Importance: A poor prognostic understanding regarding curability is associated with lower odds of hospice use among patients with cancer. However, the association between poor prognostic understanding or prognostic discordance and health care use among older adults with advanced incurable cancers is not well characterized., Objective: To evaluate the association of poor prognostic understanding and patient-oncologist prognostic discordance with hospitalization and hospice use among older adults with advanced cancers., Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a post hoc secondary analysis of a cluster randomized clinical trial that recruited patients from October 29, 2014, to April 28, 2017. Data were collected from community oncology practices affiliated with the University of Rochester Cancer Center National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program. The parent trial enrolled 541 patients who were aged 70 years or older and were receiving or considering any line of cancer treatment for incurable solid tumors or lymphomas; the patients' oncologists and caregivers (if available) were also enrolled. Patients were followed up for at least 1 year. Data were analyzed from January 3 to 16, 2021., Main Outcomes and Measures: At enrollment, patients and oncologists were asked about their beliefs regarding cancer curability (100%, >50%, 50%, <50%, and 0%; answers other than 0% reflected poor prognostic understanding) and life expectancy (≤6 months, 7-12 months, 1-2 years, 2-5 years, and >5 years; answers of >5 years reflected poor prognostic understanding). Any difference between oncologist and patient in response options was considered discordant. Outcomes were any hospitalization and hospice use at 6 months captured by the clinical research associates., Results: Among the 541 patients, the mean (SD) age was 76.6 (5.2) years, 264 of 540 (49%) were female, and 486 of 540 (90%) were White. Poor prognostic understanding regarding curability was reported for 59% (206 of 348) of patients, and poor prognostic understanding regarding life expectancy estimates was reported for 41% (205 of 496) of patients. Approximately 60% (202 of 336) of patient-oncologist dyads were discordant regarding curability, and 72% (356 of 492) of patient-oncologist dyads were discordant regarding life expectancy estimates. Poor prognostic understanding regarding life expectancy estimates was associated with lower odds of hospice use (adjusted odds ratio, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.16-0.59). Discordance regarding life expectancy estimates was associated with greater odds of hospitalization (adjusted odds ratio, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.01-2.66)., Conclusions and Relevance: This study highlights different constructs of prognostic understanding and the need to better understand the association between prognostic understanding and health care use among older adult patients with advanced cancer., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02107443.

Context: Systematic collection of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) reduces symptom burden and improves quality of life. The ability of older adults to complete PROs, however, has not been thoroughly studied., Objectives: To determine whether older adults with advanced cancer received assistance completing PROs, the nature of the assistance, the factors associated with receiving assistance, and how the prevalence of assistance changed over time., Methods: Data were obtained from a multisite cluster randomized controlled study of geriatric assessment (Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02107443). Adults ≥70 years with advanced cancer completed multiple PROs at 4 time points (enrollment, 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months). Factors associated with receipt of assistance were assessed with bivariate and multivariate analyses., Results: The study included 541 adults (range 70-96 years, 49% female, mixed incurable cancer diagnoses). Twenty-eight percent (153/541) received assistance completing PROs. Of these, 42% received assistance from caregivers, 37% from research staff, and 15% from both. Factors associated with receiving assistance included older age [Adjusted Odds Ratio (AOR) 3.71, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 1.03-13.38], lower education level (3.92, 2.11-7.29), impaired cognition (1.90, 1.23-2.93), impaired functional status (2.16, 1.33-3.52), and impaired hearing (1.38, 1.05-1.80). Eighty percent of individuals who received assistance were identified at study initiation. Receiving assistance decreased over time from 28% to 18%, partially due to drop-outs., Conclusion: Over a quarter of older adults with advanced cancer in this study received assistance completing PROs. Completing PROs is a key aspect of many clinical programs and cancer trials; assistance in completing PROs should be offered and provided., (Copyright © 2021 American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Feasibility assessments (FAs) are important to establish site capabilities to conduct clinical trials and their suitability for specific trials. However, current FA methods used by biotechnology and pharmaceutical (biotech-pharma) trial sponsors and contract research organizations (CROs) are costly, inefficient, unnecessarily burdensome, and resource intensive. These methods delay trial start-up, act as a barrier to site participation, and ultimately reduce timely patient access to clinical trials and novel treatments., Methods: An ASCO Task Force was convened to assess the specific burdens and challenges with FAs and to develop recommendations to improve their efficiencies and effectiveness. Stakeholders (including trial sites, biotech-pharma sponsors, and CROs) provided insights into challenges and offered solutions through two surveys and an in-person meeting. The Task Force used the feedback to formulate consensus recommendations to improve FAs for oncology clinical trials., Results: Three key recommendations were identified for application across all biotech-pharma sponsored trials: (1) implement a streamlined and uniform FA process across trials and sponsors; (2) minimize and standardize questions; and (3) leverage technology to centralize FAs, facilitate communications, and reduce redundancies., Conclusion: There is an urgency to improve the current FA process, which is costly, inconsistent, inefficient, labor intensive, and of uncertain effectiveness. All stakeholders stand to benefit from implementing these recommendations, which aim to minimize burdens and ensure that more trial sites and patients have timely access to oncology clinical trials. To have meaningful impact, adoption and consistent execution of these recommendations across all trials, sponsors, CROs, and sites are essential.

Importance: Older patients with cancer and their caregivers worry about the effects of cancer treatment on aging-related domains (eg, function and cognition). Quality conversations with oncologists about aging-related concerns could improve patient-centered outcomes. A geriatric assessment (GA) can capture evidence-based aging-related conditions associated with poor clinical outcomes (eg, toxic effects) for older patients with cancer., Objective: To determine whether providing a GA summary and GA-guided recommendations to oncologists can improve communication about aging-related concerns., Design, Setting, and Participants: This cluster-randomized clinical trial enrolled 541 participants from 31 community oncology practices within the University of Rochester National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program from October 29, 2014, to April 28, 2017. Patients were aged 70 years or older with an advanced solid malignant tumor or lymphoma who had at least 1 impaired GA domain; patients chose 1 caregiver to participate. The primary outcome was assessed on an intent-to-treat basis., Interventions: Oncology practices were randomized to receive either a tailored GA summary with recommendations for each enrolled patient (intervention) or alerts only for patients meeting criteria for depression or cognitive impairment (usual care)., Main Outcomes and Measures: The predetermined primary outcome was patient satisfaction with communication about aging-related concerns (modified Health Care Climate Questionnaire [score range, 0-28; higher scores indicate greater satisfaction]), measured after the first oncology visit after the GA. Secondary outcomes included the number of aging-related concerns discussed during the visit (from content analysis of audiorecordings), quality of life (measured with the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy scale for patients and the 12-Item Short Form Health Survey for caregivers), and caregiver satisfaction with communication about aging-related patient concerns., Results: A total of 541 eligible patients (264 women, 276 men, and 1 patient did not provide data; mean [SD] age, 76.6 [5.2] years) and 414 caregivers (310 women, 101 men, and 3 caregivers did not provide data; mean age, 66.5 [12.5] years) were enrolled. Patients in the intervention group were more satisfied after the visit with communication about aging-related concerns (difference in mean score, 1.09 points; 95% CI, 0.05-2.13 points; P = .04); satisfaction with communication about aging-related concerns remained higher in the intervention group over 6 months (difference in mean score, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.04-2.16; P = .04). There were more aging-related conversations in the intervention group's visits (difference, 3.59; 95% CI, 2.22-4.95; P < .001). Caregivers in the intervention group were more satisfied with communication after the visit (difference, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.12-1.98; P = .03). Quality of life outcomes did not differ between groups., Conclusions and Relevance: Including GA in oncology clinical visits for older adults with advanced cancer improves patient-centered and caregiver-centered communication about aging-related concerns., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02107443.

Objectives: To evaluate the relationships between aging-related domains captured by geriatric assessment (GA) for older patients with advanced cancer and caregivers' emotional health and quality of life (QOL)., Design: In this cross sectional study of baseline data from a nationwide investigation of older patients and their caregivers, patients completed a GA that included validated tests to evaluate eight domains of health (eg, function, cognition)., Setting: Thirty-one community oncology practices throughout the United States., Participants: Enrolled patients were aged 70 and older, had one or more GA domain impaired, and had an incurable solid tumor malignancy or lymphoma. Each could choose one caregiver to enroll., Measurements: Caregivers completed the Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7, Distress Thermometer, Patient Health Questionnaire-2 (depression), and Short Form Health Survey-12 (SF-12 for QOL). Separate multivariate linear or logistic regression models were used to examine the association of the number and type of patient GA impairments with caregiver outcomes, controlling for patient and caregiver covariates., Results: A total of 541 patients were enrolled, 414 with a caregiver. Almost half (43.5%) of the caregivers screened positive for distress, 24.4% for anxiety, and 18.9% for depression. Higher numbers of patient GA domain impairments were associated with caregiver depression (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.29; P < .001], caregiver physical health on SF-12 (regression coefficient [β] = -1.24; P < .001), and overall caregiver QOL (β = -1.14; P < .01). Impaired patient function was associated with lower caregiver QOL (β = -4.11; P < .001). Impaired patient nutrition was associated with caregiver depression (aOR = 2.08; P < .01). Lower caregiver age, caregiver comorbidity, and patient distress were also associated with worse caregiver outcomes., Conclusion: Patient GA impairments were associated with poorer emotional health and lower QOL of caregivers. J Am Geriatr Soc 67:969-977, 2019., (© 2019 The American Geriatrics Society.)

Background: Supporting patients' decision making about clinical trials may enhance trial participation. To date, few theory-based interventions have been tested to address this issue. The objective of the current study was aimed to evaluate the effect of a multimedia psychoeducation (MP) intervention, relative to a print education (PE) intervention, on patients' decision support needs and attitudes about clinical trials., Methods: Patients with cancer who were eligible for participation in a National Cancer Institute therapeutic cancer clinical trial were recruited through the nationwide University of Rochester Cancer Center National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program from 2014 to 2016 and were randomized to the MP or PE intervention. Assessments at baseline (before intervention), postintervention, and at a 2-month follow-up visit included patients' decision support needs, attitudes regarding clinical trials, and clinical trial participation., Results: In total, 418 patients with various types of cancer were recruited (ages 26-89 years). Relative to the PE intervention, the MP intervention did not significantly affect decision support needs. However, patients in the MP arm reported significantly more positive attitudes about clinical trials and were more likely to participate in a clinical trial than those in the PE arm (69% vs 62%; P = .01). Furthermore, an improvement in attitudes about clinical trials significantly mediated the effect of the intervention on participation in clinical trials., Conclusions: The MP intervention was able to improve patient attitudes toward clinical trials compared with the PE intervention, and this improvement led to increased rates of participation in trials. The MP intervention could be disseminated to improve attitudes about clinical trials among patients with cancer., (© 2018 American Cancer Society.)

Background: This study's objectives were to describe community oncologists' beliefs about and confidence with geriatric care and to determine whether geriatric-relevant information influences cancer treatment decisions. Methods: Community oncologists were recruited to participate in 2 multisite geriatric oncology trials. Participants shared their beliefs about and confidence in caring for older adults. They were also asked to make a first-line chemotherapy recommendation (combination vs single-agent vs no chemotherapy) for a hypothetical vignette of an older patient with advanced pancreatic cancer. Each oncologist received one randomly chosen vignette that varied on 3 variables: age (72/84 years), impaired function (yes/no), and cognitive impairment (yes/no). Other patient characteristics were held constant. Logistic regression models were used to identify associations between oncologist/vignette-patient characteristics and treatment decisions. Results: Oncologist response rate was 61% (n=305/498). Most oncologists agreed that "the care of older adults with cancer needs to be improved" (89%) and that "geriatrics training is essential" (72%). However, <25% were "very confident" in recognizing dementia or conducting a fall risk or functional assessment, and only 23% reported using the geriatric assessment in clinic. Each randomly varied patient characteristic was independently associated with the decision to treat: younger age (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 5.01; 95% CI, 2.73-9.20), normal cognition (aOR, 5.42; 95% CI, 3.01-9.76), and being functionally intact (aOR, 3.85; 95% CI, 2.12-7.00). Accounting for all vignettes across all scenarios, 161 oncologists (52%) said they would offer chemotherapy. All variables were independently associated with prescribing single-agent over combination chemotherapy (older age: aOR, 3.22; 95% CI 1.43-7.25, impaired cognition: aOR, 3.13; 95% CI, 1.36-7.20, impaired function: aOR, 2.48; 95% CI, 1.12-5.72). Oncologists' characteristics were not associated with decisions about providing chemotherapy. Conclusion: Geriatric-relevant information, when available, strongly influences community oncologists' treatment decisions., (Copyright © 2018 by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network.)

The sum of these intervention studies suggests that a CGA can be performed in a variety of settings (inpatient, outpatient, or home), is a multidisciplinary effort, and can lead to interventions that may decrease the risk of morbidity and mortality in older patients with cancer. Further studies are needed using a CGA to (1) guide and test interventions to improve the care of older adults with cancer and (2) evaluate the impact of cancer therapy on geriatric assessment domains.

The proteasome was validated as an oncology target following the clinical success of VELCADE (bortezomib) for injection for the treatment of multiple myeloma and recurring mantle cell lymphoma. Consequently, several groups are pursuing the development of additional small-molecule proteasome inhibitors for both hematologic and solid tumor indications. Here, we describe MLN9708, a selective, orally bioavailable, second-generation proteasome inhibitor that is in phase I clinical development. MLN9708 has a shorter proteasome dissociation half-life and improved pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and antitumor activity compared with bortezomib. MLN9708 has a larger blood volume distribution at steady state, and analysis of 20S proteasome inhibition and markers of the unfolded protein response confirmed that MLN9708 has greater pharmacodynamic effects in tissues than bortezomib. MLN9708 showed activity in both solid tumor and hematologic preclinical xenograft models, and we found a correlation between greater pharmacodynamic responses and improved antitumor activity. Moreover, antitumor activity was shown via multiple dosing routes, including oral gavage. Taken together, these data support the clinical development of MLN9708 for both hematologic and solid tumor indications.

Motivation: The development of microarray-based high-throughput gene profiling has led to the hope that this technology could provide an efficient and accurate means of diagnosing and classifying tumors, as well as predicting prognoses and effective treatments. However, the large amount of data generated by microarrays requires effective reduction of discriminant gene features into reliable sets of tumor biomarkers for such multiclass tumor discrimination. The availability of reliable sets of biomarkers, especially serum biomarkers, should have a major impact on our understanding and treatment of cancer., Results: We have combined genetic algorithm (GA) and all paired (AP) support vector machine (SVM) methods for multiclass cancer categorization. Predictive features can be automatically determined through iterative GA/SVM, leading to very compact sets of non-redundant cancer-relevant genes with the best classification performance reported to date. Interestingly, these different classifier sets harbor only modest overlapping gene features but have similar levels of accuracy in leave-one-out cross-validations (LOOCV). Further characterization of these optimal tumor discriminant features, including the use of nearest shrunken centroids (NSC), analysis of annotations and literature text mining, reveals previously unappreciated tumor subclasses and a series of genes that could be used as cancer biomarkers. With this approach, we believe that microarray-based multiclass molecular analysis can be an effective tool for cancer biomarker discovery and subsequent molecular cancer diagnosis.