Le-Rademacher, Jennifer

Abstract Background Older adults remain underrepresented in prospective trials of immunotherapy for advanced lung cancer. To estimate pembrolizumab adverse events, we conducted a multicenter, nonrandomized, open-label phase 2 trial of oncologist-choice first-line pembrolizumab with or without chemotherapy for older adults with advanced lung adenocarcinoma. Methods Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology A171901 enrolled patients aged 70 years and older with stage IV or recurrent lung adenocarcinoma starting oncologist’s choice of first-line pembrolizumab with or without carboplatin and pemetrexed. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients experiencing a solicited grade 3 or greater adverse event within 6 months. Secondary endpoints included overall survival, quality of life, and association of a geriatric assessment toxicity risk score with severe adverse events. Results Among 95 evaluable patients, 43 (45.3%) received pembrolizumab and 52 (54.7%) received pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy. Median age was 77 years (range = 70-92 years); 11.6% had an E Performance Status of 2 or higher. During 6 months of treatment, 25.6% (95% CI = 13.5% to 41.2%) experienced a solicited grade 3 or greater adverse event in the monotherapy group and 42.3% (95% CI = 28.7% to 56.8%) in the combination group. Median overall survival was 16.4 months (95% CI = 10.1 to not estimable) with monotherapy and 29.9 months (95% CI = 16.4 to not estimable) with combination therapy. Quality of life worsened during treatment. The geriatric assessment toxicity risk score was not associated with severe adverse events with pembrolizumab with or without chemotherapy. Conclusions Older adults with advanced lung adenocarcinoma receiving pembrolizumab with or without chemotherapy had comparable adverse event rates to those in prior registration trials that excluded medically frail patients. These findings can inform shared decision making and support inclusion of older adults in future trials. Clinical Trial NCT04533451 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04533451)

Abstract Background: Multidisciplinary research networks often face challenges in harmonizing metrics and measures across participating sites, limiting the ability to aggregate data and generate generalizable insights. To address this barrier within the Connecting Patient Populations to Clinical Trials (CP2CT) Network, the Data, Evaluation, and Coordinating Center (DECC) coordinated the establishment of a unified framework that supports comparable evaluation and enhances the scientific impact of network-wide activities. Methods: Consensus was developed through a structured, iterative, and collaborative process: (1) drafting initial constructs, metrics, measures, and benchmarks informed by Network site materials and relevant literature; (2) soliciting qualitative and quantitative feedback from Network sites via Basecamp, an innovative online collaborative workspace for construct development; (3) conducting open dialogue sessions followed by systematic review and integration of site feedback; and (4) refining all elements through repeated feedback cycles until no further modifications were requested. Each iteration strengthened the clarity, coherence, and scientific precision of the final constructs. Results: A total of seven constructs were incorporated into the consensus-development process: clinical trials referral, clinical trials accrual, participants’ awareness of clinical trials, participants’ knowledge of clinical trials, providers’ awareness of NCI-supported clinical trials, providers’ engagement with NCI-supported clinical trials, and providers’ referral to NCI-supported clinical trials. For each construct, the Network established a conceptual definition (broad description of the construct), an operational definition (specification of how the construct is measured or observed), benchmarks (standards for assessing performance), metrics (quantitative indicators of performance), and measures (tools used to quantify inputs, processes, or outcomes). Common measures were developed for two constructs—clinical trials accrual and participants’ knowledge of clinical trials. Although full consensus was not achieved across all four Network sites for every construct, at least three sites reached consensus for the remaining five constructs. Conclusion: This consensus-building initiative resulted in the development of a unified, scientifically grounded framework. By harmonizing key elements related to clinical trial referral, accrual, awareness, knowledge, and provider engagement, the Network has established foundational tools that enable cross-site data comparability and facilitate more rigorous assessment of efforts to connect diverse patient populations to clinical trials. This framework positions the Network to inform strategies that improve equitable clinical trial participation. Citation Format: Folakemi T. Odedina, Jennifer Le-Rademacher, Robert Freimuth, Cristina Orozco, Laura Lectora, Timethia Bonner, Holly Thorson, Connecting Patient Populations to Clinical Trials(CP2CT) Program Evaluation Work Group, Connecting Patient Populations to Clinical Trials(CP2CT) Steering Committee. Development of and consensus building towards shared metrics, measures and benchmarks for the connecting patient populations to clinical trials (CP2CT) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2026; Part 1 (Regular Abstracts); 2026 Apr 17-22; San Diego, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2026;86(7 Suppl):Abstract nr 860.