Culakova, Eva

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 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 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.

11625 Background: Improving body image and self-esteem are top ASCO priorities in the survivorship care of men with prostate cancer (PCa). Body image and global self-esteem, influenced by physical self-worth, are negatively affected by PCa treatment. We investigate whether exercise can improve physical self-worth in men treated for PCa and if improving self-worth is associated with changes in quality of life (QoL) and mental health. Methods: We performed a secondary analysis of a phase II randomized controlled trial comparing the effects of Exercise for Cancer Patients(EXCAP), a structured, 6-week, home-based exercise intervention, to usual care (UC) in men with non-metastatic PCa receiving radiation or Androgen Deprivation Therapy (ADT). The Physical Self-Perception Profile (PSPP), a valid 30-item questionnaire where higher scores indicate greater physical self-worth, was assessed at pre- and post-intervention. Changes between arms were compared using ANCOVA. Spearman correlations were calculated for pre/post-intervention change scores for PSPP and QoL, depression, and anxiety as measured by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT), Center of Epidemiologic Studies Depression (CES-D) scale, and State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI), respectively. Results: Fifty-eight men were randomized; average age was 67.1 years. Physical self-worth at baseline moderated the effect of the intervention. Compared to UC, EXCAP improved physical self-worth in those with baseline PSPP scores above the median (p < 0.04). Exercisers with baseline PSPP scores in the top quartile demonstrated a more significant improvement over UC (p < 0.01). Improvements in physical self-worth were associated with improved QoL (r = 0.29, p = 0.04), depression (r = -0.28, p = 0.04) and anxiety (r = -0.30, p = 0.03). Conclusions: Exercise significantly improves physical self-worth in men with PCa on radiation or ADT, and greater physical self-worth is associated with improved QoL, depression and anxiety. Those with higher baseline physical self-worth derived the most benefit from exercise. Exercise should be prescribed to boost self-esteem and body image in men receiving radiation or ADT for PCa. Clinical trial information: NCT00815672.