NCI-sponsored Trials Research Articles

Some Thoughts on the Reporting of Adverse Events in Phase II Cancer Clinical Trials

Some Thoughts on the Reporting of Adverse Events in Phase II Cancer Clinical Trials

National survival trends of young adults with sarcoma

Young adults with cancer in the U.S. have had less improvement in survival than either younger patients or older patients. The authors attempted to determine whether similar deficits have occurred in young adults with sarcomas and, if so, then why. In 38,144 young adults with sarcoma who were diagnosed during 1975-1998 and were followed by the National Cancer Institute's (NCI) Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program, the average annual percent change in 5-year survival was derived as a function of patient age. National sarcoma treatment trial data were obtained on 3242 patients who were entered onto NCI-sponsored trials during 1997-2002. 1) For patients with bone and soft-tissue sarcomas, except Kaposi sarcoma (KS), the least survival improvement occurred between age 15 years and age 45 years. For patients with KS, the pattern was reversed, with the greatest survival increase occurring among patients ages 30-44 years. 2) The lowest participation rate in NCI-sponsored sarcoma treatment trials occurred in patients ages 20-44 years. For patients with KS, the highest accrual rate occurred in patients ages 35-44 years. 3) The age-dependent survival improvement and clinical-trial accrual patterns were correlated directly (soft-tissue sarcomas, P < 0.005; bone sarcomas, P < 0.05; KS, P = 0.06), regardless of whether the accrual profile demonstrated a decline or a peak (KS) during early adulthood. The lack of survival prolongation in patients age 15-44 years in the U.S. with non-KS sarcomas may have been a result of their relative lack of participation in clinical trials. If this is true, then reversing the shortfall in survival among young adults with sarcomas, as was accomplished among patients with KS, should benefit from increased clinical trial availability, access, and participation.

Incremental treatment costs in national cancer institute-sponsored clinical trials.

Concern about additional costs for direct patient care impedes efforts to enroll patients in clinical trials. But generalizable evidence substantiating these concerns is lacking. To assess the additional cost of treating cancer patients in the National Cancer Institute (NCI)-sponsored clinical trials in the United States across a range of trial phases, treatment modalities, and patient care settings. Retrospective cost study using a multistage, stratified, random sample of patients enrolled in 1 of 35 active phase 3 trials or phase 1 or any phase 2 trials between October 1, 1998, and December 31, 1999. Unadjusted and adjusted costs were compared and related to trial phase, institution type, and vital status. A representative sample of 932 cancer patients enrolled in nonpediatric, NCI-sponsored clinical trials and 696 nonparticipants with a similar stage of disease not enrolled in a research protocol from 83 cancer clinical research institutions across the United States. Direct treatment costs as measured using a combination of medical records, telephone survey, and Medicare claims data. Administrative and other research costs were excluded. The incremental costs of direct care in trials were modest. Over approximately a 2.5-year period, adjusted costs were 6.5% higher for trial participants than nonparticipants (35,418 dollars vs 33,248 dollars; P =.11). Cost differences for phase 3 studies were 3.5% (P =.22), lower than for phase 1 or 2 trials (12.8%; P =.20). Trial participants who died had higher costs than nonparticipants who died (17.9%; 39,420 dollars vs 33,432 dollars, respectively; P =.15). Treatment costs for nonpediatric clinical trial participants are on average 6.5% higher than what they would be if patients did not enroll. This implies total incremental treatment costs for NCI-sponsored trials of 16 million dollars in 1999. Incremental costs were higher for patients who died and who were in early phase studies although these findings deserve further scrutiny. Overall, the additional treatment costs of an open reimbursement policy for government-sponsored cancer clinical trials appear minimal.

P11 Evaluation of a two-phase enrollment design: Experience of the age-related eye disease study (AREDS)

Oncotype DX, a 21-gene assay, was clinically validated as a predictor of 10-year recurrence-free survival and treatment response in patients with early-stage estrogen-receptor-positive, lymph-node negative breast cancer (ER+ LN- ESBC). This study determined “real-life” alteration in treatment decision and economic implications of Oncotype DX use in women with ER+ LN- ESBC.Clalit Health Services (CHS, Tel Aviv, Israel), determined the proportion of women in low, intermediate and high-risk groups in the first 368 Oncotype DX assays performed, the change of adjuvant therapy recommendation following the recurrence (RS) results from Oncotype DX use, and associated chemotherapy costs. The risk of recurrence-free survival was derived from prespecified statistical protocols of NCI-sponsored trials conducted by NSABP (B-14 and B-20). Utilities were literature based. A 3% discount rate was employed.Oncotype DX altered recommendations of 40% of patients, 84% of whom were changed from hormone + chemotherapy to hormonal therapy alone. Among high-risk women, 8% switched actual treatment from hormonal therapy to hormone + chemotherapy. By reducing the chemotherapy disutility, quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) increased 0.170 years. Use of Oncotype DX costs $10,770 per QALY gained. Sensitivity analyses revealed that risk reduction in the low-risk population, the cost of adverse events, and the relative risk reduction of recurrence were the most influential variables.Oncotype DX resulted in net QALY gain and increased overall costs, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $10,770. For CHS, Oncotype DX represents an effective and affordable approach to favorably affect the lives of women with ESBC.

105 Evaluation of responsiveness of health scales for outcome measurement in clinical trials

Oncotype DX, a 21-gene assay, was clinically validated as a predictor of 10-year recurrence-free survival and treatment response in patients with early-stage estrogen-receptor-positive, lymph-node negative breast cancer (ER+ LN- ESBC). This study determined “real-life” alteration in treatment decision and economic implications of Oncotype DX use in women with ER+ LN- ESBC.Clalit Health Services (CHS, Tel Aviv, Israel), determined the proportion of women in low, intermediate and high-risk groups in the first 368 Oncotype DX assays performed, the change of adjuvant therapy recommendation following the recurrence (RS) results from Oncotype DX use, and associated chemotherapy costs. The risk of recurrence-free survival was derived from prespecified statistical protocols of NCI-sponsored trials conducted by NSABP (B-14 and B-20). Utilities were literature based. A 3% discount rate was employed.Oncotype DX altered recommendations of 40% of patients, 84% of whom were changed from hormone + chemotherapy to hormonal therapy alone. Among high-risk women, 8% switched actual treatment from hormonal therapy to hormone + chemotherapy. By reducing the chemotherapy disutility, quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) increased 0.170 years. Use of Oncotype DX costs $10,770 per QALY gained. Sensitivity analyses revealed that risk reduction in the low-risk population, the cost of adverse events, and the relative risk reduction of recurrence were the most influential variables.Oncotype DX resulted in net QALY gain and increased overall costs, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $10,770. For CHS, Oncotype DX represents an effective and affordable approach to favorably affect the lives of women with ESBC.