Citations

Purpose To determine the effects of carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (KRd) versus lenalidomide and dexamethasone (Rd) on health-related quality of life (HR-QoL) in the Carfilzomib, Lenalidomide, and Dexamethasone Versus Lenalidomide and Dexamethasone for the Treatment of Patients With Relapsed Multiple Myeloma (ASPIRE) trial. Methods Patients with relapsed multiple myeloma were randomly assigned to receive KRd or Rd. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire C30 and myeloma-specific module were administered at baseline; day 1 of cycles 3, 6, 12, and 18; and after treatment. The Global Health Status/Quality of Life (GHS/QoL) scale and seven subscales (fatigue, nausea and vomiting, pain, physical functioning, role functioning, disease symptoms, and adverse effects of treatment) were compared between groups using a mixed model for repeated measures. The percentages of responders with ≥ 5- or 15-point GHS/QoL improvement at each cycle were compared between groups. Results Baseline questionnaire compliance was excellent (94.1% of randomly assigned patients). KRd patients had higher GHS/QoL scores versus Rd patients over 18 treatment cycles (two-sided P < .001). The minimal important difference was met at cycle 12 (5.6 points) and approached at cycle 18 (4.8 points). There was no difference between groups for the other prespecified subscales from ASPIRE. A higher proportion of KRd patients met the GHS/QoL responder definition (≥ 5-point improvement) with statistical differences at cycle 12 (KRd v Rd patients, 25.5% v 17.4%, respectively) and 18 (KRd v Rd patients, 24.2% v 12.9%, respectively). Conclusion KRd improves GHS/QoL without negatively affecting patient-reported symptoms when compared with Rd. These data further support the benefit of KRd in patients with relapsed multiple myeloma.

Recent advances in follicular lymphoma (FL) have resulted in prolongation of overall survival (OS). Here we assessed if early events as defined by event‐free survival (EFS) at 12 and 24 months from diagnosis (EFS12/EFS24) can inform subsequent OS in FL. 920 newly diagnosed grade 1‐3A FL patients enrolled on the University of Iowa/Mayo Clinic Lymphoma SPORE Molecular Epidemiology Resource (MER) from 2002‐2012 were initially evaluated. EFS was defined as time from diagnosis to progression, relapse, re‐treatment, or death due to any cause. OS was compared to age‐and‐sex‐matched survival in the general US population using standardized mortality ratios (SMR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). We used a cohort of 412 FL patients from two Lyon, France hospital registries for independent replication. Patients who failed to achieve EFS12 had poor subsequent OS (MER SMR = 3.72, 95%CI: 2.78‐4.88; Lyon SMR = 8.74, 95%CI: 5.41‐13.36). Conversely, patients achieving EFS12 had no added mortality beyond the background population (MER SMR = 0.73, 95%CI: 0.56‐0.94, Lyon SMR = 1.02, 95%CI: 0.58‐1.65). Patients with early events after immunochemotherapy had especially poor outcomes (EFS12 failure: MER SMR = 17.63, 95%CI:11.97‐25.02, Lyon SMR = 19.10, 95%CI:9.86‐33.36; EFS24 failure: MER SMR = 13.02, 95%CI:9.31‐17.74, Lyon SMR = 7.22, 95%CI:4.13‐11.74). In a combined dataset of all patients from both cohorts, baseline FLIPI was no longer informative in EFS12 achievers. Reassessment of patient status at 12 months from diagnosis in follicular lymphoma patients, or at 24 months in patients treated with immunochemotherapy, is a strong predictor of subsequent overall survival in FL. Early event status provides a simple, clinically relevant endpoint for studies assessing outcome in FL. Am. J. Hematol. 91:1096–1101, 2016. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Abstract The increasing adoption of electronic health records (EHRs) in the United States, spurred largely by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid's EHR Meaningful Use Incentive Program, has potential to increase patient engagement and improve quality of healthcare delivered, especially for those diagnosed with cancer or other chronic conditions. Meaningful Use Stage 2 criteria require that providers give patients the ability to view, download and transmit their medical records; this is of particular importance for cancer patients, whose care is often delivered by teams of different specialists and for whom accurate communication of medical and treatment history between patients and providers is critical. To investigate whether there is a difference in patient access to and utilization of EHRs based on history of cancer diagnosis, we analyzed data from the National Cancer Institute's Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS 4, Cycle 4). The survey was fielded between July and November 2014 via postal mail; 3,370 complete surveys were returned (response rate = 34.4%). Of the respondents, 6.4% reported having a prior diagnosis of a cancer other than non-melanoma skin cancer. Among those with a self-reported history of cancer, 48.2% reported being offered access to their EHRs and 30.8% accessed their EHRs at least once, compared with those who did not have cancer (41.8% and 27.2%, respectively; p &gt; 0.05). After adjusting for sociodemographic and healthcare-related characteristics, no significant difference was found in the odds of being offered EHR access based on cancer diagnosis status. Those with a history of cancer had a statistically significantly higher odds of accessing their EHRs at least once compared to those without a diagnosis of cancer after adjustment, (OR = 1.75, 95% CI = 1.08-2.81, p = 0.02). Other significant predictive factors included in the model were age, education, health insurance, having a regular provider, and internet access (p &lt; 0.05). A borderline association was also seen between a previous cancer diagnosis and increased frequency of EHR access (p = 0.08). These findings suggest that, if offered access to their records, those with a diagnosis of cancer have higher odds of using their EHRs; further investigation is needed to determine how patients are using EHRs to help manage their care, the impact of this use on cancer-specific outcomes, and associations with quality of care. Citation Format: Alexandra J. Greenberg, Angela Falisi, Lila J. Finney Rutten, Wen-Ying Sylvia Chou, Richard P. Moser, Bradford W. Hesse. Cancer diagnoses and patient use of electronic health records: results from the health information national trends survey. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 107th Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2016 Apr 16-20; New Orleans, LA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2016;76(14 Suppl):Abstract nr 2573.

Abstract Introduction Tau protein levels in plasma may be a marker of neuronal damage. We examined associations between plasma tau levels and Alzheimer's disease (AD)–related magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and positron emission tomography (PET) neuroimaging measures among nondemented individuals. Methods Participants included 378 cognitively normal (CN) and 161 mild cognitive impairment (MCI) individuals enrolled in the Mayo Clinic Study of Aging with concurrent neuropsychological measures and amyloid PET, fluorodeoxyglucose PET, and MRI. Baseline plasma tau levels were measured using the Quanterix Simoa‐HD1 tau assay. Results Plasma tau levels were higher in MCI compared with CN (4.34 vs. 4.14 pg/mL, P = .078). In regression models adjusted for age, gender, education, and APOE , higher plasma tau was associated with worse memory performance (b = −0.30, P = .02) and abnormal cortical thickness in an AD signature region (odds ratio = 1.80, P = .018). Discussion Plasma tau is associated with cortical thickness and memory performance. Longitudinal studies will better elucidate the associations between plasma tau, neurodegeneration, and cognition.