12048 Background: Playing music has been an important part of human culture for millennia. Today more than half of American households have at least one person who plays music, and in the UK 43% of adults play an instrument. Despite the overlap between musicians and people diagnosed with cancer, the effect of cancer treatment on musicianship has not been well-studied. We previously reported that 26% of a musician breast cancer survivor cohort reported difficulty with musicianship after treatment, and here we conduct further analysis to identify treatment and disease factors associated with this difficulty, termed acute musical toxicity (AMT). Methods: The Musical Toxicity Questionnaire was distributed to participants who had previously enrolled in the Mayo Clinic Breast Cancer Registry. PROMIS (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System) scores were available through the Registry and treatment details were collected retrospectively. Due to the inter-dependency and high correlation between treatment and disease-related variables, a classification tree analysis (CTA) was performed to identify the combination of variables that most accurately classified patients by AMT. Sixteen variables were analyzed by the algorithm. Logistic regression was utilized for examining associations between AMT and continuous variables. Results: Of the 4075 surveys distributed, 1871 were returned and 535 respondents identified as musicians. Median time from diagnosis was 5.2 years, respondents were mostly stage I or II (71%), and 32% were node positive (N+). Over a quarter (26% or 144 respondents) reported AMT. In the final CTA model, being N+ was strongly associated with AMT (42% of those N+ had AMT, 20% of those not N+ had AMT). For respondents who were N+, those who received endocrine therapy were more likely to have AMT than those who did not (46% vs 21% respectively). Subsequent leaves identified not undergoing axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) and receiving chemotherapy as associated with AMT. For respondents who did not receive chemotherapy, breast reconstruction was associated with AMT (60% vs 19%). Variables such as mastectomy, radiation volume, specific chemotherapies, and stage of disease were not selected by the algorithm. The odds of having AMT decreased by 9.7% and 17% with each additional point in the composite mental health (p=0.003) and physical health (p<0.001) PROMIS scores, respectively. The odds of having AMT increased by 3.5% with each lymph node removed (p=0.001). Conclusions: The final model suggests that the group with the largest proportion of AMT was N+, received endocrine therapy, did not have ALND, and received chemotherapy. Both physical and mental health PROMIS scores were associated with AMT, although the directionality of this relationship requires more study. Care teams should counsel patients on potential musical toxicity and engage in shared decision making with musical patients.
Establishing the minimal clinically important difference of the Brief Fatigue Inventory for brain or CNS cancer patients undergoing radiotherapy
Abstract Background Minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) quantify the clinical relevance of quality of life results at the individual patient and group level. The aim of this study was to estimate the MCID for the Brief Fatigue Inventory (BFI) and the Worst and Usual Fatigue items in patients with brain or CNS cancer undergoing curative radiotherapy. Methods Data from a multi-site prospective registry was used. The MCID was calculated using distribution-based and anchor-based approaches. For the anchor-based approach, the fatigue item from the PROMIS-10 served as the anchor to determine if a patient improved, deteriorated, or had no change from baseline to end of treatment (EOT). We compared the unadjusted means on the BFI for the 3 groups to calculate the MCID. For the distribution-based approaches, we calculated the MCID as 0.5 SD of the scores and as 1.96 times the standard error of measurement. Results Three-hundred and fifty nine patients with brain or CNS tumors undergoing curative radiotherapy filled out the 9-item BFI at baseline and EOT. The MCID for the BFI was 1.33 (ranging from 0.99 to 1.70 across the approaches), 1.51 (ranging from 1.16 to 2.02) and 1.76 (ranging from 1.38 to 2.14) for the usual and worst fatigue items, respectively. Conclusions This study provides the MCID ranges for the BFI and Worst and Usual fatigue items, which will allow clinically meaningful conclusions to be drawn from BFI scores. These results can be used to select optimal treatments for patients with brain or CNS cancer or to interpret BFI scores from clinical trials.
Geriatric pre-surgical optimization in the NCORP (Alliance).
370 Background: Mounting evidence suggests tailored preparation targeting geriatric vulnerabilities can improve functional outcomes after major surgery in older adults. Although many surgeons express interest in surgical optimization of older patients, few practices have the time or expertise to deliver geriatric prehabilitation before surgery. This study investigated the effectiveness of OPTI-Surg, a frailty prehabilitation toolkit, for improving surgical outcomes. In this abstract, we report adherence to the OPTI-Surg toolkit in the intervention arm. Methods: Thoracic (T), gastrointestinal (GI), and urologic (GU) oncological surgery practices affiliated with NCI’s Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP) were randomized 1:1:1, stratified by practice type, to usual care (control), OPTI-Surg toolkit, or OPTI-Surg with an implementation coach. The toolkit was implemented at the practice level and consisted of the 12-item Edmonton Frail Scale (EFS) and guided recommendations for interventions including referrals directed at identified vulnerabilities. Eligible patients were ≥70 years old and undergoing curative intent surgery for T, Gl, or GU cancers. Results: From July 2019 to October 2021, 155 patients were enrolled in the OPTI-Surg intervention arm. The EFS was administered to 153 (98.7%) of the enrolled patients, 143 of whom went on to have surgery. Overall, 134 (93.7%) surgical patients had at least one deficit identified on the EFS assessment and 55 (41.0%) of these patients received a recommended referral intended to optimize surgical outcomes. Among the 55 patients who received referrals, 44 (80.0%) followed through on the referral. Individual deficit rates were highest for medication use, general health status, and functional performance, and referrals were most frequently made for deficits in continence and functional independence (Table). Conclusions: In the OPTI-Surg geriatric surgical optimization trial, implementation of the frailty screening with the EFS assessment was successful. Rates of recommended referrals for patients with identified deficits, however, were low. When referred, most patients followed through for targeted prehabilitation. Clinical trial information: NCT03857620 .[Table: see text]
Surgical care and outcomes in older patients with cancer through implementation of a pre-surgical toolkit (OPTI-Surg): Interim results of a phase III cluster randomized trial (Alliance A231601CD).
1541 Background: Frailty is common in older adults undergoing major cancer surgery. Mounting evidence indicates multimodal interventions to optimize patient functional status by addressing vulnerabilities associated with frailty before surgery result in decreased complications and enhanced functional recovery. This study tested the effectiveness of OPTI-Surg, a surgical prehabilitation toolkit for improving surgical care and outcomes in older patients undergoing major cancer surgery. Here, we report results from the planned futility interim analysis (IA). Methods: Thoracic (T), gastrointestinal (GI), and urologic (GU) oncological surgery practices affiliated with NCI’s Community Oncology Research Program were randomized 1:1:1, stratified by practice type, to usual care (control), OPTI-Surg toolkit, or OPTI-Surg with an implementation coach. The toolkit was implemented at the practice level. It consisted of the 12-item Edmonton Frail Scale and guided recommendations for interventions directed at identified vulnerabilities. Eligible patients were adults ≥70 years old undergoing curative intent surgery for lung, gastrointestinal, or urologic cancers. Primary outcome was 8-week post-operative function (weekly caloric expenditure) derived from the validated Community Healthy Activities Model Program for Seniors (CHAMPS) questionnaire. A linear mixed model was used to compare usual care to the 2 OPTI-Surg arms combined, controlling for baseline function. Results: From July 2019 to October 2021, 225 patients, 50% of the total accrual goal, were enrolled from 29 practices, triggering the IA. Study was suspended to new patient accrual March to June 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic. There were no differences in demographics by arm (mean age 76.2 years; 46.4% women; 79.6% white; 20.4% lung resection, 69.8% major GI surgery, 9.8% total cystectomy). Of the 225 patients, 140 (47 Usual Care, 93 OPTI-Surg) were evaluable for the IA. There was no significant difference in post-operative function between OPTI-Surg and usual care (mean decrease of 0.59 kCal/week for OPTI-Surg patients and 0.19 kCal/week for usual care patients, p = 0.762, intraclass correlation = 0.033). Based on the futility analysis, the DSMB recommended closure of recruitment on September 16, 2022. Conclusions: Implementation of the OPTI-Surg toolkit did not significantly improve functional outcomes 8 weeks after surgery for patients aged 70 and older undergoing major cancer surgery compared to usual care. Future analysis of implementation and ethnographic data may identify reasons why significant differences between the intervention and usual care arms were not observed, potentially including disruptions due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Clinical trial information: NCT03857620 .
Enrollment patterns and site-level predictors of Black participant recruitment to a multisite randomized clinical trial (RCT) of endocrine therapy adherence support.
68 Background: Accrual of racial and ethnic minority patients (pts) to clinical trials has been an ongoing challenge in research. Barriers exist at many levels of engagement including trial availability, screening biases, strict enrollment criteria, and structural racism. Lack of trial diversity has led to less generalizable medical evidence, suboptimal data for toxicity and efficacy of cancer treatments, poorer outcomes and continued mistrust by communities of color in research processes that exclude or marginalize them. Site factors and study design strategies associated with successful recruitment of diverse study populations are understudied. Methods: Alliance A191901 is an RCT testing combinations of text and telephone support to promote endocrine therapy adherence among breast cancer survivors. It oversamples Black participants and those < 50 years at thresholds of 30% each. Administrative enrollment data was used to track and describe monthly accrual trajectory by race among the initial 50% of participants (n = 590) and to examine associations between % Black participants accrued and accruing site characteristics, including site type, geographic region, % Black population in the site’s zip code and volume of pts by race accrued to recent (2018-2019) Alliance trials, using χ2 tests. We also examined patterns of Black participant accrual before and after closure of the A191901 study to non-Black participants. Results: At 50% accrual, 124 sites had enrolled at least 1 participant. Among 590 participants, 9.7% were Black and 22.5% were < 50 years. Neither site type nor volume was associated with % Black participants recruited. Sites in the South recruited higher proportions of Blacks (19.0% vs 5.6% for Midwest, the lowest region, p < 0.001). Neighborhood racial composition was positively associated with accrual of Black participants (17.2% at sites from highest Black composition vs. 2.3% in lowest, p < 0.001). Recruitment trajectories of Black participants consistently lagged those of non-Black participants in the first half of the study; however, Black participants recruited per month numerically increased after the study reached target accrual of non-Blacks and closed to non-Black participants. Conclusions: Sites in neighborhoods and geographic regions with larger Black populations recruited higher proportions of Black participants, but site type and volume were not associated with recruitment of Black participants. Closure of non-Black study strata based on predetermined accrual targets may positively impact recruitment trajectories of Black participants, but further study is needed. Site selection based on neighborhood composition and geography may be an appropriate tool for increasing trial diversity. Support: UG1CA189823. Clinical trial information: NCT04379570.
Collaborative biostatistics and epidemiology in academic medical centres: A survey to assess relationships with health researchers and ethical implications
AbstractThe role of collaborative biostatisticians and epidemiologists in academic medical centres and how their degree type, supervisor type and sex influences recognition and feelings of respect is poorly understood. We conducted a cross‐sectional survey of self‐identified biostatisticians and epidemiologists working in academic medical centres in the United States or Canada. The survey was sent to 341 contacts at 125 institutions who were asked to forward the survey invitation to faculty and staff at their institution and posted on Community sections of the American Statistical Association website. Participants were asked a variety of questions including if they felt pressured to produce specific results, whether they had intellectual and ethical freedom to pursue appropriate use of statistical methods in collaborative research and if they felt their contributions were appropriately recognized by collaborators. We received responses from 314 biostatisticians or related methodologists. A majority were female (59%), had a doctorate degree (52%) and reported to a statistician or biostatistician supervisor (69%). Overall, most participants felt valued by their collaborators, but that they did not have sufficient calendar time to meet deadlines. Doctoral‐level participants reported more autonomy in their collaborations than master's level participants. Females were less likely to feel recognized and respected compared with males. The survey results suggest that while most respondents felt valued by their collaborators, they have too many projects and need more time to critically review research. Further research is needed to understand why response differs by sex and how these responses fluctuate over time.