Search

In this article, we present a brief history of cancer advocacy and discuss the variety of ways advocates have become involved in cancer research and subsequently present principles that establish a framework for successful research advocacy based on a review of many early initiatives coupled with our knowledge as long-time cancer advocates. Challenges to effective advocacy are described, and recommendations for increasing meaningful contributions by research advocates are proposed. The purpose of this article is to discuss the exciting field of research advocacy and to help shape a more productive future for advocates and their scientific collaborators. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Explores strategies for managing classroom behavior of children with behavior problems. Teachers' concerns about the inclusion of children with special needs; Application of a constructivist approach by capitalizing on the social context and social activity in a classroom; Strategies for teaching children how to manage their own behavior and be responsible members of a community.

Discusses the diagnostic and therapeutic roles of children's rough-and-tumble (R&T) play. Definition of R&T; Difference between R&T and aggressive behavior; Results of a study of elementary school children's R&T and aggression; Therapeutic role of R&T.

Presents a study on the behaviors of African-American Head Start children and their mothers around a series of experimental joint reading contexts in their homes. Uses for the mother-child reading paradigm; Methodology; Results and discussion.

Describes ways and approaches in learning mathematics. Exploration of natural learning processes; Open-ended problem-solving challenges; Real life applications of mathematics; Investigations as official mathematics activities; Encouragement of critical thinking skills by making choices; Areas for investigations; Other mathematical activities in the classroom.

Ethically sound clinical research requires that prospective study participants provide voluntary informed consent before any study procedures begin. The original intent was to provide the participant with clear, accurate information about study specifics (e.g., risks/benefits) to aid in the decision to participate. Broad consensus among sponsors, research staff, study participants, and advocates indicate that the current process could be improved to enhance participants' understanding of study-related information and meet the needs of individuals. The Clinical Trials Transformation Initiative (CTTI) convened a project to identify problems in the current process and to formulate recommendations for improvement. A literature review, expert interviews, and multi-stakeholder meeting were conducted to identify barriers and develop solutions for a more effective informed consent process. Four key topics were the foundation of the recommendations: 1) defining an effective informed consent process, 2) training research staff, 3) improving the informed consent document, and 4) exploring the use of electronic consent. The ideal informed consent process involves an ongoing, interactive conversation between the participant and knowledgeable, responsive research staff who were trained in best practices. The informed consent process should be supported by a tiered informed consent document that provides critically relevant information to aid in the decision to participate in a study. Adoption of the CTTI informed consent recommendations should lead to a more participant-centric informed consent process. Participant involvement better meets the needs of participants and benefits the clinical trial enterprise by promoting a research culture that encourages informed participation in clinical studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Importance: Electronic systems that facilitate patient-reported outcome (PRO) surveys for patients with cancer may detect symptoms early and prompt clinicians to intervene.Objective: To evaluate whether electronic symptom monitoring during cancer treatment confers benefits on quality-of-life outcomes.Design, Setting, and Participants: Report of secondary outcomes from the PRO-TECT (Alliance AFT-39) cluster randomized trial in 52 US community oncology practices randomized to electronic symptom monitoring with PRO surveys or usual care. Between October 2017 and March 2020, 1191 adults being treated for metastatic cancer were enrolled, with last follow-up on May 17, 2021.Interventions: In the PRO group, participants (n = 593) were asked to complete weekly surveys via an internet-based or automated telephone system for up to 1 year. Severe or worsening symptoms triggered care team alerts. The control group (n = 598) received usual care.Main Outcomes and Measures: The 3 prespecified secondary outcomes were physical function, symptom control, and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) at 3 months, measured by the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30; range, 0-100 points; minimum clinically important difference [MCID], 2-7 for physical function; no MCID defined for symptom control or HRQOL). Results on the primary outcome, overall survival, are not yet available.Results: Among 52 practices, 1191 patients were included (mean age, 62.2 years; 694 [58.3%] women); 1066 (89.5%) completed 3-month follow-up. Compared with usual care, mean changes on the QLQ-C30 from baseline to 3 months were significantly improved in the PRO group for physical function (PRO, from 74.27 to 75.81 points; control, from 73.54 to 72.61 points; mean difference, 2.47 [95% CI, 0.41-4.53]; P = .02), symptom control (PRO, from 77.67 to 80.03 points; control, from 76.75 to 76.55 points; mean difference, 2.56 [95% CI, 0.95-4.17]; P = .002), and HRQOL (PRO, from 78.11 to 80.03 points; control, from 77.00 to 76.50 points; mean difference, 2.43 [95% CI, 0.90-3.96]; P = .002). Patients in the PRO group had significantly greater odds of experiencing clinically meaningful benefits vs usual care for physical function (7.7% more with improvements of ≥5 points and 6.1% fewer with worsening of ≥5 points; odds ratio [OR], 1.35 [95% CI, 1.08-1.70]; P = .009), symptom control (8.6% and 7.5%, respectively; OR, 1.50 [95% CI, 1.15-1.95]; P = .003), and HRQOL (8.5% and 4.9%, respectively; OR, 1.41 [95% CI, 1.10-1.81]; P = .006).Conclusions and Relevance: In this report of secondary outcomes from a randomized clinical trial of adults receiving cancer treatment, use of weekly electronic PRO surveys to monitor symptoms, compared with usual care, resulted in statistically significant improvements in physical function, symptom control, and HRQOL at 3 months, with mean improvements of approximately 2.5 points on a 0- to 100-point scale. These findings should be interpreted provisionally pending results of the primary outcome of overall survival.Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03249090. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose.--To update key recommendations of the American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PgR) testing in breast cancer guideline. Methods.--A multidisciplinary international Expert Panel was convened to update the clinical practice guideline recommendations informed by a systematic review of the medical literature. Recommendations.--The Expert Panel continues to recommend ER testing of invasive breast cancers by validated immunohistochemistry as the standard for predicting which patients may benefit from endocrine therapy, and no other assays are recommended for this purpose. Breast cancer samples with 1%to 100%of tumor nuclei positive should be interpreted as ER positive. However, the Expert Panel acknowledges that there are limited data on endocrine therapy benefit for cancers with 1% to 10% of cells staining ER positive. Samples with these results should be reported using a new reporting category, ER Low Positive, with a recommended comment. A sample is considered ER negative if < 1% or 0% of tumor cell nuclei are immunoreactive. Additional strategies recommended to promote optimal performance, interpretation, and reporting of cases with an initial low to no ER staining result include establishing a laboratory-specific standard operating procedure describing additional steps used by the laboratory to confirm/adjudicate results. The status of controls should be reported for cases with 0% to 10% staining. Similar principles apply to PgR testing, which is used primarily for prognostic purposes in the setting of an ER-positive cancer. Testing of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) for ER is recommended to determine potential benefit of endocrine therapies to reduce risk of future breast cancer, while testing DCIS for PgR is considered optional. Additional information can be found at www.asco.org/breast-cancer-guidelines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Traditionally, drug development has evaluated dose, safety, activity, and comparative benefit in a sequence of phases using trial designs and endpoints specifically devised for each phase. Innovations in drug development seek to consolidate the phases and rapidly expand accrual with "seamless" trial designs. Although consolidation and rapid accrual may yield efficiencies, widespread use of seamless first-in-human (FiH) trials without careful consideration of objectives, statistical analysis plans, or trial oversight raises concerns. A working group formed by the National Cancer Institute convened to consider and discuss opportunities and challenges for such trials as well as encourage responsible use of these designs. We reviewed all abstracts presented at American Society of Clinical Oncology annual meetings from 2010 to 2017 for FiH trials enrolling at least 100 patients. We identified 1786 early-phase trials enrolling 57 559 adult patients. Fifty-one of the trials (2.9%) investigated 50 investigational new drugs, were seamless, and accounted for 14.6% of the total patients. The seamless trials included a median of 3 (range = 1-13) expansion cohorts. The overall risk of clinically significant treatment-related adverse events (grade 3-4) was 49.1% (range = 0.0-100%), and seven studies reported at least one toxic death. Rapid expansion of FiH trials may lead to earlier drug approval and corresponding widespread patient access to active therapeutics. Nevertheless, seamless designs must adhere to established ethical, scientific, and statistical standards. Protocols should include prospectively planned analyses of efficacy in disease- or biomarker-defined cohorts of sufficient rigor to support accelerated approval. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Case reports and small prospective trials suggest that administering targeted therapies to patients with advanced cancer and an identified genomic target may be associated with clinical benefit. The Targeted Agent and Profiling Utilization Registry (TAPUR) study, a phase II prospective, nonrandomized, multibasket pragmatic clinical trial, aims to identify signals of drug activity when US Food and Drug Administration–approved drugs are matched to prespecified genomic targets in patients with advanced cancer, outside of approved indications. Methods: Patients eligible to participate in TAPUR are age ≥ 12 years and have advanced measurable or evaluable solid tumors, multiple myeloma, or B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Eligible participants are matched to any of the 16 US Food and Drug Administration–approved study drugs based on protocol-specified genomic inclusion and exclusion criteria. Genomic profiling from any Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments–certified, College of American Pathologists–accredited laboratory is acceptable. The treating physician selects the treatment from the available study therapies or consults with the TAPUR Molecular Tumor Board. Participants are placed into multiple parallel cohorts defined by tumor type, genomic alteration, and drug. The primary study end point within each cohort is objective response or stable disease of at least 16 weeks duration. Secondary end points include safety, progression-free survival, and overall survival. Results: More than 1,000 participants have thus far been registered, and more than 800 have been treated with a TAPUR study drug. Two study cohorts have permanently closed to enrollment because of lack of antitumor activity, and 12 have expanded to the second stage of enrollment after promising preliminary activity. Conclusion: The TAPUR study will describe the efficacy and toxicity of the targeted drugs used outside of their approved indications when matched to a somatic genomic variant. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Oncology providers are often confronted by patients who use complementary or alternative therapies, but have limited knowledge or confidence on how to advise patients on appropriate use. Despite this, there are few opportunities for oncology providers to learn about complementary or alternative therapies, while at the same time there is a high demand for integrative oncology (IO) training. To address a gap in IO educational opportunities, and particularly for nonphysicians, we created the Integrative Oncology Scholars (IOS) Program. The program's goal is to train 100 IO leaders and facilitate partnerships between them and complementary practitioners. Design: Four iterations of a year-long National Cancer Institute-funded educational program that combines in-person team-based learning and eLearning to teach the evidence, application, and philosophy supporting IO. Settings: In-person sessions take place at the University of Michigan, and eLearning is implemented using a Canvas website (Instructure, Inc., Salt Lake City, UT). Subjects: Nurses, social workers, physician assistants, psychologists, physicians, pharmacists, and physical/occupational therapists with active oncology practices. Educational intervention: Four cohorts of 25 oncology providers per year will learn the evidence base for complementary and alternative approaches to a wide number of oncology topics, including symptom control, dietary supplements commonly used by cancer patients, diet, and the utility of specific integrative approaches for common oncology side-effects such as fatigue. Outcome measures: A mixed methods approach will be used to evaluate overall IOS Program progress and individual scholar's impact on IO research, education, and clinical endeavors. Results: The first cohort of 25 IOS has been recruited and their education will begin in Summer 2018. Scholars come from 13 states and represent 23 different healthcare systems. Conclusions: The IOS Program has the potential to increase the number of trained IO providers, educators, and researchers in the United States. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Case reports and small prospective trials suggest that administering targeted therapies to patients with advanced cancer and an identified genomic target may be associated with clinical benefit. The Targeted Agent and Profiling Utilization Registry (TAPUR) study, a phase II prospective, nonrandomized, multibasket pragmatic clinical trial, aims to identify signals of drug activity when US Food and Drug Administration–approved drugs are matched to prespecified genomic targets in patients with advanced cancer, outside of approved indications. Methods: Patients eligible to participate in TAPUR are age ≥ 12 years and have advanced measurable or evaluable solid tumors, multiple myeloma, or B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Eligible participants are matched to any of the 16 US Food and Drug Administration–approved study drugs based on protocol-specified genomic inclusion and exclusion criteria. Genomic profiling from any Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments–certified, College of American Pathologists–accredited laboratory is acceptable. The treating physician selects the treatment from the available study therapies or consults with the TAPUR Molecular Tumor Board. Participants are placed into multiple parallel cohorts defined by tumor type, genomic alteration, and drug. The primary study end point within each cohort is objective response or stable disease of at least 16 weeks duration. Secondary end points include safety, progression-free survival, and overall survival. Results: More than 1,000 participants have thus far been registered, and more than 800 have been treated with a TAPUR study drug. Two study cohorts have permanently closed to enrollment because of lack of antitumor activity, and 12 have expanded to the second stage of enrollment after promising preliminary activity. Conclusion: The TAPUR study will describe the efficacy and toxicity of the targeted drugs used outside of their approved indications when matched to a somatic genomic variant. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Using pre-treatment gene expression, protein/phosphoprotein, and clinical data from the I-SPY2 neoadjuvant platform trial (NCT01042379), we create alternative breast cancer subtypes incorporating tumor biology beyond clinical hormone receptor (HR) and human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER2) status to better predict drug responses. We assess the predictive performance of mechanism-of-action biomarkers from ∼990 patients treated with 10 regimens targeting diverse biology. We explore >11 subtyping schemas and identify treatment-subtype pairs maximizing the pathologic complete response (pCR) rate over the population. The best performing schemas incorporate Immune, DNA repair, and HER2/Luminal phenotypes. Subsequent treatment allocation increases the overall pCR rate to 63% from 51% using HR/HER2-based treatment selection. pCR gains from reclassification and improved patient selection are highest in HR+ subsets (>15%). As new treatments are introduced, the subtyping schema determines the minimum response needed to show efficacy. This data platform provides an unprecedented resource and supports the usage of response-based subtypes to guide future treatment prioritization. [Display omitted] • The I-SPY2-990 Data Resource contains mRNA, protein, and response data over 10 drugs • Biomarkers are combined to create breast cancer subtypes to match modern treatments • Best subtyping schemas incorporate Immune, DNA repair, Luminal, and HER2 phenotypes • Treatment assignment using these response predictive subtypes may improve outcomes Wolf et al. use gene expression, protein levels, and response data from 10 drug arms of the I-SPY2 neoadjuvant trial to create new breast cancer subtypes that incorporate tumor biology beyond clinical hormone receptor (HR) and HER2 status. Use of these response-predictive subtypes to guide treatment prioritization may improve patient outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Research institutions differ in their willingness to defer to a single, central institutional review board (IRB) for multicenter clinical trials, despite statements from the FDA, OHRP, and NIH in support of using central IRBs to improve the efficiency of conducting trials. The Clinical Trials Transformation Initiative (CTTI) supported this project to solicit current perceptions of barriers to the use of central IRBs and to formulate potential solutions. We held discussions with IRB experts, interviewed representatives of research institutions, and held an expert meeting with diverse stakeholder groups and thought leaders. We found that many perceived barriers relate to conflating responsibilities of the institution with the ethical review responsibilities of the IRB. We identified the need for concrete tools to help research institutions separate institutional responsibilities from ethical responsibilities required of the IRB. One such tool is a document we created that delineates these responsibilities and how they might be assigned to each entity, or, in some cases, both entities. This tool and project recommendations will be broadly disseminated to facilitate the use of central IRBs in multicenter trials. The ultimate goal is to increase the nation's capacity to efficiently conduct the large number of high-quality trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose.--To develop a guideline to improve the accuracy of immunohistochemical (IHC) estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PgR) testing in breast cancer and the utility of these receptors as predictive markers. Methods.--The American Society of Clinical Oncology and the College of American Pathologists convened an international Expert Panel that conducted a systematic review and evaluation of the literature in partnership with Cancer Care Ontario and developed recommendations for optimal IHC ER/PgR testing performance. Results.--Up to 20% of current IHC determinations of ER and PgR testing worldwide may be inaccurate (false negative or false positive). Most of the issues with testing have occurred because of variation in pre-analytic variables, thresholds for positivity, and interpretation criteria. Recommendations.--The Panel recommends that ER and PgR status be determined on all invasive breast cancers and breast cancer recurrences. A testing algorithm that relies on accurate, reproducible assay performance is proposed. Elements to reliably reduce assay variation are specified. It is recommended that ER and PgR assays be considered positive if there are at least 1% positive tumor nuclei in the sample on testing in the presence of expected reactivity of internal (normal epithelial elements) and external controls. The absence of benefit from endocrine therapy for women with ER-negative invasive breast cancers has been confirmed in large overviews of randomized clinical trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose.--To develop a guideline to improve the accuracy of immunohistochemical (IHC) estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PgR) testing in breast cancer and the utility of these receptors as predictive markers. Methods.--The American Society of Clinical Oncology and the College of American Pathologists convened an international Expert Panel that conducted a systematic review and evaluation of the literature in partnership with Cancer Care Ontario and developed recommendations for optimal IHC ER/PgR testing performance. Results.--Up to 20% of current IHC determinations of ER and PgR testing worldwide may be inaccurate (false negative or false positive). Most of the issues with testing have occurred because of variation in preanalytic variables, thresholds for positivity, and interpretation criteria. Recommendations.--The Panel recommends that ER and PgR status be determined on all invasive breast cancers and breast cancer recurrences. A testing algorithm that relies on accurate, reproducible assay performance is proposed. Elements to reliably reduce assay variation are specified. It is recommended that ER and PgR assays be considered positive if there are at least 1% positive tumor nuclei in the sample on testing in the presence of expected reactivity of internal (normal epithelial elements) and external controls. The absence of benefit from endocrine therapy for women with ER-negative invasive breast cancers has been confirmed in large overviews of randomized clinical trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The intent of this study was to examine the ways in which Head Start children's vocabulary was developed when they and their mothers engaged in joint reading contexts. Nineteen dyads were observed while interacting around expository texts presented in two formats: familiar (newspaper toy advertisements) and traditional (trade books). Dyads in this study were observed in their homes across four observations while reading a series of presented texts. Children's ability to identify words from the texts read was measured as was their comprehension of a standardized receptive vocabulary list. Mothers talked more than children in all contexts; furthermore, different forms of talk were observed around the different text formats. Correlational and sequential analyses indicated that children's word recall was best predicted by responsive maternal strategies, such as encouraging children to talk about the text, and children's modelling maternal strategies. Word recall and vocabulary, however, was significantly correlated with children's language generated around traditional, not familiar, format texts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]