Wills, Rachel

PURPOSE The primary objective of this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter phase II study (Alliance A221805) was to screen two doses of duloxetine for preventing sensory oxaliplatin-induced peripheral neuropathy (OIPN). METHODS Participants were randomly assigned 1:1:1 to receive once daily 30 mg duloxetine, 60 mg duloxetine, or placebo. Eligible participants had stage II to III colorectal cancer and no baseline neuropathy, had Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-2, were age 25 years and older, and received oxaliplatin via one of the following doses and schedules: 85 mg/m 2 every 2 weeks (6 or 12 doses) or 130 mg/m 2 every 3 weeks (4 doses). Duloxetine/placebo was taken once daily beginning day 1 of cycle 1 and continued for 17 weeks. The primary end point, a composite response reflecting sensory OIPN symptom severity and onset, was measured in weeks 19-21 using a validated participant-reported outcome survey assessing extremity numbness, tingling, and pain. Response was defined as a participant-reported highest score of ≤2 (ie, 1 = not at all; 2 = a little) on survey items. To be evaluable for the response end point, eligible participants must have initiated oxaliplatin and submitted ≥1 postbaseline OIPN survey. RESULTS Of the 199 participants (n = 66, 30 mg duloxetine; n = 66, 60 mg duloxetine; n = 67, placebo), 46, 47, and 50 (N = 143, 71.8%), respectively, were evaluable for primary end point analysis based on modified intention-to-treat criteria. Participant mean age was 55.1 years (standard deviation = 10.4). Most were White (n = 113, 80.7%) and male (n = 82, 58.6%). The proportion of responders among those receiving placebo (68.0%) was similar to those receiving duloxetine 30 mg (65.2%) or 60 mg (66.0%). Duloxetine adherence rates, measured via pill counts—30 mg (54%), 60 mg (57%), and placebo (59%) groups—were low (<75%). CONCLUSION Duloxetine is not more promising than placebo for preventing sensory OIPN.

PURPOSE Lack of race- and age-diversity in clinical trials adversely affects generalizability of trial results and equity of trial access. Research on barriers to representative accrual has focused on patient-level factors. We aimed to define site-level factors affecting the diversity of accrual to a multicenter clinical trial. METHODS Alliance 191901 (GETSET) is a national randomized controlled trial testing interventions to promote breast cancer endocrine therapy adherence, which oversamples Black women and those under age 50 years at 30% thresholds. A secondary study objective is to examine site-level factors associated with accrual of Black and younger participants. At 50% accrual to the parent study, we performed prespecified analyses of association between site characteristics (region, neighborhood racial composition, Alliance membership type, number of recent accruals to cooperative research group trials) and the proportion of Black patients and younger patients accrued. We also examined trajectories of accrual over time for race- and age-specified subgroups. RESULTS The analysis included 124 sites. Among 590 participants, 9.7% were Black, and 22.4% were age <50 years. Neither site type nor historical accrual volume was associated with Black participant recruitment. Southern sites recruited higher proportions of Black participants (19.0% v 7.3% for West, P < .001). Neighborhood racial composition was positively associated with recruitment of Black participants (16.2% at sites from highest Black composition v 1.4% in lowest, P < .01). Recruitment trajectories of Black participants were slower than target rates, whereas those among non-Black participants were faster. CONCLUSION Neighborhood composition and geographic region were predictors of proportions of Black participants accrued to A191901 sites, but site type and historical accrual volume were not. When trials must limit site selection, identifying sites based on neighborhood composition and geography may be an appropriate tool for increasing trial diversity.

Abstract Background The Patient Cloud ePRO app was adopted by the National Cancer Institute National Clinical Trials Network (NCTN) to facilitate capturing electronic patient-reported (ePRO) outcome data, but use has been low. The study objectives were to test whether a patient-targeted ePRO educational resource (ePRO-E) would increase ePRO intent (number of users) and improve data quality (high quality: ≥80% of the required surveys submitted) within an ongoing NCTN study. Methods The ePRO-E intervention, a patient-targeted educational resource (written material and 6-minute animated YouTube video), was designed to address ePRO barriers. ePRO intent and data quality were compared between 2 groups (N = 69): a historical control group and a prospectively recruited intervention group exposed to ePRO-E. Covariates included technology attitudes, age, sex, education, socioeconomic status, and comorbidity. Results Intervention group ePRO intent (78.8%) was statistically significantly higher than historical control group intent (47.1%) (P = .03). Patients choosing ePRO versus paper surveys had more positive and higher technology attitudes scores (P = .03). The odds of choosing ePRO were 4.7 times higher (95% Confidence Interval [CI] = 1.2 to 17.8) (P = .02) among intervention group patients and 5.2 times higher (95% CI = 1.3 to 21.6) (P = .02) among patients with high technology attitudes scores, after controlling for covariates. However, the 80% submission rate (percentage submitting ≥80% of required surveys) in the ePRO group (30.6%) was statistically significantly lower than in the paper group (57.9%) (P = .05). Conclusions ePRO-E exposure increased ePRO intent. High technology attitudes scores were associated with ePRO selection. Since the ePRO survey submission rate was low, additional strategies are needed to promote high-quality data submission.

370 Background: Mounting evidence suggests tailored preparation targeting geriatric vulnerabilities can improve functional outcomes after major surgery in older adults. Although many surgeons express interest in surgical optimization of older patients, few practices have the time or expertise to deliver geriatric prehabilitation before surgery. This study investigated the effectiveness of OPTI-Surg, a frailty prehabilitation toolkit, for improving surgical outcomes. In this abstract, we report adherence to the OPTI-Surg toolkit in the intervention arm. Methods: Thoracic (T), gastrointestinal (GI), and urologic (GU) oncological surgery practices affiliated with NCI’s Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP) were randomized 1:1:1, stratified by practice type, to usual care (control), OPTI-Surg toolkit, or OPTI-Surg with an implementation coach. The toolkit was implemented at the practice level and consisted of the 12-item Edmonton Frail Scale (EFS) and guided recommendations for interventions including referrals directed at identified vulnerabilities. Eligible patients were ≥70 years old and undergoing curative intent surgery for T, Gl, or GU cancers. Results: From July 2019 to October 2021, 155 patients were enrolled in the OPTI-Surg intervention arm. The EFS was administered to 153 (98.7%) of the enrolled patients, 143 of whom went on to have surgery. Overall, 134 (93.7%) surgical patients had at least one deficit identified on the EFS assessment and 55 (41.0%) of these patients received a recommended referral intended to optimize surgical outcomes. Among the 55 patients who received referrals, 44 (80.0%) followed through on the referral. Individual deficit rates were highest for medication use, general health status, and functional performance, and referrals were most frequently made for deficits in continence and functional independence (Table). Conclusions: In the OPTI-Surg geriatric surgical optimization trial, implementation of the frailty screening with the EFS assessment was successful. Rates of recommended referrals for patients with identified deficits, however, were low. When referred, most patients followed through for targeted prehabilitation. Clinical trial information: NCT03857620 .[Table: see text]

Introduction Socioeconomic disparities for breast cancer surgical care exist. Although the aetiology of the observed socioeconomic disparities is likely multifactorial, patient engagement during the surgical consult is critical. Shared decision-making may reduce health disparities by addressing barriers to patient engagement in decision-making that disproportionately impact socioeconomically disadvantaged patients. In this trial, we test the impact of a decision aid on increasing socioeconomically disadvantaged patients’ engagement in breast cancer surgery decision-making. Methods and analysis This multisite randomised trial is conducted through 10 surgical clinics within the National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP). We plan a stepped-wedge design with clinics randomised to the time of transition from usual care to the decision aid arm. Study participants are female patients, aged ≥18 years, with newly diagnosed stage 0–III breast cancer who are planning breast surgery. Data collection includes a baseline surgeon survey, baseline patient survey, audio-recording of the surgeon–patient consultation, a follow-up patient survey and medical record data review. Interviews and focus groups are conducted with a subset of patients, surgeons and clinic stakeholders. The effectiveness of the decision aid at increasing patient engagement (primary outcome) is evaluated using generalised linear mixed-effects models. The extent to which the effect of the decision aid intervention on patient engagement is mediated through the mitigation of barriers is tested in joint linear structural equation models. Qualitative interviews explore how barriers impact engagement, especially for socioeconomically disadvantaged women. Ethics and dissemination This protocol has been approved by the National Cancer Institute Central Institutional Review Board, and Certificate of Confidentiality has been obtained. We plan to disseminate the findings through journal publications and national meetings, including the NCORP network. Our findings will advance the science of medical decision-making with the potential to reduce socioeconomic health disparities. Trial registration number ClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT03766009).

68 Background: Accrual of racial and ethnic minority patients (pts) to clinical trials has been an ongoing challenge in research. Barriers exist at many levels of engagement including trial availability, screening biases, strict enrollment criteria, and structural racism. Lack of trial diversity has led to less generalizable medical evidence, suboptimal data for toxicity and efficacy of cancer treatments, poorer outcomes and continued mistrust by communities of color in research processes that exclude or marginalize them. Site factors and study design strategies associated with successful recruitment of diverse study populations are understudied. Methods: Alliance A191901 is an RCT testing combinations of text and telephone support to promote endocrine therapy adherence among breast cancer survivors. It oversamples Black participants and those < 50 years at thresholds of 30% each. Administrative enrollment data was used to track and describe monthly accrual trajectory by race among the initial 50% of participants (n = 590) and to examine associations between % Black participants accrued and accruing site characteristics, including site type, geographic region, % Black population in the site’s zip code and volume of pts by race accrued to recent (2018-2019) Alliance trials, using χ2 tests. We also examined patterns of Black participant accrual before and after closure of the A191901 study to non-Black participants. Results: At 50% accrual, 124 sites had enrolled at least 1 participant. Among 590 participants, 9.7% were Black and 22.5% were < 50 years. Neither site type nor volume was associated with % Black participants recruited. Sites in the South recruited higher proportions of Blacks (19.0% vs 5.6% for Midwest, the lowest region, p < 0.001). Neighborhood racial composition was positively associated with accrual of Black participants (17.2% at sites from highest Black composition vs. 2.3% in lowest, p < 0.001). Recruitment trajectories of Black participants consistently lagged those of non-Black participants in the first half of the study; however, Black participants recruited per month numerically increased after the study reached target accrual of non-Blacks and closed to non-Black participants. Conclusions: Sites in neighborhoods and geographic regions with larger Black populations recruited higher proportions of Black participants, but site type and volume were not associated with recruitment of Black participants. Closure of non-Black study strata based on predetermined accrual targets may positively impact recruitment trajectories of Black participants, but further study is needed. Site selection based on neighborhood composition and geography may be an appropriate tool for increasing trial diversity. Support: UG1CA189823. Clinical trial information: NCT04379570.