Johnson, David

6133 Background: Patient (pt) trial experience may give insight to quality of life (QOL) factors affecting accrual, retention and outcome. While pts are vital to clinical trial success, we know little about their post-trial opinions. This trial examined pt opinion of their trial and treatment decision making (TDM). Methods: Pts enrolled on designated North Central Cancer Treatment Group (NCCTG) phase II or III treatment trials completed the TDM Control Preferences Scale at baseline and the Was It Worth It (WIWI) satisfaction assessment at the ends of cycle 1 and active protocol treatment. The primary endpoint was the proportion of pts reporting worthwhile participation. Fisher Exact tests compared pt opinion across subgroups. Results: As of 01/15/2012, 264 pts were enrolled on 25 protocols and treated at 79 sites. 86% of pts were in phase II studies and 89% had stage IV disease. At the end of cycle 1, pts felt the trial was worthwhile (74%), would do it again (85%), and would recommend it to others (82%). 85% of pts reported undiminished QOL and only 7% rated the trial worse than expected. End of treatment responses were similar. Satisfaction rates varied by tumor site (p=0.04). 11% of pts having tumor response rated the trial as not worthwhile, and 66% of pts with progressive disease rated it worthwhile (see table). Pts with concordant preferred and actual TDM roles rated participation higher than pts with discordant TDM roles (see table). Conclusions: Most pts endorsed their clinical trial experience. Contrary to popular beliefs, treatment outcome did not have an overwhelming impact on pt satisfaction, and was just one of many factors such as TDM role discordance. Assessing pt satisfaction will inform future study design that can potentially improve pt accrual and retention. [Table: see text]

2002 Background: This study sought to update the predictive significance of the three WHO-defined molecular glioma subgroups ( IDHwt, IDHmt/noncodel, and IDHmt/codel) in the subset of specimens available for analysis in NRG Oncology/RTOG 9802, a phase III trial of high-risk low-grade gliomas (LGGs) treated with radiation (RT) with and without PCV after biopsy/surgical resection. Notably, this is the first phase III study to evaluate the predictive value of the WHO subgroups in LGGs using prospectively-collected, well-annotated long-term overall survival data, in a post-hoc analysis. Methods: IDH1/2 mutation status was determined by immunohistochemistry and/or next-generation sequencing. 1p/19q status was determined by Oncoscan and/or 450K methylation data. Treatment effects on overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) by marker status were determined by the Cox proportional hazard model and tested using the log-rank test in a secondary and exploratory analysis. Results: Of all the randomized eligible high-risk G2 patients (N = 251) in NRG Oncology/RTOG 9802, 106(42%) patients had tissue available with sufficient quality DNA for profiling. Of these, 80(75%) were IDHmut; 43(41%) were IDHmut/non-co-deleted, 37(35%) were IDHmut/co-deleted, and 26(24%) were IDHwt. Upon univariate analyses, no significant difference in either PFS or OS was observed with the addition of PCV in the IDHwt subgroup. Both the IDHmut/non-co-deleted and IDHmut/co-deleted subgroups were significantly correlated with longer PFS (HR = 0.32; p = 0.003; HR = 0.13; p < 0.001) and OS (HR = 0.38; p = 0.013; HR = 0.21; p = 0.029) in the RT plus PCV arm, respectively. Conclusions: Our analyses suggest that both IDHmut/non-co-deleted and IDHmut/co-deleted subgroups received benefit from treatment with PCV although sample size is limited and analyses are post-hoc. Our results also support the notion that IDHwt high-risk LGG patients do not benefit from the addition of PCV to RT. Funding: U10CA180868, U10CA180822, and U24CA196067. Also, R01CA108633, R01CA169368, RC2CA148190, U10CA180850-01, BTFC, OSU-CCC (all to AC). Clinical trial information: NCT00003375.

PurposeFatigue is one of the most common symptoms experienced by patients with cancer. This trial was developed to evaluate the efficacy of long-acting methylphenidate for improving cancer-related fatigue and to assess its toxicities.Patients and MethodsAdults with cancer were randomly assigned in a double-blinded manner to receive methylphenidate (target dose, 54 mg/d) or placebo for 4 weeks. The Brief Fatigue Inventory was the primary outcome measure, while secondary outcome measures included a Symptom Experience Diary (SED), the Short Form-36 (SF-36) Vitality Subscale, a linear analog self-assessment, the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index, and the Subject Global Impression of Change.ResultsIn total, 148 patients were enrolled. Using an area under the serum concentration-time curve analysis, there was no evidence that methylphenidate, as compared with placebo, improved the primary end point of cancer-related fatigue in this patient population (P = .35). Comparisons of secondary end points, including clinically significant changes in quality-of-life variables and cancer-related fatigue change from baseline, were similarly negative. However, a subset analysis suggested that patients with more severe fatigue and/or with more advanced disease did have some fatigue improvement with methylphenidate (eg, in patients with stage III or IV disease, the mean improvement in usual fatigue was 19.7 with methylphenidate v 2.1 with placebo; P = .02). There was a significant difference in self-reported toxicities (SED), with increased levels of nervousness and appetite loss in the methylphenidate arm.ConclusionThis clinical trial was unable to support the primary prestudy hypothesis that the chosen long-acting methylphenidate product would decrease cancer-related fatigue.