Background: Among all patients with cancer, those with advanced non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) experience the most distress. Although new therapies are improving survival, it is unknown whether receiving immunotherapy or targeted therapy during the COVID-19 pandemic increases patients’ psychological vulnerability. To meet clinical needs, knowledge of patients’ COVID-19 perceptions and safety behaviors is essential. Thus, this study compared patients’ psychological responses at diagnosis and during COVID-19 and compared patients with similar individuals without cancer during the same period. Patients and Methods: Patients with advanced NSCLC enrolled at diagnosis for cohort study participated (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03199651). Those with follow-ups from April 28, 2020, through July 14, 2020 (n=76), were assessed again including COVID-19 measures. Simultaneously, community controls with similar sociodemographics and smoking histories were solicited (n=67). Measures were COVID-19 perceptions (Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire), social distancing, and depressive (Patient Health Questionnaire-9) and anxiety (Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7) symptoms. First, analyses evaluated differences in the psychological responses of patients with NSCLC at diagnosis and during COVID-19. Second, patients and controls were contrasted on COVID-19 perceptions, social distancing, and psychological symptoms. Results: The depressive and anxious symptoms of patients with NSCLC were greater at diagnosis (P<.02) than during COVID-19, approximately 1 year later. Patients with NSCLC and controls did not differ in terms of sociodemographics, except those with NSCLC were more racially diverse and older, and had greater smoking history (P<.03). Groups did not differ regarding concern, understanding, or perceived control over COVID-19 (P>.406). Notably, controls anticipated the COVID threat would last longer, practiced more social distancing, were more concerned about family (P<.04), and reported worse psychological symptoms (P<.023). With less depression and anxiety, patients with NSCLC viewed COVID-19 as a shorter-term threat and had fewer COVID-19–related worries than did controls. For controls, COVID-19 was more salient, heightening worries and psychological symptoms. Conclusions: Despite multiple health stressors, patients with NSCLC demonstrated resilience when receiving cancer treatment during COVID-19. Nonetheless, this population remains psychologically vulnerable, requiring support at diagnosis and thereafter.
Nicole A. Arrato, Stephen B. Lo, Clarence A. Coker, Jonathan J. Covarrubias, Tessa R. Blevins, Sarah A. Reisinger, Carolyn J. Presley, Peter G. Shields, and Barbara L. Andersen
Martin J. Edelman, Daniel P. Raymond, Dwight H. Owen, Michelle B. Leavy, Kari Chansky, Sriram Yennu, Felix G. Fernandez, Carolyn J. Presley, Tithi Biswas, Gwendolyn P. Quinn, Matthew B. Schabath, Seth Sheffler-Collins, Laura Chu, and Richard E. Gliklich
Background: Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related death in the United States and globally, and many questions exist about treatment options. Harmonizing data across registries and other data collection efforts would yield a robust data infrastructure to help address many research questions. The purpose of this project was to develop a minimum set of patient and clinician relevant harmonized outcome measures that can be collected in non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patient registries and clinical practice. Methods: Seventeen lung cancer registries and related efforts were identified and invited to submit outcome measures. Representatives from medical specialty societies, government agencies, health systems, health information technology groups, patient advocacy organizations, and industry formed a stakeholder panel to categorize the measures and harmonize definitions using the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality’s supported Outcome Measures Framework (OMF). Results: The panel reviewed 66 outcome measures and identified a minimum set of 8 broadly relevant measures in the OMF categories of patient survival, clinical response, events of interest, and resource utilization. The panel harmonized definitions for the 8 measures through in-person and virtual meetings. The panel did not reach consensus on 1 specific validated instrument for capturing patient-reported outcomes. The minimum set of harmonized outcome measures is broadly relevant to clinicians and patients and feasible to capture across NSCLC disease stages and treatment pathways. A pilot test of these measures would be useful to document the burden and value of the measures for research and in clinical practice. Conclusions: By collecting the harmonized measures consistently, registries and other data collection systems could contribute to the development research infrastructure and learning health systems to support new research and improve patient outcomes.
Kah Poh Loh, Vivian Lam, Katey Webber, Simran Padam, Mina S. Sedrak, Vivek Musinipally, Madison Grogan, Carolyn J. Presley, Janice Grandi, Chandrika Sanapala, Daniel A. Castillo, Grace DiGiovanni, Supriya G. Mohile, Louise C. Walter, and Melisa L. Wong
Background: Maintaining functional status is important to older adults with cancer, but data are limited on how systemic treatments affect functional status. We systematically reviewed changes in functional status during systemic cancer treatments and identified characteristics associated with functional decline and improvement. Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials for articles examining characteristics associated with functional changes in older adults during systemic cancer treatment published in English between database inception and January 11, 2019 (PROSPERO CRD42019123125). Findings were summarized with descriptive statistics. Study characteristics between older adult–specific and non–older adult–specific studies were compared using the Fisher exact test. Results: We screened 15,244 titles/abstracts and 519 full texts. The final analysis included 44 studies, which enrolled >8,400 patients; 39% of studies focused on older adults (1 study enrolled adults aged ≥60 years, 10 enrolled adults aged ≥65 years, and 6 enrolled adults aged ≥70 years). Almost all studies (98%) used patient-reported outcomes to measure functional status; only 20% used physical performance tests. Reporting of functional change was heterogeneous, with 48% reporting change scores. Older adult–specific studies were more likely to analyze functional change dichotomously (29% vs 4%; P=.008). Functional decline ranged widely, from 6% to 90%. The most common patient characteristics associated with functional decline were older age (n=7 studies), worse performance status (n=4), progressive disease status (n=4), pain (n=4), anemia (n=4), and worse nutritional status (n=4). Twelve studies examined functional improvement and identified 11 unique associated characteristics. Conclusions: Functional decline is increasingly recognized as an important outcome in older adults with cancer, but definitions and analyses are heterogeneous, leading to a wide range of prevalence. To identify patients at highest risk of functional decline during systemic cancer treatments, trials need to routinely analyze functional outcomes and measure characteristics associated with decline (eg, nutrition).
Angel Qin, Songzhu Zhao, Abdul Miah, Lai Wei, Sandipkumar Patel, Andrew Johns, Madison Grogan, Erin M. Bertino, Kai He, Peter G. Shields, Gregory P. Kalemkerian, Shirish M. Gadgeel, Nithya Ramnath, Bryan J. Schneider, Khaled A. Hassan, Nicholas Szerlip, Zoey Chopra, Sara Journey, Jessica Waninger, Daniel Spakowicz, David P. Carbone, Carolyn J. Presley, Gregory A. Otterson, Michael D. Green, and Dwight H. Owen
Background: Bone metastases and skeletal-related events (SREs) are a frequent cause of morbidity in patients with metastatic non–small cell lung cancer (mNSCLC). Data are limited on bone metastases and SREs in patients with mNSCLC treated using immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), and on the efficacy of bone-modifying agents (BMAs) in this setting. Here we report the incidence, impact on survival, risk factors for bone metastases and SREs, and impact of BMAs in patients with mNSCLC treated with ICIs in a multi-institutional cohort. Patients and Methods: We conducted a retrospective study of patients with mNSCLC treated with ICIs at 2 tertiary care centers from 2014 through 2017. Overall survival (OS) was compared between patients with and without baseline bone metastases using a log-rank test. A Cox regression model was used to evaluate the association between OS and the presence of bone metastases at ICI initiation, controlling for other confounding factors. Results: We identified a cohort of 330 patients who had received ICIs for metastatic disease. Median patient age was 63 years, most patients were treated in the second line or beyond (n=259; 78%), and nivolumab was the most common ICI (n=211; 64%). Median OS was 10 months (95% CI, 8.4–12.0). In our cohort, 124 patients (38%) had baseline bone metastases, and 43 (13%) developed SREs during or after ICI treatment. Patients with bone metastases had a higher hazard of death after controlling for performance status, histology, line of therapy, and disease burden (hazard ratio, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.19–2.08; P=.001). Use of BMAs was not associated with OS or a decreased risk of SREs. Conclusions: Presence of bone metastases at baseline was associated with a worse prognosis for patients with mNSCLC treated with ICI after controlling for multiple clinical characteristics. Use of BMAs was not associated with reduced SREs or a difference in survival.