Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, United States.
Division of Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, United States.
Oncologist. 2024 Sep 6;29(9):780-785. doi: 10.1093/oncolo/oyae121.
Standard investigator-based adverse events (AE) assessment is via CTCAE for clinical trials. However, including the patient perspective through PRO (patient-reported outcomes) enhances clinicians' understanding of patient toxicity and fosters early detection of AEs. We assessed longitudinal integration of PRO-CTCAE within clinical workflow in a phase II trial.
As a sub-study in a phase II trial of genotype-directed irinotecan dosing evaluating efficacy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer receiving FOLFIRI and bevacizumab, patients reported on 13 AEs generating a PRO-CTCAE form. The primary objective was to estimate forms completed by patients and clinicians at least 80% of time. Secondary objectives were estimating concordance and time to first score of specific symptoms between patient and clinician pairs.
Feasibility of longitudinal PRO-CTCAE integration was met as 96% of patients and clinician-patient pairs completed at least 80% of PRO-CTCAE forms available to them with 79% achieving 100% completion. Concordance between patient and clinician reporting a severe symptom was 73% with 24 disconcordant pairs, 21 involved patients who reported a severe symptom that the clinician did not. Although protocol-mandated dose reductions were guided by CTCAE not PRO-CTCAE responses, the median time to dose reduction of 2.53 months, and the time-to-event curve closely approximated time to patient-reported toxicity.
Longitudinal integration of PRO-CTCAE paired CTCAE proved feasible. Compared to clinicians, patients reported severe symptoms more frequently and earlier. Patient-reported toxicity more closely aligned with dose decreases indicating incorporation into routine clinical practice may enhance early detection of toxicity improving patient safety and quality of life.
临床试验中的标准以研究者为基础的不良事件(AE)评估是通过 CTCAE 进行的。然而,通过 PRO(患者报告的结果)纳入患者视角可以增强临床医生对患者毒性的理解,并促进 AE 的早期发现。我们评估了 PRO-CTCAE 在 II 期试验中的临床工作流程中的纵向整合。
作为一项评估基因型指导的伊立替康剂量在接受 FOLFIRI 和贝伐单抗治疗的转移性结直肠癌患者中的疗效的 II 期试验的子研究,患者报告了 13 种导致 PRO-CTCAE 表格生成的 AE。主要目标是估计患者和临床医生至少完成 80%的表格。次要目标是估计患者和临床医生对特定症状的首次评分之间的一致性和时间。
纵向 PRO-CTCAE 整合的可行性得到满足,因为 96%的患者和医患对至少 80%的 PRO-CTCAE 表格进行了评估,其中 79%的患者达到了 100%的完成率。患者和临床医生报告严重症状的一致性为 73%,有 24 对不相符,其中 21 例涉及患者报告了严重症状,而临床医生未报告。尽管剂量减少是根据 CTCAE 而不是 PRO-CTCAE 反应来指导的,但剂量减少的中位数时间为 2.53 个月,时间事件曲线与患者报告的毒性时间非常接近。
PRO-CTCAE 与 CTCAE 的纵向整合是可行的。与临床医生相比,患者更频繁且更早地报告严重症状。患者报告的毒性与剂量减少更密切相关,这表明将其纳入常规临床实践可能会增强毒性的早期检测,从而提高患者的安全性和生活质量。