Do eligibility criteria restrict access to clinical trials?

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (29_suppl) ◽  
pp. 94-94
Author(s):  
Nessa Stefaniak ◽  
Jennifer Walker ◽  
Monica L. Murphy ◽  
Mishellene McKinney ◽  
Lu Liu ◽  
...  

94 Background: Stringent eligibility criteria may be a barrier to oncology clinical trial enrollment. We examined patients meeting basic trial eligibility criteria defined in a clinical pathway where the trial was not selected, and then performed a thorough review of full trial eligibility. Methods: Locally available trials are embedded into a pathways tool used at the point of care by medical oncologists at a tertiary cancer center. The physician can choose to have the patient fully screened for the recommended trial or bypass it. Patients where the physician bypassed the trial for eleven Phase 2 and 3 solid tumor trials from April 2018 to December 2019 were reviewed for trial eligibility. Basket trials and adoptive cellular therapy trials were excluded. Trials selected for the audit were presented for more than 20 patients and were bypassed in 80% or more cases. For each trial a random set of 20% of cases or a minimum of 15 cases minimum were reviewed. Results: Among the 184 cases reviewed, 149 (81%) were trial ineligible based upon one or more criteria. The most common reasons for patients' ineligibility were the wrong biomarker profile, prior drug treatment, and health conditions including co-morbidities, autoimmune diseases, other cancers and poor performance status. Conclusions: The majority of patients meeting basic eligibility in a clinical pathways system did not meet strict eligibility criteria. This suggests the trials may not be reflective of the needs of the cancer population being treated and may limit the applicability of trial results to the general cancer population. Use of the pathway program to define eligibility is limited by the numerous and nuanced eligibility criteria that cannot be programmed into the pathways system. Clinical trials eligibility criteria and pathway tools need to adapt to the patient population to help advance cancer research. [Table: see text]

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e19075-e19075
Author(s):  
K. Goto ◽  
H. Kenmotsu ◽  
Y. Nishiwaki ◽  
K. Kubota ◽  
H. Ohmatsu ◽  
...  

e19075 Background: Although gefitinib is a promising agent for the treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer, ILD occurs in Japanese patients and sever ILD sometimes becomes fatal toxicity. ILD has been reported to be associated with preexisting ILD, smoking, and poor performance status. On the other hand, it has been reported that female gender, adenocarcinoma, non-smoker, and EGFR mutation are associated with sensitivity to gefitinib. Methods: To investigate the trend in incidence of severe ILD and patient characteristics receiving gefitinib, a total of 751 patients who were administered gefitinib in National Cancer Center Hospital East between 2002 and 2008 were retrospectively reviewed. To investigate how oncologists avoid administering gefitinib to patients with preexisting ILD, pretreatment chest CT films of all patients were also reviewed by two thoracic radiologists. Results: The patient number who received gefitinib in 2002/2003/2004/2005/2006/2007/2008 were 134/141/88/93/125/98/72, respectively. In these patients, percentages of female were 36/43/42/55/59/52/54%, adenocarcinoma 76/78/93/88/95/93/92%, non-smoker 35/30/40/53/49/48/46%, respectively. Almost all of the patient receiving gefitinib was recently restricted to adenocarcinoma. Grade 3–5 severe ILD was observed in 1.9% of all patients. However, the incidence rate of sever ILD were decreased as 3.0/2.8/2.3/1.1/0.8/1.0/1.4%, respectively. The rates of patients with preexisting ILD were also decreased as 22/14/15/5/2/3/6%, respectively. Conclusions: The correct information about efficacy and severe ILD about gefitinib influenced patient selection by oncologists, and it is reasonable to select more effective and safe patients in Japan. It is estimated that the incidence rate of severe ILD should be consequently controlled by the spread of these information. No significant financial relationships to disclose.


2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 6538-6538 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew J. Parchman ◽  
Guo-Qiang Zhang ◽  
Patrick Mergler ◽  
Jill Barnholtz-Sloan ◽  
Robert Lanese ◽  
...  

6538 Background: Clinical trials are the evidence base for improving cancer treatment. Unfortunately, only approximately 5% of cancer patients (pts) take part in clinical research studies. Even in settings where clinical trials (CTs) are available, pt participation remains low. We hypothesize that the time required to identify appropriate studies for individual pts is a significant barrier to clinical trial accrual. Methods: Our multidisciplinary team developed Trial Prospector (TP), an innovative and flexible computer-based system that utilizes artificial intelligence and natural language processing to automatically extract information (e.g. demographics, pathologic diagnosis, stage, labs) from multiple clinical data systems and then match it to CT eligibility criteria. A user-friendly interface allows physician perusal of relevant CTs and eligibility checklists at the point of care without requiring manual data entry. We pilot tested TP in our cancer center GI oncology subspecialty clinics. TP was deployed for consecutive new pts, and oncologists (oncs) completed surveys after each visit to assess the usability and impact of TP. Results: Eleven medical oncologists (6 attendings and 5 fellows) participated in the pilot study. TP was deployed during 60 new pt visits. Of the 15 relevant GI/phase I CTs, TP identified a mean of 7 ± 2.7 eligible trials per patient. The most common reasons for ineligibility were pathologic diagnosis and labs. CTs were considered by the treating onc for 66.7% of the pts. 95% of participating oncs reviewed the TP output at the point of care with 70% spending 0-5 minutes assessing eligibility. Of the pts considered for CTs, a TP report was reviewed 72.5% of the time. Oncs reported that TP saved time identifying potential CTs during 57.1% of the visits. The reports were manually reviewed, and the TP matching algorithm was 100% accurate. 90.9% of the oncs recommended TP for CT screening. Conclusions: These results indicate that Trial Prospector is a feasible, accurate, and effective means to identify CTs for individual pts during a busy outpatient oncology clinic. Ongoing refinements will expand clinical data extraction and CT warehouse to improve precision and applicability across diseases.


2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 12024-12024 ◽  
Author(s):  
Harpreet Singh ◽  
Yutao Gong ◽  
Pourab Roy ◽  
Bellinda King-Kallimanis ◽  
Vishal Bhatnagar ◽  
...  

12024 Background: Patients with poor performance status are often excluded from clinical trials. The FDA has published several guidances on modernizing oncology clinical trial eligibility criteria to more accurately reflect the patient population. Many patients receiving novel oncology therapeutics are heavily pretreated, and often have comorbidities, organ dysfunction, and frailty syndromes. Little is known about the safety of novel therapeutics in patients with poor performance status. Methods: Data from six randomized trials (n=4465) leading to registration for several solid tumor and malignant hematologic cancers, including multiple therapeutic mechanisms of action, such as EGFR TKI’s, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI), and chemotherapy, were pooled. Cumulative incidence of Grade 3-5 adverse events and serious adverse events at Days 30, 90, and 180 were evaluated based on ECOG 0-2. Rates of treatment discontinuation by ECOG was also examined. Results: Cumulative incidence of toxicity events at days 30, 90, and 180 are shown in Table. Patient dropout rates due to death were 3.9%, 6.7%, and 10.9%; dropout rates due to disease progression were 66.5%, 66.6% and 56.9%; and dropout rates due to reasons other than progression or death were 29.7%, 26.7% and 32.1% for ECOG PS 0, 1 and 2, respectively. Conclusions: This FDA exploratory analysis of safety outcomes in registration trials based on ECOG suggests increasing rates of adverse events and rates of treatment discontinuation due to death with worsening performance status. Discontinuation rates due to disease progression and other reasons did not appear to be worse for ECOG 2 compared to 0-1. These findings were consistent across therapies (targeted therapy, ICI, chemotherapy). All trials in the analysis led to FDA approval, thus inclusion of patients with ECOG 2 did not adversely affect the trial outcome for this set of FDA approved agents. ECOG performance status eligibility criteria should be evaluated and modified on a frequent basis during drug development. Additional analysis of trials which enroll patients with ECOG 2 is needed. [Table: see text]


2004 ◽  
Vol 22 (11) ◽  
pp. 2046-2052 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael S. Simon ◽  
Wei Du ◽  
Lawrence Flaherty ◽  
Philip A. Philip ◽  
Patricia Lorusso ◽  
...  

Purpose The practice patterns of medical oncologists at a large National Cancer Institute Comprehensive Cancer Center in Detroit, MI were evaluated to better understand factors associated with accrual to breast cancer clinical trials. Patients and Methods From 1996 to 1997, physicians completed surveys on 319 of 344 newly evaluated female breast cancer patients. The 19-item survey included clinical data, whether patients were offered clinical trial (CT) participation and enrollment, and when applicable, reasons why they were not. Multivariate analyses using logistic regression were performed to evaluate predictors of an offer and enrollment. Results The patients were 57% white, 32% black, and 11% other/unknown race. One hundred six (33%) were offered participation and 36 (34%) were enrolled. In multivariate analysis, CTs were less likely offered to older women (mean age, 52 years for those offered v 57 years for those not offered; P = .0005) and black women (21% of blacks offered v 42% of whites; P = .0009). Women with stage 1 disease, poor performance status, and those who were previously diagnosed were also less likely to be offered trials. None of these factors were significant predictors of enrollment. Women were not offered trials because of ineligibility (57%), lack of available trials (41%), and noncompliance (2%). Reasons for failed enrollment included patient refusal (88%) and failed eligibility (12%). Conclusion It is important for cooperative groups to design studies that will accommodate a broader spectrum of patients. Further work is needed to assess ways to improve communication about breast cancer CT participation to all eligible women.


2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 5071-5071 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. O. Siefker-Radtke ◽  
A. M. Kamat ◽  
D. L. Williams ◽  
N. M. Tannir ◽  
S. Tu ◽  
...  

5071 Background: We developed a clinical trial incorporating response into the treatment algorithm. Patients meeting a certain threshold of response continued with the same treatment; those with insufficient response were switched to alternative chemotherapy. We now report on final results from this trial. Methods: Patients were randomly assigned to one of four regimens: ifosfamide, doxorubicin, gemcitabine; ifosfamide, paclitaxel, cisplatin; gemcitabine, cisplatin; or cisplatin, gemcitabine, and ifosfamide. To continue with chemotherapy, patients must have had at least a 40% response after the first 6-week interval, and a >90% response after the second 6 weeks. Otherwise, they were re-randomized to alternate chemotherapy. Overall success (OSX) was defined as patients with a >90% response with either front-line or second-line therapy. Surgical consolidation was offered to patients at the discretion of their treating physician. Results: Median overall survival (OS) for 120 patients was 19.1 mo. (3 and 5-yr survival: 33% and 20%). OSX was achieved in 41 patients (median OS: 51 mo.); the median OS in the other 79 patients was 15 mo. (p = 0.0001), with a 5-yr survival of 42% and 10% respectively. Surgical consolidation was performed in 35 patients: 23 with nodal metastases to pelvic and/or RPLN, 6 with cT4b tumors, and an additional 6 patients with distant metastases. Their median OS from surgery was 23.7 months, (5-yr survival: 31%). Surgical consolidation in the setting of OSX was associated with a 42% 5-yr survival as compared to 11% in those undergoing surgery in the absence of OSX. Visceral metastases and poor performance status were associated with a worse prognosis. Conclusions: With sequential therapy, 34% of patients had a >90% response (OSX). A potential benefit in long-term survival was seen in patients who had surgical consolidation in the setting of OSX. This trial design provides a novel method for assessing the benefits of sequential chemotherapy, and enhancing the population of patients who may be offered surgical consolidation in the setting of initially unresectable, or metastatic urothelial cancer. No significant financial relationships to disclose.


2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 238-238
Author(s):  
Jon Kroll Bjerregaard ◽  
Michael Bau Mortensen ◽  
Katrine R. Schønnemann ◽  
Per Pfeiffer

238 Background: Knowledge of patients (pts) with pancreatic cancer (PC) is often inferred from randomized phase III trials or registry based studies. Information about selection, therapy, and outcome is however often limited by availability of data in registries or lack of generalizability due to strict inclusion criteria in phase III studies. We wanted to investigate therapy choices and survival in a complete population of pts with PC. Methods: During 2007-2009 all cases of PC in the Region of Southern Denmark (RSD) (pop: 1,200,000) was retrieved from the Danish Cancer Registry. Concurrently we established a registry at the regional PC cancer center, recording clinical variables. The two registries were merged and dis-concordant cases were all examined. Information about hematology, liver function, performance status and therapy was retrieved from patient charts. Patients with neuroendocrine or acinar cell carcinomas were excluded from outcome analysis. Results: 618 cases of PC were retrieved from the Danish Cancer Registry. After examining dis-concordant pairs and histology 64 cases were removed and 25 added resulting in a total of 579 eligible pts with PC. Based on therapy delivered pts were divided in four groups (Table 1). Sixty-five pts had an initial resection of their tumor, 191 pts were treated with either chemotherapy or chemo-radiotherapy (CT/CRT), 56 pts were evaluated for CT/CRT, but was in too poor performance status or progressed/died before therapy; finally 268 pts were never evaluated for CT/CRT and never received tumor directed therapy. Of the total population 3% participated in clinical trials. Conclusions: Survival of un-selected patients appears to be similar to trial patients, and has improved compared to other registry based studies. However the majority of pts with PC do not receive cancer directed therapy. Improving the outcome of PC pts as a whole requires research into the large group of untreated pts. [Table: see text]


2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 399-399
Author(s):  
Meena Sadaps ◽  
Bassam N. Estfan ◽  
Davendra Sohal ◽  
Alok A. Khorana

399 Background: Precision oncology – the use of next-generation sequencing (NGS) to identify therapeutic options for advanced cancer patients – is being used widely, but its utility in patients with pancreatobiliary (PB) cancers has not been studied systematically. We evaluated the prevalence of actionable alterations and their impact on therapeutic decision-making in patients with PB cancers. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of consecutive patients seen at the Cleveland Clinic between 2013 and 2016 with incurable solid tumor malignancies, in whom FoundationOne™ (Cambridge, MA) NGS was ordered. All results were reviewed at a multidisciplinary genomics tumor board (GTB), which determined actionability and made therapeutic recommendations. Treatment decisions (on label, off label, or clinical trials) based on said recommendations were reviewed. Results: The study population was 600 patients, of whom 53 had PB cancers. For these 53, median age was 59.6 years; 62.2% (33/53) were female; 86.8% (46/53) were Caucasian. Eight samples (15.1%) had inadequate tissue; of 45 resulted cases, 21 (46.7%) were recommended treatment, including clinical trials (n = 19) and off-label drugs (n = 2). The most common targets for therapy were FGFR (5/21) and CDKN2 (3/21). Of 21 patients with recommendations, only two (9.5%) received genomics-driven therapy, compared with 31.7% (86/271) of patients with other solid tumor malignancies (p = 0.03). One received an IDH1 inhibitor, and one received dabrafenib and trametinib for a BRAF alteration; both on clinical trials. At time of last follow-up, best responses were unknown and partial response, respectively. Unavailability of clinical trials in the vicinity (9.5%), and clinical trial ineligibility, mainly due to poor performance status (9.5%), were common reasons for lack of actionability. Conclusions: Benefit from precision oncology in the PB population is low, with only 4.4% (2/45) of patients with NGS results eventually receiving genomics-driven therapy. Benefit to patients will not improve until access to clinical trials is enhanced and patients are evaluated for these trials earlier in the course of their disease, when their performance status is likely to be higher.


Cancers ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (7) ◽  
pp. 236 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juliet Carmichael ◽  
Daisy Wing-san Mak ◽  
Mary O’Brien

Until recently, chemotherapy has remained the mainstay of treatment for the majority of patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Excellent responses have been observed with immune-checkpoint inhibitors, and targeted treatments for those tumours with actionable mutations, resulting in a paradigm shift in the treatment approach for these patients. Elderly patients and those with poor performance status (PS), such as Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) 2, have historically been excluded from clinical trials due to poor outcomes. There is therefore a lack of data to define the optimal treatment strategy for these patients. Due to improved tolerability of novel therapies, inclusion of these patients in clinical trials has increased, and sub-group analyses have identified many treatments demonstrating potential activity. Here, we summarise key recent advances in the treatment of NSCLC, specifically evaluating their efficacy and tolerability in these patient cohorts.


Hematology ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 2007 (1) ◽  
pp. 420-428 ◽  
Author(s):  
Harry P. Erba

AbstractThe outcome of older patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) has not improved in the last three decades. These patients are more likely to have comorbid illness, poor performance status, and impaired organ function. These clinical features limit their ability to tolerate intensive cytotoxic chemotherapy and result in greater early mortality. The AML seen in elderly patients is also more likely to have evolved from a prior hematologic disorder, and the leukemic blasts are more likely to have poor-risk structural and numeric cytogenetic abnormalities and expression of multidrug resistance protein (MDR1). These blast features have been associated with greater resistance to therapy. Attempts to improve outcome have generally been unsuccessful. Priming of leukemic blasts with granulocyte colony-stimulating factors during cytarabine therapy, granulocyte colony-stimulating factor support to speed neutrophil recovery following induction therapy, inhibition of the MDR1 p-glycoprotein efflux pump, the use of alternative anthracyclines, and the addition of high-dose cytarabine have all been investigated in the last three decades. Further manipulation of standard cytotoxic chemotherapy alone is unlikely to improve the outcome for the majority of patients with AML. Incorporation of molecularly targeted therapies may prove to be less toxic and/or more efficacious. However, patient selection for clinical trials will continue to confound the interpretation of treatment outcomes on clinical trials of older patients with AML.


Blood ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 124 (21) ◽  
pp. 3277-3277 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guillermo Garcia-Manero ◽  
Xuelin Huang ◽  
Monica Cabrero ◽  
Courtney D. DiNardo ◽  
Naveen Pemmaraju ◽  
...  

Abstract The prognosis of patients with untreated MDS or AML with poor performance, organ dysfunction, or other comorbidities is very poor. Most patients do not receive therapy, and a large majority of them are excluded from investigational clinical trials. We hypothesized that this group of patients would significantly benefit from participation in clinical trials. To test this concept, we performed an initial proof-of-principle study of 30 patients with these characteristics using a combination of azacitidine and vorinostat, a histone deacetylase inhibitor, with the stopping rules being survival at 60 days, a response rate (30%), and toxicity. This study indicated that treatment was associated with longer-than-expected survival and response rate and acceptable toxicity as well as demonstrating that this group of patients can be safely and efficiently enrolled in clinical trials (Garcia-Manero ASH 2010 abstract #604). To further verify these results, we subsequently expanded this trial as a randomized study comparing azacitidine versus azacitidine + vorinostat, the results of which are shown here. This study would allow further experience in the development of clinical trials for this at-risk population as well as explore the role of vorinostat in combination with azacitidine. The primary objective was survival at 60 days. The study was independently monitored by the Dept of Biostatistics at our institution. Patients were randomized using an adaptive procedure. The first 40 patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio, and after that will be unbalanced in favor of the superior arm as efficacy (survival at 60 days) data accrue. Inclusion criteria included patients with newly diagnosed AML or higher-risk MDS who were not eligible for high-dose chemotherapy or clinical trials due to comorbidities, organ dysfunction, or poor performance status. Treatment consisted of azacitidine 75 mg/m2 IV daily x 5 (A arm) or azacitidine at the same dose schedule with vorinostat at 200 mg 3 times a day on days 1 to 5 (A+V arm). From September 2011 to March 2014, 79 patients were enrolled: 27 (34%) in the A arm and 52 (66%) in the A+V arm. Median age was 70 (30-90); median bone marrow blasts were 8% (1-89), median WBC 2.8 (0.2-102.0), median peripheral blasts 0% (0-78), poor cytogenetic risk in 41 (52%), diploidy in 20 (25%), and intermediate risk in 18 (22%). Reasons for inclusion were concurrence or previous history of other malignancies (36; 46%); ≥2 ECOG performance status (9; 11%); comorbidities including lung fibrosis, renal or liver dysfunction, or HIV positive status (17; 21.5%); or non-eligibility for others trials due to higher priority (17; 21.5%). The number of median cycles was 1 (1-12) for the A arm and 3 (1-12) for A+V arm. Study drugs were tolerated with no drug-related early stoppage (8 week mortality). Incidence of any grade 3-4 toxicity was less than 9%. Sixty-day survival was seen in 18 patients (67%) for the A arm and 44 patients (85%) for the A+V. The A+V arm was associated with a better outcome (OR 0.311, 95% CI [0.101-0.962]; p=0.043). The ORR (CR+CRp) was 12 (44%) for the A arm and 18 (35%) for the A+V arm (p=0.395). The median number of cycles for response was 1 in the A arm and 1.5 in the A+V arm. Survival was confounded by death unrelated to leukemia. The median overall (OS) and relapse-free survival (RFS) for the whole group were 7.1 months (5.5-8.7) and 5.9 months (3.1-8.7), respectively. Median OS for the A and A+V arms was 6.1 and 5.9 months, respectively (p=0.9), and median RFS for the A and A+V arms was 5.9 and 8.7 months (p=0.5), respectively. Patients who achieved CR/CRp had better OS: median 12 vs 6 months (HR: 0.41, [0.22-0.78] p=0.007). After a median follow-up of 9.5 months, 23 patients (29%) are alive at last follow-up. In conclusion, azacitidine+vorinostat was associated with a better 60-day survival than single-agent azacitidine in a patient population that is generally excluded from clinical trials. This study confirms the possibility of treating patients that are generally not considered eligible for clinical trials. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document