Snavely, Anna C.

Abstract Interpreting cancer clinical trial results often depends on addressing issues of multiplicity. When testing multiple hypotheses, unreliable findings can occur by chance due to the inflation of the type I error rate, the probability of mistakenly rejecting the null hypothesis when the null hypothesis is true. In this setting, researchers may often set the type I error rate (or the alpha level) low to limit false positive findings and the interpretation of a causal relationship where none exists. Conversely, overly conservative type I error control may result in declaring findings, that do not meet multiplicity-adjusted alpha levels, as false when they are actually true, reducing opportunities for new discovery. This presentation focuses on multiplicity adjustment in the context of clinical trials conducted within the NCI’s Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP). Because federally sponsored trials often require long-term participation from patients and represent a substantial investment by taxpayers, striking the right balance between optimizing what is learned from these trials, while avoiding false positive results, should be a priority.

Abstract The intracluster correlation coefficient (ICC) measures the correlation of observations within clusters and is a key parameter for power and sample size calculations for cluster randomized trials (CRTs). To facilitate the design of future CRTs within the National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP), all studies from the NCORP website were reviewed to identify completed CRTs. ICCs for primary and secondary outcomes (when available) were ascertained from these trials and summarized in this article as a resource for future trial development. Although ICCs are relatively small for many outcome cluster combinations, that is not always the case, so consideration should always be given to the specific outcome of interest, trial design, and type of cluster when estimating an ICC to facilitate trial development.

Abstract Cancer care delivery research trials conducted within the National Cancer Institute (NCI) Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP) routinely implement interventions at the practice or provider level, necessitating the use of cluster randomized controlled trials (cRCTs). The intervention delivery requires cluster-level randomization instead of participant-level, affecting sample size calculation and statistical analyses to incorporate correlation between participants within a practice. Practical challenges exist in the conduct of these cRCTs due to unique trial network infrastructures, including the possibility of unequal participant accrual totals and rates and staggered study initiation by clusters, potentially with differences between randomized arms. Execution of cRCT designs can be complex, ie, if some clusters do not accrue participants, unintended cluster-level crossover occurs, how best to identify appropriate cluster-level stratification, timing of randomization, and multilevel eligibility criteria considerations. This article shares lessons learned with potential mitigation strategies from 3 NCORP cRCTs.

Abstract Purpose: Taste and smell abnormalities (TSA) are common in patients receiving chemotherapy and may lead to altered nutritional intake, treatment withdrawal, and impaired quality of life. Lipid peroxidation in the oral cavity is one cause of TSA. Lactoferrin (LFN), an iron-binding salivary protein, reduces production of lipid oxidation byproducts and has been shown to reduce perception of unpleasant flavors. To assess the feasibility of LFN as a treatment for TSA, we conducted pilot investigations among patients with cancer who self-reported TSA following onset of chemotherapy. The primary objective was to assess change in subjective taste and smell perception from baseline to completion of 30-days of LFN supplementation.Methods: Patients were treated with 750mg LFN daily for 30 days and followed for an additional 30 days without LFN. TSA was measured via the taste and smell questionnaire (TSQ) including taste (score 0-10), smell (score 0-6), and composite scores (0-16, 0=no TSA) at baseline, day 30, and day 60.Results: 26 patients enrolled; 19 remained on study at day 30 and 17 at day 60. Baseline mean TSQ scores were 6.5 (taste), 3.1 (smell) and 9.6 (composite). By day 30, mean composite TSQ score improved by 1.7 (p=0.018); taste and smell improved by 0.6 (p=.062) and 1.1 (p=.042) respectively. From baseline to day 60, mean composite TSQ score improved by 3.8 (p<.0001); taste and smell improved by 1.9 (p=.001) and 1.8 (p=.003). Conclusions: Further evaluation of LFN is warranted to determine its value for improving self-reported TSA among patients receiving chemotherapy.