Do current approaches to assessing therapy related adverse events align with the needs of long-term cancer patients and survivors?

Pettit, Syril; Kirch, Rebecca

doi:10.1186/s40959-018-0031-4

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 116 publications

(153 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As the clinical management of cancer improves, the impact of TRAEs is of increasing importance to healthcare stakeholders. Much of this is due to the impact of TRAEs on patients’ quality of life, compliance with clinical regimens, and the clinical and economic burden of illness [ 28 , 29 ]. For example, a recent retrospective analysis found that roughly 20% of unscheduled hospitalizations among patients with solid tumors were due to TRAEs [ 29 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Indirect Treatment Comparison of Larotrectinib versus Entrectinib in Treating Patients with TRK Gene Fusion Cancers

García‐Foncillas

Bokemeyer

Italiano

et al. 2022

Cancers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Information regarding the comparative efficacy of first-generation receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors is limited. This matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) evaluated differences in efficacy and safety across larotrectinib and entrectinib trials. Data from clinical trials for larotrectinib (LOXO-TRK-14001 (NCT02122913), SCOUT (NCT02637687), and NAVIGATE (NCT02576431)) and entrectinib (ALKA-372-001 (EudraCT 2012-000148-88), STARTRK-1 (NCT02097810), and STARTRK-2 (NCT02568267)) were used. Adults (≥18 years) across trials were matched on available baseline characteristics. Outcomes evaluated included overall response rate (ORR), complete response (CR) rate, duration of response (DoR), overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), any serious treatment-related adverse events of grade ≥ 3 (TRAEs), and TRAEs leading to treatment discontinuation. The MAIC included 74 patients from entrectinib trials and 117 and 147 patients for the larotrectinib efficacy and safety populations, respectively. Post-matching, larotrectinib was associated with a significantly longer median duration of OS than entrectinib (p < 0.05) and a numerically longer median PFS (p = 0.07). ORR was similar for both agents (p = 0.63). The CR rate was higher (p < 0.05) and the DoR was longer for larotrectinib (p < 0.05). Safety outcomes were comparable and low for both treatments. Results were consistent in sensitivity analyses. These findings suggest favorable efficacy for larotrectinib and comparable safety profiles versus entrectinib in treating tropomyosin receptor kinase fusion cancer.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Indirect Treatment Comparison of Larotrectinib versus Entrectinib in Treating Patients with TRK Gene Fusion Cancers

García‐Foncillas

Bokemeyer

Italiano

et al. 2022

Cancers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Adjuvant therapy is administered to patients after primary treatment, when the patient is “cancer free,” to lower the risk of disease recurrence . Unfortunately, in addition to their potentially life‐prolonging efficacy, adjuvant therapies also may cause adverse events (AEs) that can affect a patient's adherence to drug therapy, as well as their immediate and long‐term physical, emotional, and financial health and quality of life . AEs vary by treatment, dosing, duration, and patient and can range from mild fatigue, to severe chronic pain, to potentially fatal organ failure.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…3 Unfortunately, in addition to their potentially life-prolonging efficacy, adjuvant therapies also may cause adverse events (AEs) that can affect a patient's adherence to drug therapy, as well as their immediate and long-term physical, emotional, and financial health and quality of life. 4,5 AEs vary by treatment, dosing, duration, and patient and can range from mild fatigue, to severe chronic pain, to potentially fatal organ failure. As this potential for extended survival increases, so too does the focus on patient quality of life, both during and after treatment.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stakeholder perspectives on addressing adverse events from adjuvant cancer therapy: A qualitative study

Pettit

Silberman

Lich

et al. 2019

Cancer

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background With increasing survival rates, a growing population of patients with cancer have received or will receive adjuvant therapy to prevent cancer recurrences. Patients and caregivers will confront the complexities of balancing the preventative benefits of adjuvant therapy with possible near‐term or long‐term adverse events (AEs). Adjuvant treatment–related AEs (from minimal to severe) can impact therapeutic adherence, quality of life, emotional and physical health, and survival. However, to the authors' knowledge, limited information is available regarding how stakeholders use or desire to use adjuvant‐related AE information to inform the care of patients with cancer. Methods A qualitative, purposeful sampling approach was used to elicit stakeholder feedback via semistructured interviews (24 interviews). Drug development, drug regulatory, clinical, payer, and patient/patient advocacy stakeholders were questioned about the generation, dissemination, and use of adjuvant treatment–related AE information to inform the care of patients with cancer. Transcripts were coded independently by 2 senior health care researchers and reconciled to identify key themes. Results All stakeholder groups in the current study identified needed improvements in each of the following 4 areas: 1) improving the accessibility and relevance of AE‐related information; 2) better integrating and implementing available information regarding AEs for decisions; 3) connecting contemporary cultural and economic value systems to the generation and use of information regarding adjuvant treatment–related AEs; and 4) addressing a lack of alignment and ownership of stakeholder efforts to improve the use of AE information in the adjuvant setting. Conclusions Despite commonalities in the overall needs identified by the diverse stakeholders in the current study, broad systemic change has been stymied. The current study identified the lack of alignment and the absence of a central “owner” of these diffuse efforts as a previously unrecognized hurdle to realizing the desired systemic improvements. Future initiatives aimed at improving quality of life and outcomes for patients receiving adjuvant therapy through the improved use of AE information must address this challenge through innovative collectives and novel leadership strategies.

show abstract

Prevalence of Fatigue and Associated Factors Among Cancer Patients Attending Tikur Anbessa Specialized Hospital, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

Nugusse¹,

Lemlem²,

Deressa³

et al. 2021

CMAR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Fatigue is a subjective and distressing symptom in cancer patients and has profound effects on daily life. The rates of fatigue during treatment are reported to be 25–90%. Its causes are secondary to their treatment course, cancer itself and associated factors. Purpose To assess the prevalence of fatigue and associated factors among cancer patients at Tikur Anbessa Specialized Hospital in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2019. Patients and Methods A cross-sectional study design was conducted on cancer patients undergoing treatment in Tikur Anbessa Specialized Hospital. A sample of 278 was selected using systematic random sampling technique and Brief Fatigue Inventory questionnaire was used for data collection. The data were entered into EPI data version 3.1 and transferred to SPSS version 24 for analysis. Bivariate and multivariable logistic regression were conducted to summarize the data. The significant statistical test was determined at 95% confidence interval and at p<0.05. Results The mean age of the participants was 44.9 ± 14 years. The prevalence of fatigue identified by this study was 208 (74.8%). Age, stage of cancer, presence of infection, type of cancer, and type of treatment had shown a significant association with fatigue [AOR = 3.15, 95% CI: (1.35–7.34)], [AOR = 0.02, 95% CI: (0.003–0.172)], [AOR = 4.15, 95% CI: (1.06–16.07)], [AOR = 5.19, 95% CI: (1.59–16.90)], [AOR = 0.18, 95% CI: (0.07–0.462)] respectively. Conclusion The prevalence of fatigue in cancer patients in this study was high. Risk factors were age of the patients, stage of cancer, presence of infection, cervical cancer and radiation therapy.

show abstract

Do current approaches to assessing therapy related adverse events align with the needs of long-term cancer patients and survivors?

Cited by 3 publications

References 116 publications

Indirect Treatment Comparison of Larotrectinib versus Entrectinib in Treating Patients with TRK Gene Fusion Cancers

Indirect Treatment Comparison of Larotrectinib versus Entrectinib in Treating Patients with TRK Gene Fusion Cancers

Stakeholder perspectives on addressing adverse events from adjuvant cancer therapy: A qualitative study

Prevalence of Fatigue and Associated Factors Among Cancer Patients Attending Tikur Anbessa Specialized Hospital, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About