Timeliness of completion of NCI cooperative group trials.

11023 Background: Concerns about timely publication of NIH trial results, as well as sharing of clinical trial data, have led to important initiatives. The NCI developed an online archive of individual patient data (IPD) for cooperative group trials published after 2014, and ClinicalTrials.gov has required data sharing plans for all trials that began enrollment after 2018. We examined the dissemination of NCI cooperative group trial results via published manuscripts as well as availability of IPD from completed trials. Methods: We queried the Access to Aggregate Content of ClinicalTrials.gov database for phase II or III interventional trials for which NCI cooperative groups were listed as the sponsor, responsible party, or principal investigator. We included trials that were initiated between 2011 and 2022 and reached actual primary completion status (i.e. completion of data collection to fulfill the primary outcome measurement) by 2022. Primary manuscripts that reported the study primary outcome data were identified by searching NCT ID numbers on ClinicalTrials.gov, PubMed, and Google Scholar through a dual review. We restricted our 2 and 5-year assessments of study publication status to studies that had reached their primary completion date before 2022 and 2019, respectively. Individual patient data (IPD) sharing was assessed by reviewing the data-sharing statements on ClinicalTrials.gov for trials that began enrollment after the ClinicalTrials.gov mandate in January 2019. Next, we searched the NCT trial number in the NCTN/NCORP data archive to look for the availability of IPD among trials that published their primary outcome after January 2015. We also conducted a subgroup analysis of phase III trials. Results: Of 232 eligible studies, 159 (68.5%) were phase II, 11 (4.7%) were phase II/III, and 62 (26.7%) were phase III. NRG Oncology (n=58), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (n=47), and Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology (n=42) were the most represented cooperative groups. Overall, 33 (14.2% of the total) trials published their primary outcome results within one year of their primary completion, compared to 67 (31.6%) within 2 years, and 69 (63.3%) in 5 years. Among phase III trials, 26 (44.8%) had published their primary outcome findings within 2 years of study completion, and 22 (78.6%) published within 5 years. Among the 138 trials that published their primary outcome since January 2015, 36 (26.1%) had their IPD stored in the NCI online archive (76.1% of the 46 phase III trials). Among the 9 trials initiated since January 2019, 3 indicated on ClinicalTrials.gov that they had a plan to share their IPD. Conclusions: A substantial proportion of NCI cooperative group trials have not published manuscripts reporting their primary results in a peer-reviewed journal within 5 years of study completion. Approximately three quarters of phase III group trials completed during the study period had their IPD available within the NCI archive.

NCI Cooperative Clinical Trials Groups proceed with reorganization

Representation of Minorities in Therapeutic Clinical Trials - a 15-Year Review of Lymphoma Cooperative Group Studies (Alliance A152123)

BackgroundAccrual to oncology clinical trials remains a challenge, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic. For late phase clinical trials funded by the National Cancer Institute, the development of these research protocols is a resource-intensive process; however, mechanisms to optimize patient accrual after trial activation are underdeveloped across the National Clinical Trial Network (NCTN). Low patient accrual can lead to the premature closure of clinical trials and can ultimately delay the availability of new, potentially life-saving therapies in oncology.ObjectiveThe purpose of this study is to formally create an easily implemented tool kit of resources for investigators of oncology clinical trials within the NCTN, specifically the NRG Oncology cooperative group, in order to optimize patient accrual.MethodsNRG Oncology sought to formally develop a tool kit of resources to use at specific time points during the lifetime of NRG Oncology clinical trials. The tools are clearly described and involve the facilitation of engagement of the study principal investigator with the scientific and patient advocate community during the planning, activation, and accrual periods. Social media tools are also leveraged to enhance such engagement. The principal investigator (PI) tool kit was created in 2019 and thereafter piloted with the NRG Oncology/Alliance NRG-LU005 phase II or III trial in small-cell lung cancer. The PI tool kit was developed by the NRG Oncology Protocol Operations Management committee and was tested with the NRG/Alliance LU005 randomized trial within the NCTN.ResultsNRG Oncology/Alliance NRG-LU005 has seen robust enrollment, currently 127% of the projected accrual. Importantly, many of the tool kit elements are already being used in ongoing NRG Oncology trials, with 56% of active NRG trials using at least one element of the PI tool kit and all in-development trials offered the resource. This underscores the feasibility and potential benefits of deploying the PI tool kit across all NRG Oncology trials moving forward.ConclusionsWhile clinical trial accrual can be challenging, the PI tool kit has been shown to augment accrual in a low-cost and easily implementable fashion. It could be widely and consistently deployed across the NCTN to improve accrual in oncology clinical trials.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT03811002; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03811002

A041702: A Randomized Phase III Study of Ibrutinib Plus Obinutuzumab Versus Ibrutinib Plus Venetoclax and Obinutuzumab in Untreated Older Patients (≥ 70 Years of Age) with Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL)

6509 Background: Accrual of underrepresented populations (URPs-racial and ethnic minorities, women, rural populations, and younger and older populations) to clinical trials has been historically low, hampering progress in cancer treatment, symptom intervention and prevention for all. In 2018, the Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology (Alliance), as a part of the NCI's National Clinical Trials Network (NCTN) and a Research Base for the NCI Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP) began a multi-pronged strategy to increase accrual of underrepresented minorities by race and ethnicity (URMs) to both treatment and cancer control trials conducted by the Alliance. Methods: Alliance leadership set a goal of 20% accrual for racial and ethnic minorities to all trials in 2018. The Health Disparities Committee (HDC) implemented several strategies over time including leadership promotion/expectation of goals; funding junior investigators and special projects focusing on URPs; working groups for specific populations in HDC; HDC co-chairs to selected protocols; translation services of patient facing materials; opening studies at NCORP Minority Underserved Sites; real time monitoring of accrual demographics, by Alliance and by site; protocols addressing aims for specific populations; closing protocol enrollment to majority populations; and increasing the study sample size to enroll additional minority participants to allow for analyzing intervention effects by subgroups. Results: Accrual data from 117 NCTN and NCORP trials led by Alliance was included from 2014-2022. Over time, accrual of racial and ethnic minorities increased from 13.6% to 25.3% for treatment and 13% to 21.5% for cancer control trials. This results in overall increase from 13.5 % to 23.6% of URMs for all trials, a 74.8% improvement. Conclusions: Intentional approaches to increase URMs has led to an increase in URM accruals to Alliance trials. Future strategies include implementation of the Alliance Patient Questionnaire to prospectively measure the prevalence of specific social determinants of health among patients enrolled to further expand the understanding and address the needs of unique population accrued to Alliance trials. In addition, accrual of women, rural populations, and younger and older adults (65+ years) are now being monitored over time to increase all URP accruals.

BackgroundBorderline resectable pancreatic cancers infiltrate into adjacent vascular structures to an extent that makes an R0 resection unlikely when pancreatectomy is performed de novo. In a pilot study, Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology Trial A021101, the median survival of patients who received chemotherapy and radiation prior to anticipated pancreatectomy was 22 months, and 64% of operations achieved an R0 resection. However, the individual contributions of preoperative chemotherapy and radiation therapy to therapeutic outcome remain poorly defined.MethodsIn Alliance for Clinical Oncology Trial A021501, a recently activated randomized phase II trial, patients (N = 134) with a CT or MRI showing a biopsy-confirmed pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma that meets centrally-reviewed anatomic criteria for borderline resectable disease will be randomized to receive either 8 cycles of modified FOLFIRINOX (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, irinotecan 180 mg/m2, leucovorin 400 mg/m2 and infusional 5-fluorouracil 2400 mg/m2 over 2 days for 4 cycles) or to 7 cycles of modified FOLFIRINOX followed by stereotactic body radiation therapy (33–40 Gy in 5 fractions). Patients without evidence of disease progression following preoperative therapy will undergo pancreatectomy and will subsequently receive 4 cycles of postoperative modified FOLFOX6 (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, leucovorin 400 mg/m2, bolus 5-fluorouracil 400 mg/m2, and infusional 5-fluorouracil 2400 mg/m2 over 2 days for 4 cycles). The primary endpoint is the 18-month overall survival rate of patients enrolled into each of the two treatment arms. An interim analysis of the R0 resection rate within each arm will be conducted to assess treatment futility after accrual of 30 patients. Secondary endpoints include rates of margin-negative resection and event-free survival. The primary analysis will compare the 18-month overall survival rate of each arm to a historical control rate of 50%. The trial is activated nationwide and eligible to be opened for accrual at any National Clinical Trials Network cooperative group member site.DiscussionThis study will help define standard preoperative treatment regimens for borderline resectable pancreatic cancer and position the superior arm for further evaluation in future phase III trials.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02839343, registered July 14, 2016.

Disparities in older adult accrual to cancer trials: Analysis from the alliance for clinical trials in oncology (A151736)

Many multicenter randomized clinical trials in oncology are conducted through the National Clinical Trials Network (NCTN), an organization consisting of 5 cooperative groups. These groups are made up of multidisciplinary investigators who work collaboratively to conduct trials that test novel therapies and establish best practice for cancer care. Unfortunately, disparities in clinical trial leadership are evident. To examine the current state of diversity, equity, and inclusion across the NCTN, an independent NCTN Task Force for Diversity in Gastrointestinal Oncology was established in 2021, the efforts of which serve as the platform for this commentary. The task force sought to assess existing data on demographics and policies across NCTN groups. Differences in infrastructure and policies were identified across groups as well as a general lack of data regarding the composition of group membership and leadership. In the context of growing momentum around diversity, equity, and inclusion in cancer research, the National Cancer Institute established the Equity and Inclusion Program, which is working to establish benchmark data regarding diversity of representation within the NCTN groups. Pending these data, additional efforts are recommended to address diversity within the NCTN, including standardizing membership, leadership, and publication processes; ensuring diversity of representation across scientific and steering committees; and providing mentorship and training opportunities for women and individuals from underrepresented groups. Intentional and focused efforts are necessary to ensure diversity in clinical trial leadership and to encourage design of trials that are inclusive and representative of the broad population of patients with cancer in the United States.

Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group ECOG) is an NCI‐funded cooperative group that conducts clinical trials in oncology. Over many years, ECOG has developed efficient systems for conducting high‐quality clinical trials with limited funding. Because ECOG runs many studies in the same network of institutions, a key factor is that quality control procedures focus on the performance of the sites across studies rather than on the individual study. ECOG has also achieved efficiencies through standardization of data elements and evaluation criteria and through use of a single data monitoring committee for the Group's entire portfolio of Phase III trials, while ensuring patient safety through an aggressive program of adverse‐event monitoring. These procedures have enabled ECOG to make major contributions advancing the treatment of cancer patients within the funding constraints of the NCI's Cooperative Group program.

Bone marrow biopsies (BMB) are performed before/after therapy to confirm complete response (CR) in patients with lymphoma on clinical trials. We sought to establish whether BMB add value in assessing response or predict progression-free survival (PFS) or overall survival (OS) outcomes in follicular lymphoma (FL) subjects in a large, multicenter, multitrial cohort. Data were pooled from seven trials of 580 subjects with previously untreated FL through Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology (Alliance) and SWOG Cancer Research Network (SWOG) completing enrollment from 2008 to 2016. Only 5/580 (0.9%) had positive baseline BMB, CR on imaging, and subsequent positive BMB (P < .0001). Therefore, BMB were irrelevant to response in 99% of subjects. A sensitivity analysis of 385 FL subjects treated on an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group study was included. In the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group cohort, 5/385 (1.3%) had BMB that affected response assessment. Since some subjects do not undergo confirmatory BMB, we performed a landmark survival analysis from first radiologic CR with data from 580 subjects from Alliance and SWOG. Of subjects with CR on imaging (n = 187), PFS and OS were not significantly different among those with negative BMB to confirm CR (n = 47) versus those without repeat BMB (n = 140; PFS: adjusted hazard ratio, 1.10, 95% CI, 0.62 to 1.94, log-rank P = .686; OS: hazard ratio, 0.59, 95% CI, 0.23 to 1.53, log-rank P = .276). We conclude that BMB add little value to response assessment in subjects with FL treated on clinical trials and we recommend eliminating BMB from clinical trial requirements. BMB should also be removed from diagnostic guidelines for FL except in scenarios in which it may change management including confirmation of limited stage and assessment of cytopenias. This would reduce cost, patient discomfort, resource utilization, and potentially remove a barrier to trial enrollment.

Radiation target nomenclature for lymphoma trials: consensus recommendations from the National Clinical Trials Network groups

PL03-01: NCI-MATCH: A new paradigm in the era of genomic oncology

We sought to evaluate local/regional recurrence rates after breast-conserving surgery in a cohort of patients enrolled in legacy trials of the Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology and to evaluate variation in recurrence rates by receptor subtype. Multiple randomized controlled trials have demonstrated equivalent survival between breast conservation and mastectomy, albeit with higher local/regional recurrence rates after breast conservation. However, absolute rates of local/regional recurrence have been declining with multi-modality treatment. Data from 5 Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology legacy trials that enrolled women diagnosed with breast cancer between 1997 and 2010 were included. Women who underwent breast-conserving surgery and standard systemic therapies (n=4,404) were included. Five-year rates of local/regional recurrence were estimated from Kaplan-Meier curves. Patients were censored at the time of distant recurrence (if recorded as the first recurrence), death, or last follow-up. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models were used to identify factors associated with time to local/regional recurrence, including patient age, tumor size, lymph node status, and receptor subtype. Overall 5-year recurrence was 4.6% (95% CI=4.0-5.4%). Five-year recurrence rates were lowest in those with ER+ or PR+ tumors (Her2+ 3.4% [95% CI 2.0-5.7%], Her2- 4.0% [95% CI 3.2-4.9%]) and highest in the triple-negative subtype (7.1% [95% CI 5.4-9.3%]). On multivariable analysis, increasing nodal involvement and triple-negative subtype were positively associated with recurrence ( P <0.0001). Rates of local/regional recurrence after breast conservation in women with breast cancer enrolled in legacy trials of the Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology are significantly lower than historic estimates. This data can better inform patient discussions and surgical decision-making.

Patient withdrawal of consent from a cancer clinical trial is defined as a patient's volitional cessation of participation in all matters related to a trial. It can undermine the trial's purpose, make the original sample size and power calculations irrelevant, introduce bias between trial arms, and prolong the time to trial completion. To report rates of and baseline factors associated with withdrawal of consent among patients in cancer clinical trials. This multisite observational cohort study was conducted through the Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology. Patient withdrawal was defined as a patient's voluntary termination of consent to participate anytime during trial conduct. Baseline patient- and trial-based factors were investigated for their associations with patient withdrawal within the first 2 years using logistic regression models. All patients who participated in cancer therapeutic clinical trials conducted within the Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology from 2013 through 2019 were included. The data lock date was January 23, 2022. The percentage of patients who withdrew consent in 2 years and factors associated with withdrawal of consent. A total of 11 993 patients (median age, 62 years; 67% female) from 58 trials were included. Within 2 years, 1060 patients (9%) withdrew from their respective trials. Two-year rates of withdrawal were 5.7%, 7.6%, 8.5%, 7.8%, 8.4%, 9.5%, and 9.8% for each of the respective years from 2013 through 2019. In multivariable analyses, Hispanic ethnicity (odds ratio [OR], 1.67; 95% CI, 1.30-2.15; P < .001), randomized design with placebo (OR, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.38-1.94; P < .001), and patient age 75 years and older (OR, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.12-1.72; P = .003) were associated with higher likelihood of withdrawal by 2 years. Use of radiation was associated with patient retention (OR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.54-0.86; P = .001). In this cohort study, rates of withdrawal of consent were less than 10% and appeared consistent over time. Factors that are associated with withdrawal of consent should be considered when designing trials and should be further studied to learn how they can be favorably modified.