Unger, Joseph M.

LBA629 Background: Whether BCG strain influences clinical efficacy is unclear. BCG shortages and a reliance on a single strain may impact disease outcomes. Evidence also suggests that priming with intradermal (ID) BCG vaccination prior to intravesical (IVe) BCG enhances anti-tumor immunity and cancer clearance. Co-primary objectives address these issues. Methods: The trial design calls for 924 eligible patients with BCG naïve non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) (HG Ta/T1 +/- CIS or CIS alone) with negative purified protein derivative (PPD) to be randomized in a 1:1:1 ratio, to IVe TICE (Arm 1), IVe Tokyo-172 (Arm 2), or ID + IVe Tokyo-172 (Arm 3) BCG, stratifying on age group and clinical stage. IVe BCG included 6 weekly instillations (induction) and three weekly instillations (maintenance) at 3 and 6 months (mo), then every 6 mo for 3 years. Objective 1 tests whether Tokyo-172 BCG is non-inferior (NI) to TICE BCG, specifying a NI hazard ratio=1.34 (84% power). Objective 2 tests whether priming with ID prior to IVe Tokyo-172 is superior to IVe Tokyo-172 (HR=0.71, 83% power). The primary endpoint is high-grade recurrence-free survival (HG-RFS) censored at last cystoscopy, using a one-sided α=0.021 for each test. A Cox model adjusting for the stratification factors is used. Secondary endpoints include adverse events, 6-mo biopsy-proven complete response (CR) in patients with CIS +/- Ta, T1, duration of CR, PPD conversion and HG-RFS, progression-free survival (PFS) and quality of life. Max follow-up is 5 years. Results: 1000 (984 eligible) patients were enrolled from 2/17-12/20. Median (IQR) follow up is 4.6 (3.6, 5.0) yrs. Median age (range) is 70 yrs (26, 99), 17% are female, 9% are non-white, and 34% had CIS at entry. HG-RFS, CR, duration of CR at 4 yrs, and PFS were similar among arms (Table). PPD conversion occurred in 29% and was not correlated with HG-RFS. Gr 1-2 AE rate was similar (67%, 71%, and 67%) and Gr 3-4 (no Gr 5s) rate was 6%, 11%, and 14% for Arms 1,2, and 3, respectively. Conclusions: Tokyo-172 is non-inferior to TICE BCG in terms of HG RFS and CIS CR and is similar for PFS. Gr 3-4 AE rate is higher with Tokyo-172. Priming with Tokyo-172 BCG does not improve HG RFS. PPD conversion is not prognostic. Clinical trial information: NCT #03091660 . CIS Component N (eligible) 5-yr HG RFS HG RFSHR (95.8% CI) @ 5-yrPFS PFS HR(95% CI) @ CR %(95% CI) 4 yr CR duration Tice Ive 333 (330) 58% 79% 62%; 71/114(53%, 71%) 80% Tokyo Ive 332 (327) 64% *0.82(0.63, 1.08) 79% *0.99(0.70, 1.39) 60%; 66/110(50%, 69%) 83% Tokyo ID + Ive 335 (327) 63% **1.00(0.76, 1.33) 77% **1.07(0.76, 1.51) 63%; 69/109(54%, 72%) 80% 3 mo. PPD + conversionY vs. N 782 evaluable225 (29%)557 (71%) 69%67% ^HR=0.91(0.68, 1.22) * Tokyo-172 vs. Tice, ** Tokyo Priming vs. Tokyo no priming. ^conversion to PPD + vs. – @ adjusted for 2 strat factors (and arms for PPD model). PFS event = MIBC, metastasis, or death.

We present a subset analysis on the adolescent cohort of the S1826 randomized phase three trial, comparing nivolumab, doxorubicin, vinblastine, dacarbazine (N-AVD) to brentuximab vedotin-AVD (BV-AVD) in newly diagnosed advanced-stage (AS, stages III and IV) classic Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL). Among 994 patients enrolled, 24% (n = 240) were age 12-17 years. The 3-year progression-free survival (PFS) was significantly higher in the N-AVD group (93% [95% CI, 87 to 96]) compared with the BV-AVD group (82% [95% CI, 73 to 88]; hazard ratio, 0.37 [95% CI, 0.17 to 0.80]). One N-AVD and two BV-AVD patients received protocol-specified residual site radiotherapy (RT). Rates of febrile neutropenia and sepsis were low in both groups. Severe immune-related adverse events were infrequent, although thyroid dysfunction was seen in 7% with N-AVD. Sensory neuropathy (grade ≥2) was more frequent with BV-AVD (14% v 7%) by clinician report. Although premature discontinuation of therapy was reported in 12 N-AVD patients and four BV-AVD patients, no PFS events were noted in the N-AVD group. Patient-reported outcomes indicated less toxicity with N-AVD. N-AVD demonstrated high 3-year PFS in adolescents with AS cHL, with minimal RT use. S1826 exemplifies the benefits of harmonized clinical trial protocols, resulting in timely access to novel agents for adolescents.

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 Examining treatment effects in subgroups of patients defined by demographic, genetic, or clinical characteristics is increasingly of interest given the pursuit of personalized medicine and the importance of representation and equity in treatment decisions. The magnitude or even the direction of the treatment effect may vary across subgroups, and these differential treatment effects could have clinical implications. Subgroup analyses require caution in their interpretation, however, because of the high probability of a false-positive or false-negative conclusion. We outline study design and analysis considerations for responsibly investigating and reporting differential treatment effects across subgroups in oncology trials, with examples from the National Cancer Institute’s National Clinical Trials Network and Community Oncology Research Program. Recommendations include ensuring appropriate representation of patients from subgroups of interest, recognizing power and multiplicity limitations, and treating exploratory subgroup analyses as hypothesis generating rather than practice changing.

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.

Introduction: Health disparities negatively impact outcomes of patients (pts) with hematologic malignancies. Limited retrospective data correlating health disparities with lymphoma outcomes prohibit proper identification of reversible causes and elaboration of potential interventions. We present data from a coordinated effort between the National Clinical Trials Network (NCTN) cooperative groups (Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology [Alliance], Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group [ECOG], and the Southwest Oncology Group [SWOG]) to catalog the racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic characteristics of pts with lymphoma to better understand the quality of data collected, analyze selected health disparity indicators, and develop a prospective data collection tool. Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of demographic data from pts with lymphoma enrolled on 32 cooperative group therapeutic trials between 2005 and 2020. Special focus was placed on data regarding race, ethnicity, and proxies that help identify socioeconomic status (health insurance, residential zip code, Social Deprivation Index [SDI]). These were evaluated in relation to histology-based metrics from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program (SEER) Program with reported data through 2022. Here, our focus is to characterize baseline demographic and disparities data on the collection of these 32 NCTN lymphoma trials. Results: A total of 3,897 pts were included, with 3,406 non-Hodgkin lymphoma (87.4%) - 1,644 diffuse large B-cell (DLBCL, 48.3%), 905 follicular (26.6%), 669 mantle cell (19.6%), 113 primary central nervous system (3.3%), 75 T-cell (2.2%) - and 491 Hodgkin lymphoma (12.6%). Age at registration was available for 3,891 pts with median age 57.1 years (range: 18-92). The majority of patients were male (58.8%; one pt missing biological sex data). Race data were available for all but one patient, where most pts were white (W, 86.6%), followed by 246 African American (AA, 6.3%), 99 Asian (A, 2.5%), 13 American Indian or Alaska Native (AI, 0.3%), 8 Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander (PI, 0.2%), 11 with more than 1 race reported (0.3%), and 145 with unknown/not reported race. Ethnicity data were unknown for 327 pts (8.4%) with 179 Hispanic or Latino (Hisp, 4.6%). Combined race/ethnicity data showed 3,010 non-Hisp white (NHW, 77.2%) and 219 non-Hisp black (NHB, 5.6%). For comparison, in the SEER database, 84.7% of all lymphoma cases were W, with 8.6% AA, 5.2% A/PI, 0.4% AI, and 1.1% unknown race, and with 13.9% of pts reported as Hisp. When focusing on the 804 pts enrolled on Alliance CALGB 50303 and ECOG-ACRIN 1412 studies, two randomized DLBCL studies, there was a more proportional representation of W and AA pts with DLBCL - 82.1% and 9.8% compared 84.6% and 7.7%, respectively, at SEER database, with 5.3% Hisp (with another 5.3% unknown) compared to 14.9% at SEER. Insurance information was missing in 113 pts. Of the remainder, 2,102 pts had private insurance only (55.6%), 549 with a mix of private and public (14.5%), 701 public only (18.5%, including 11.4% Medicare, 4.5% Medicaid, 0.8% both), and 166 self-pay (4.4%). Year-matched SDI score was available in 2,885 pts, where higher SDI scores = higher social deprivation. The total mean SDI score for the overall cohort was 42.5 with significant differences observed based on race/ethnicity and insurance type. Specifically, NHW were from less deprived areas (mean SDI=38.8) than NHB (66.4) or Hisp (65.5) (p<0.0001). Those without insurance (mean SDI=52.6) or only public insurance (48.9) were located in areas associated with greater deprivation compared to pts with private (40.1) or public+private (38.8) insurance (p<0.0001). Conclusion: To our knowledge, this is the largest retrospective catalog of racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic characteristics of pts with lymphoma enrolled on cooperative group therapeutic trials. The scope of NCTN cooperative group lymphoma studies provides a unique opportunity to assess novel therapeutic outcomes for patients representing racial, ethnic and socioeconomic subgroups with both common and rare lymphoma subtypes. From this resource, additional analyses on relationships between SDI, race/ethnicity, insurance coverage, disease subtype, and temporal trends will be presented. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882, UG1CA189823

Abstract Background The phase III RxPONDER trial has affected treatment for node-positive (1-3), hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer with a 21-gene recurrence score (RS) less than 26. We investigated how these findings apply to different racial and ethnic groups within the trial. Methods The trial randomly assigned women to endocrine therapy (ET) or to chemotherapy plus ET. The primary clinical outcome was invasive disease-free survival (IDFS), with distant relapse-free survival (DRFS) as a secondary outcome. Multivariable Cox models were used to evaluate the association between race/ethnicity and survival outcomes, adjusting for clinicopathological characteristics, RS, and treatment. Results A total of 4048 women with self-reported race/ethnicity were included: Hispanic (15.1%), non-Hispanic Black (NHB) (6.1%), Native American/Pacific Islander (0.8%), Asian (8.0%), and non-Hispanic White (NHW) (70%). No differences in RS distribution, tumor size, or number of positive nodes were observed by race/ethnicity. Relative to NHWs, IDFS was worse for NHB participants (5-year IDFS 91.6% vs 87.1%, HR = 1.37; 95% CI = 1.03 to 1.81) and better for Asians (91.6% vs 93.9%, HR = 0.64; 95% CI = 0.46 to 0.91). Relative to NHW, DRFS was worse for NHB participants (5-year DRFS 95.8% vs 91.0%, HR = 1.65; 95% CI = 1.17 to 2.32) and better for Asians (95.8% vs 96.7%, HR = 0.59; 95% CI = 0.37 to 0.95). Adjusting for clinical characteristics, particularly body mass index, diminished the effect of race on outcomes. Chemotherapy treatment efficacy did not differ by race/ethnicity. Conclusions NHB women had worse clinical outcomes compared with NHWs in the RxPONDER trial despite similar RS and comparable treatment. Our study emphasizes the persistent racial disparities in breast cancer outcomes while highlighting complex interactions among contributing factors. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01272037.

Abstract Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are often collected in cancer clinical trials. Data obtained from trials with PROs are essential in evaluating participant experiences relating to symptoms, financial toxicity, or health-related quality of life. Although most features of clinical trial design, implementation, and analyses apply to trials with PROs, several considerations are unique. In this paper, we focus on specific issues such as selection of the tool, timing and frequency of assessments, and data collection methods. We discuss how the estimand framework can be used in connection with PROs, properties of common estimation methods, and handling of missing outcomes. With a plethora of literature available, we aim to summarize best practices and pragmatic approaches to the design and analysis of the studies incorporating PROs.

ImportanceThe American Institute for Cancer Research and American Cancer Society regularly publish modifiable lifestyle recommendations for cancer prevention. Whether these recommendations have an impact on high-risk breast cancer survival remains unknown.ObjectiveTo investigate whether adherence to cancer prevention recommendations before, during, and 1 and 2 years after breast cancer treatment was associated with disease recurrence or mortality.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThe Diet, Exercise, Lifestyles, and Cancer Prognosis Study (DELCaP) was a prospective, observational cohort study designed to assess lifestyles before diagnosis, during treatment, and at 1 and 2 years after treatment completion, implemented ancillary to the Southwest Oncology Group (SWOG) S0221 trial, a multicenter trial that compared chemotherapy regimens in breast cancer. Participants were chemotherapy-naive patients with pathologic stage I to III high-risk breast cancer, defined as node-positive disease with hormone receptor–negative tumors larger than 1 cm or any tumor larger than 2 cm. Patients with poor performance status and comorbidities were excluded from S0221. The study was conducted from January 1, 2005, to December 31, 2010; mean (SD) follow-up time for those not experiencing an event was 7.7 (2.1) years through December 31, 2018. The analyses reported herein were performed from March 2022 to January 2023.ExposureAn aggregated lifestyle index score comprising data from 4 time points and 7 lifestyles, including (1) physical activity, (2) body mass index, (3) fruit and vegetable consumption, (4) red and processed meat intake, (5) sugar-sweetened beverage consumption, (6) alcohol consumption, and (7) smoking. Higher scores indicated healthier lifestyle.Main Outcomes and MeasuresDisease recurrence and all-cause mortality.ResultsA total of 1340 women (mean [SD] age, 51.3 [9.9] years) completed the baseline questionnaire. Most patients were diagnosed with hormone-receptor positive breast cancer (873 [65.3%]) and completed some education beyond high school (954 [71.2%]). In time-dependent multivariable analyses, patients with highest vs lowest lifestyle index scores experienced a 37.0% reduction in disease recurrence (hazard ratio, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.48-0.82) and a 58.0% reduction in mortality (hazard ratio, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.30-0.59).Conclusions and RelevanceIn this observational study of patients with high-risk breast cancer, strongest collective adherence to cancer prevention lifestyle recommendations was associated with significant reductions in disease recurrence and mortality. Education and implementation strategies to help patients adhere to cancer prevention recommendations throughout the cancer care continuum may be warranted in breast cancer.

AbstractAlthough adults aged 65 years or older make up a strong majority of cancer patients, their underrepresentation in cancer clinical trials leads to the lack of representative data to guide evidence-based therapeutic decisions in this patient population. The Trial Design Working Group, convened as part of the workshop titled, Engaging Older Adults in the National Cancer Institute Clinical Trials Network: Challenges and Opportunities, recommended study designs and design elements that could improve accrual of older adults in National Cancer Institute–funded clinical trials. These include trials that are specifically designed to enroll older adults, trials that include a cohort of older patients (parallel cohort, stratified cohort, or embedded cohort), and trials with pragmatic design elements to facilitate enrollment of older adults. This manuscript provides brief descriptions of the recommended designs, examples of successful trials, and considerations for implementation of these designs.As with any clinical trial, the scientific questions and trial objectives should drive the study design, the selection of endpoints and intervention, and eligibility criteria. When designing trials that include older adults, the heterogeneity of fitness levels is an important consideration as fitness can influence accrual rates and outcomes. Appropriately incorporating geriatric assessments can help identify the optimal subset of older patients for inclusion and minimize selection bias. Incorporating pragmatic design elements to reduce the burden on trial participants as well as on accruing sites and retaining essential elements to ensure that the main goal of the trial can be accomplished can enhance enrollment without compromising the integrity of trials.