Roth, Michael

Abstract Disparities in care, treatment-related toxicity and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) for adolescents and young adults (AYAs, aged 15-39 years) with cancer are under-addressed partly because of limited collection of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in cancer clinical trials (CCTs). The AYA years include key developmental milestones distinct from younger and older patients, and cancer interrupts attainment of critical life goals. Lack of consensus on a standardized approach to assess HRQoL and treatment-related toxicity in AYA CCTs has limited the ability to improve patient outcomes. The National Cancer Institute’s Clinical Trials Network AYA PRO Task Force was assembled to reach consensus on a core set of PROs and foster its integration into AYA CCTs. Eight key considerations for selecting the core PRO AYA battery components were identified: relevance to AYAs; importance of constructs across the age continuum; prioritization of validated measures; availability of measures without licensing fees; availability in multiple languages; applicability to different cancer types and treatments; ability to measure different HRQoL domains and toxicities; and minimized burden on patients and sites. The Task Force used a modified Delphi approach to identify key components of the PRO battery. The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) and the PRO Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events Measurement System met all criteria and were selected to assess HRQoL and treatment toxicity, respectively. Investigators are rapidly incorporating the recommendations of the Task Force into AYA trials. Inclusion of a standardized assessment of HRQoL and treatment toxicities in AYA CCTs is a vital first step to develop interventions to improve health outcomes for AYAs diagnosed with cancer.

BackgroundCurative therapy for ES requires both chemotherapy and local control of primary tumor. There is no universally accepted standard approach to local control modalities. This survey was conducted to determine practice patterns and factors influencing the choice to offer various local control modalities to patients with ES of the spine and pelvis.MethodsThe survey consisted of four scenarios involving a 15‐year‐old girl who presented with Ewing sarcoma of thoracic vertebra, sacrum, iliac wing, and acetabulum with or without neurologic compromise. The questionnaire was sent to oncologists, orthopedic surgeons, and radiation oncologists, asking their recommendations for local control modality.ResultsAmong 94 respondents, radiotherapy was most frequently chosen for sacral tumors (68.1%) and T10 vertebral tumors (46.2%) whereas surgery was preferred for iliac wing pelvic tumors (45.7%) and acetabular tumors (43.6%). Orthopedic surgeons were significantly more likely to offer surgery than radiation oncologists (OR 3.07, 95%CI 1.37‐6.88, P = 0.007). Providers outside North America were more likely to offer combined surgery plus radiotherapy (OR 10.58, 95%CI 5.41‐20.70, P < 0.001).ConclusionConsiderable heterogeneity exists in local control modalities for Ewing sarcoma of the spine and pelvis. Specialty and location of practice may influence treatment recommendations.