scholarly journals 1493P An evaluation of the psychological impact of early phase clinical trials in cancer patients

2021 ◽  
Vol 32 ◽  
pp. S1097-S1098
Author(s):  
P. Jittla ◽  
D. Graham ◽  
C. Zhou ◽  
J. Halliwell ◽  
S. O'Reilly ◽  
...  
2018 ◽  
Vol 119 (8) ◽  
pp. 937-939 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah Watson ◽  
Jessica Menis ◽  
Capucine Baldini ◽  
Patricia Martin-Romano ◽  
Jean-Marie Michot ◽  
...  

Cancers ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (22) ◽  
pp. 5829
Author(s):  
Pamela Trillo Aliaga ◽  
Dario Trapani ◽  
José Luis Sandoval ◽  
Edoardo Crimini ◽  
Gabriele Antonarelli ◽  
...  

Pivotal trials of COVID-19 vaccines did not include cancer patients, with questions remaining about their safety and efficacy in this population. Patients enrolled in early-phase clinical trials receive novel treatments with unknown efficacy and safety profiles. Studies on the safety of COVID-19 vaccines in these patients are urgently required. This is a retrospective, real-world, cohort study of patients receiving anticancer treatments and COVID-19 vaccines between 1 February and 25 June 2021 at the Division of New Drugs Development for Innovative Therapies of the European Institute of Oncology. One hundred thirteen patients were enrolled, 40 in early-phase clinical trials, and 20 under novel immunotherapy agents. Nearly three-quarters of the patients experienced at least one adverse event (AE) after the first dose (1D) (74.3%) and second dose (2D) (72.6%). Most of the AEs were local (67.3% 1D and 61.9% after 2D), while 31.8% (1D) and 38.1% (2D) of the patients had systemic AEs. No AEs above grade 2 were observed. Therefore, COVID-19 vaccines appear to be safe in patients enrolled in early-phase clinical trials, including patients receiving novel immunotherapy compounds. All cancer patients should be prioritized for COVID-19 vaccination, regardless of ongoing treatments or enrollment in early-phase trials.


2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 9651-9651 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Paul Dohan ◽  
Laura Trupin ◽  
Christopher Koenig ◽  
Fay J. Hlubocky ◽  
Christopher Daugherty

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e14025-e14025
Author(s):  
Sarah Watson ◽  
Clement Bonnet ◽  
Jessica Menis ◽  
Jean-Marie Michot ◽  
Antoine Hollebecque ◽  
...  

e14025 Background: Progression-free survival ratio (PFSr) has been proposed as a direct evaluation of treatment benefit in advanced cancer patients, based on the hypothesis that the natural history of cancer is accelerating and therefore successive lines of treatments become less efficient over time. Consequently, PFS at line +2 (PFS2) is expected to be shorter than PFS at line +1 (PFS1), whereas a PFS2/PFS1 ratio > 1.3 might reflect treatment benefit. However, this hypothesis has been poorly documented, especially in the context of early phase trials where determining treatment benefit is becoming key. We therefore proposed to evaluate PFSr in a large cohort of cancer patients enrolled in early phase clinical trials at Gustave Roussy Drug Development Department. Methods: Patients enrolled in at least two phase 1 studies for advanced solid tumors or lymphomas were retrospectively identified. Demographical, clinical and therapeutic data were collected. Time to progression (PFS) was measured from treatment initiation to progression, using radiological evaluations. Patients who had gone off-trial for reasons other than progression were censored. PFSr was defined as the ratio of the PFS under line 2 divided by the PFS under line 1 and might be censored in presence of censored PFS2. Ratio distribution in this population was estimated using Kaplan Meier. Calibration of the ratio was proposed for hypothesis testing. The influence of therapeutic class and combination versus monotherapy was studied via non parametric Gehan-Wilcoxon tests or Mick tests. Results: 212 patients enrolled between 2009 and 2016 in at least two phase 1 clinical trials were included, corresponding to 113 different clinical trials. PFSr distribution was described and correlated with demographical, clinical and therapeutic data. The relevance of the usual 1.3 PFSr cut-off to determine treatment benefit was evaluated. Final analysis results will be presented at the time of the congress. Conclusions: This study, one of the first to establish PFSr in a large cohort of patients treated in early phase clinical trials, provides guidelines for using PFSr to assess the impact of treatment sequences in advanced cancer patients.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document