Abstract
Abstract
Purpose
Regulatory guidance suggests capturing patient-reported overall side effect impact in cancer trials. We examined whether the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT) GP5 item (“I am bothered by side effects of treatment”) post-neoadjuvant chemotherapy/radiotherapy differed between oxaliplatin vs. non- oxaliplatin arms in the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) R-04 trial of stage II–III rectal cancer patients.
Methods
The R-04 neoadjuvant trial compared local-regional tumor control between patients randomized to receive 5-fluorouracil or capecitabine with radiation, with or without oxaliplatin (4 treatment arms). Participants completed surveys at baseline and immediately after chemoradiotherapy. GP5 has a 5-point response scale: “Not at all” (0), “A little bit” (1), “Somewhat” (2), “Quite a bit” (3), and “Very much” (4). Logistic regression compared the odds of reporting moderate-high side effect impact (GP5 2–4) between patients receiving oxaliplatin or not after chemoradiotherapy, controlling for relevant patient characteristics. We examined associations between GP5 and other patient-reported outcomes reflecting side effects.
Results
Analyses were performed among 1132 study participants. Participants receiving oxaliplatin were 1.58 times (95% CI: 1.22–2.05) more likely to report moderate-high side effect bother at post-chemotherapy/radiation. In both arms, worse overall side effect impact was associated with patient-reported diarrhea, nausea, vomiting, and peripheral sensory neuropathy (p < 0.01 for all).
Conclusion
This secondary analysis of R-04 found that GP5 distinguished between patients receiving oxaliplatin or not as part of their post-neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, adding patient-centric evidence on the reduced tolerability of oxaliplatin and demonstrating that GP5 is sensitive to known toxicity differences between treatments.
ClinicalTrials.gov
NCT00058474.
Funder
National Cancer Institute
National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference39 articles.
1. Basch, E., Campbell, A., Hudgens, S, et al. (2020). Broadening the Definition of Tolerability in Cancer Clinical Trials to Capture the Patient Experience. https://www.focr.org/sites/default/files/Comparative%20Tolerability%20Whitepaper_FINAL.pdf.
2. United States Food and Drug Administration. Core Patient-Reported Outcomes in Cancer Clinical Trials Guidance for Industry (2021). June 9th.
3. Pearman, T. P., Beaumont, J. L., Mroczek, D., O’Connor, M., & Cella, D. (2018). Validity and usefulness of a single-item measure of patient-reported bother from side effects of cancer therapy. Cancer. Mar 1. ;124(5):991–997. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.31133.
4. Siegel, R. L., Miller, K. D., Wagle, N. S., Jemal, A., & Cancer statistics (2023). CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians. 2023/01/01 2023;73(1):17–48. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21763.
5. Wolmark, N., Wieand, H. S., Hyams, D. M., et al. (2000). Randomized trial of postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy with or without radiotherapy for carcinoma of the rectum: National Surgical adjuvant breast and Bowel Project Protocol R-02. J Natl Cancer Inst Mar, 1(5), 388–396. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/92.5.388.