In the phase III CASPIAN study, first-line durvalumab plus etoposide in combination with either cisplatin or carboplatin (EP) significantly improved overall survival (primary endpoint) versus EP alone in patients with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) at the interim analysis. Here we report patientreported outcomes (PROs). Materials and methods: Treatment-naïve patients with ES-SCLC received 4 cycles of durvalumab plus EP every 3 weeks followed by maintenance durvalumab every 4 weeks until progression, or up to 6 cycles of EP every 3 weeks. PROs, assessed with the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30 (QLQ-C30) version 3 and its lung cancer module, the Quality of Life Questionnaire-Lung Cancer 13 (QLQ-LC13), were prespecified secondary endpoints. Changes from baseline to disease progression or 12 months in prespecified key disease-related symptoms (cough, dyspnea, chest pain, fatigue, appetite loss) were analyzed with a mixed model for repeated measures. Time to deterioration (TTD) of symptoms, functioning, and global health status/quality of life (QoL) from randomization was analyzed. Results: In the durvalumab plus EP and EP arms, 261 and 260 patients were PRO-evaluable. Patients in both arms experienced numerically reduced symptom burden over 12 months or until progression for key symptoms.

No abstract

No abstract

BackgroundPatients with metastatic pancreatic cancer often have a detriment in health-related quality of life (HRQoL). In the randomized, double-blind, phase III POLO trial progression-free survival was significantly longer with maintenance olaparib, a poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor, than placebo in patients with a germline BRCA1 and/or BRCA2 mutation (gBRCAm) and metastatic pancreatic cancer whose disease had not progressed during first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. The prespecified HRQoL evaluation is reported here.Patients and methodsPatients were randomized to receive maintenance olaparib (300 mg b.i.d.; tablets) or placebo. HRQoL was assessed using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30-item module at baseline, every 4 weeks until disease progression, at discontinuation, and 30 days after last dose. Scores ranged from 0 to 100; a ≥10-point change or difference between arms was considered clinically meaningful. Adjusted mean change from baseline was analysed using a mixed model for repeated measures. Time to sustained clinically meaningful deterioration (TSCMD) was analysed using a log-rank test.ResultsOf 154 randomized patients, 89 of 92 olaparib-arm and 58 of 62 placebo-arm patients were included in HRQoL analyses. The adjusted mean change in Global Health Status (GHS) score from baseline was <10 points in both arms and there was no significant between-group difference [−2.47; 95% confidence interval (CI) −7.27, 2.33; P = 0.31]. Analysis of physical functioning scores showed a significant between-group difference (−4.45 points; 95% CI −8.75, −0.16; P = 0.04). There was no difference in TSCMD for olaparib versus placebo for GHS [P = 0.25; hazard ratio (HR) 0.72; 95% CI 0.41, 1.27] or physical functioning (P = 0.32; HR 1.38; 95% CI 0.73, 2.63).ConclusionsHRQoL was preserved with maintenance olaparib treatment with no clinically meaningful difference compared with placebo. These results support the observed efficacy benefit of maintenance olaparib in patients with a gBRCAm and metastatic pancreatic cancer.ClincalTrials.gov numberNCT02184195.

No abstract

Purpose This study aimed to elucidate the patient experience of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) to guide patient-centered outcome measurement in drug development. Methods Patients with HCC participated in qualitative interviews to elicit disease-related signs/symptoms and impacts, using discussion guides developed from literature searches and discussions with oncologists. Interview participants rated the disturbance of their experiences (0–10 scale). A conceptual model was developed and mapped against patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments identified from database reviews. Results Interviews were conducted with 25 individuals with HCC (68% were men; median age: 63 years; 12% Barcelona clinic liver cancer (BCLC) stage A; 32% stage B; and 56% stage C) in the USA. Fifty-one HCC-related concepts were identified from the interviews and were grouped into eight sign/symptom categories (eating behavior/weight changes; extremities [arms, legs]; fatigue and strength; gastrointestinal; pain; sensory; skin; other) and four impact categories (emotional; physical; cognitive function; other) for the conceptual model. The most prevalent and disturbing experiences across the disease stages were fatigue/lack of energy and emotional impacts such as frustration, fear, and depression. Abdominal pain and skin-related issues were particularly common and disturbing in individuals with HCC stage C. The EORTC QLQ-C30 and HCC18 were identified as commonly used PRO instruments in HCC studies and captured the relevant signs/symptoms associated with the patient experience. Conclusion Patients with HCC reported a range of signs/symptoms and impacts that negatively affect daily functioning and quality of life. Including PRO measures in HCC clinical trials can provide meaningful patient perspectives during drug development.

No abstract

We investigated the impact of durvalumab ± tremelimumab versus chemotherapy on patient-reported symptoms, functioning, and global health status/quality of life in the phase 3 MYSTIC trial of metastatic nonsmall-cell lung cancer in patients with tumor cell programmed cell death ligand 1 expression ≥ 25%. Durvalumab ± tremelimumab reduced symptom burden and improved times to deterioration, suggesting there were no detrimental effects with treatment. Background: The phase 3 MYSTIC study of durvalumab ± tremelimumab versus chemotherapy in metastatic nonsmall-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with tumor cell (TC) programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression ≥ 25% did not meet its primary endpoints. We report patient-reported outcomes (PROs). Patients and Methods: Treatmentnaïve patients were randomized (1:1:1) to dur valumab, dur valumab + tremelimumab, or chemotherapy. PROs were assessed in patients with PD-L1 TC ≥ 25% using EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30/LC13. Changes from baseline (12 months) for prespecified PRO endpoints of interest were analyzed by mixed model for repeated measures (MMRM) and time to deterioration (TTD) by stratified log-rank tests. Results: There were no between-arm differences in