Heartland Cancer Research

12130 Background: Cancer-related fatigue (CRF) is one of the most common and debilitating symptoms reported by cancer patients, significantly impairing quality of life (QoL) across physical, functional, emotional, and social domains. Despite its prevalence, limited data exist quantifying how rapid changes in CRF after a single chemotherapy cycle influence QoL. We aim to evaluate if rapid clinically meaningful changes in CRF post chemotherapy impact QoL in breast cancer patients. Methods: This Phase III RCT (NCT03367572) enrolled chemotherapy-naïve breast cancer patients across 21 NCORP practices receiving high/moderate emetogenic chemotherapy. CRF was assessed at baseline and post chemotherapy cycle 1 (n = 1,262) using a four-day home diary, with maximum fatigue change as the primary outcome. For analysis, the CRF variable was dichotomized into two categories: a clinically significant increase (≥3 points) and less than a 3-point increase. QOL was measured with FACT-G and its subscales: emotional (EWB), functional (FWB), physical (PWB), and social (SWB). ANCOVA and Cohen’s d effect size (ES) evaluated whether clinically meaningful CRF changes predicted QOL changes across cycles. Results: Among 1,262 patients with valid fatigue scores, 74.8% experienced increased CRF after cycle 1, with 53.2% reporting a ≥3-point increase and a mean increase of 2.9 points for the group. Clinically significant increases in CRF strongly impacted quality of life (QOL), as reflected in FACT-G Total Score changes post-cycle 1 (≥3: −12.4 vs < 3: −4.7; mean difference: 7.7, p < 0.001, ES: 0.74), exceeding the clinically meaningful threshold of > 5 points. Analysis of the subscales revealed PWB with the largest changes of 4.8 (≥3: −X vs < 3: −X; p < 0.001, ES: 1.00). FWB changes were 2.1 (≥3: −X vs < 3: −X; p≤0.0001, ES: 0.48) and EWB changes were 0.7 (≥3: −X vs < 3: −X; p < 0.001, ES: 0.26). CRF did not significantly impact SWB. Notably, many of these subscale changes surpassed the clinically meaningful threshold of > 2 points. Conclusions: This study underscores the rapid onset and significant impact of CRF on QoL in breast cancer patients receiving chemotherapy. Clinically meaningful increases in CRF, even after a single chemotherapy cycle, were predictive of substantial declines in QoL, particularly in physical and functional well-being. These results emphasize the urgent need for targeted fatigue management strategies, such as tailored interventions addressing physical and functional domains, to improve patient outcomes. Clinical trial information: NCT03367572 .

Observational studies have demonstrated that aspirin and/or PTSG2 inhibitor (e.g., celecoxib) use, before or after colon cancer (CC) diagnosis, is associated with a lower risk of recurrence. However, a randomized trial of adjuvant celecoxib therapy in stage III CC did not show improved survival compared to placebo treatment. We therefore hypothesized that immune microenvironment features may identify patient subgroups with stronger survival benefits from anti-inflammatory celecoxib treatment. Drawing from an NCI-Intergroup trial (Cancer and Leukemia Group B [now Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology]/SWOG 80702) for patients with stage III resected CC that compared 3 versus 6 months of adjuvant fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin ± 3 years of celecoxib, we conducted tissue-based tumor microenvironment profiling on 1,098 resected tumors using a custom 9-plex, T-cell multiplex immunofluorescence assay coupled with digital image analysis and supervised machine learning. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to describe disease-free survival, based on T cell density, and log-rank testing was performed. Cox proportional hazards models were used to examine unadjusted and adjusted associations between T cell density and disease-free survival (DFS). Two-sided P values ≤0.05 were considered statistically significant. We found that higher CD3+ T cell density was associated with longer DFS with an adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of 0.69 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.52-0.91) for patients with densities in the highest tertile as compared the lowest tertile (P=0.01). T cell subset analysis showed that stromal regulatory T helper cells (HR 0.42 comparing highest to lowest tertile, CI 0.31-0.58, P<0.001) and stromal memory cytotoxic T cells (HR 0.55 comparing highest to lowest tertile, CI 0.42-0.74, P<0.001) were most strongly associated with longer DFS. Compared to the placebo group, adjuvant celecoxib use associated with improved DFS for patients with low but not high stromal CD3+ T cell density (adjusted HRs of 0.45 [CI 0.31-0.65] for lowest tertile and 1.13 [CI 0.73-1.74] for highest tertile; Pinteraction=0.01). This association was also seen when the analysis was restricted to microsatellite stable tumors (HR 0.50 [CI 0.32-0.80] for lowest density tertile and 1.50 [CI 0.87-2.59] for highest density tertile; Pinteraction=0.01). T cell subset analysis showed that DFS benefit for celecoxib use most strongly associated with stromal memory helper T cell density (HR 0.38 [CI 0.26-0.56] for lowest density tertile and 1.26 [CI 0.80-1.97] for highest density tertile; Pinteraction<0.001). Together, these results show that while higher T cell infiltration is associated with improved DFS, lower T cell infiltration is associated with improved DFS for patients treated with celecoxib. This unexpected finding may inform immunomodulatory treatment strategies for CC. Citation Format: Yasutoshi Takashima, Chao Ma, Qian Shi, Andressa Dias Costa, Tyler Twombly, Juha P. Väyrynen, Melissa Zhao, Ardaman Shergill, Pankaj Kumar, Felix Couture, Philip Kuebler, Smitha Krishnamurthi, Benjamin Tan, Eileen M. O'Reilly, Anthony F. Shields, Shuji Ogino, Charles S. Fuchs, Jeffrey A. Meyerhardt, Jonathan A. Nowak. Prognostic and predictive role of T cell infiltration in stage III colon cancer (CC) treated with celecoxib: CALGB/SWOG 80702 [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2025; Part 1 (Regular Abstracts); 2025 Apr 25-30; Chicago, IL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2025;85(8_Suppl_1):Abstract nr 5858.

BackgroundWomen with high-risk breast lesions, such as atypical hyperplasia (AH) or lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS), have a 4- to tenfold increased risk of breast cancer compared to women with non-proliferative breast disease. Despite high-quality data supporting chemoprevention, uptake remains low. Interventions are needed to break down barriers.MethodsThe parent trial, MiCHOICE, is a cluster randomized controlled trial evaluating the effectiveness and implementation of patient and provider decision support tools to improve informed choice about chemoprevention among women with AH or LCIS. For this pre-implementation analysis, 25 providers participated in semi-structured interviews prior to accessing decision support tools. Interviews sought to understand attitudes/beliefs and barriers/facilitators to chemoprevention.ResultsInterviews with 25 providers (18 physicians and 7 advanced practice providers) were included. Providers were predominantly female (84%), white (72%), and non-Hispanic (88%). Nearly all providers (96%) had prescribed chemoprevention for eligible patients. Three themes emerged in qualitative analysis. The first theme describes providers’ confidence in chemoprevention and the utility of decision support tools. The second theme elucidates barriers to chemoprevention, including time constraints, risk communication and perceptions of patients’ fear of side effects and anxiety. The third theme is the need for early implementation of decision support tools.ConclusionsThis qualitative study suggests that providers were interested in the early inclusion of decision aids (DA) in their chemoprevention discussion workflow. The DAs may help overcome certain barriers which were elucidated in these interviews, including patient level concerns about side effects, clinic time constraints and difficulty communicating risk. A multi-faceted intervention with a DA as one active component may be needed.Trial registrationThis trial was registered with the NIH clinical trial registry, clinicaltrials.gov, NCT04496739.

Survivors of rectal cancer experience persistent bowel dysfunction after treatments. Dietary interventions may be an effective approach for symptom management and posttreatment diet quality. SWOG S1820 was a pilot randomized trial of the Altering Intake, Managing Symptoms in Rectal Cancer (AIMS-RC) intervention for bowel dysfunction in survivors of rectal cancer. Ninety-three posttreatment survivors were randomized to the AIMS-RC group (N=47) or the Healthy Living Education attention control group (N=46) after informed consent and completion of a prerandomization run-in. Outcome measures were completed at baseline and at 18 and 26weeks postrandomization. The primary end point was total bowel function score, and exploratory end points included low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) score, quality of life, dietary quality, motivation, self-efficacy, and positive/negative affect. Most participants were White and college educated, with a mean age of 55.2years and median time since surgery of 13.1months. There were no statistically significant differences in total bowel function score by group, with the AIMS-RC group demonstrating statistically significant improvements in the exploratory end points of LARS (p=.01) and the frequency subscale of the bowel function index (p=.03). The AIMS-RC group reported significantly higher acceptability of the study. SWOG S1820 did not provide evidence of benefit from the AIMS-RC intervention relative to the attention control. Select secondary end points did demonstrate improvements. The study was highly feasible and acceptable for participants in the National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program. Findings provide strong support for further refinement and effectiveness testing of the AIMS-RC intervention.

<div>AbstractPurpose:<p>Metaplastic breast cancer (MpBC) is a rare aggressive subtype that responds poorly to cytotoxics. Median survival is approximately 8 months for metastatic disease. We report results for advanced MpBC treated with ipilimumab + nivolumab, a cohort of S1609 for rare cancers (DART: NCT02834013).</p>Patients and Methods:<p>Prospective, open-label, multicenter phase II (two-stage) trial of ipilimumab (1 mg/kg i.v. every 6 weeks) plus nivolumab (240 mg i.v. every 2 weeks) for advanced MpBC. Primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and toxicity.</p>Results:<p>Overall, 17 evaluable patients enrolled. Median age was 60 years (26–85); median number of prior therapy lines was 2 (0–5). ORR was 18%; 3 of 17 patients achieved objective responses (1 complete, 2 partial responses; 2 spindle cell, 1 chondromyxoid histology), which are ongoing at 28+, 33+, and 34+ months, respectively. Median PFS and OS were 2 and 12 months, respectively. Altogether, 11 patients (65%) experienced adverse events (AE), including one grade 5 AE. Eight patients (47%) developed an immune-related AE (irAE), with adrenal insufficiency observed in all 3 responders. Responses occurred in tumors with low tumor mutational burden, low PD-L1, and absent tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes.</p>Conclusions:<p>The ipilimumab and nivolumab combination showed no new safety signals and met its primary endpoint with 18% ORR in advanced, chemotherapy-refractory MpBC. All responses are ongoing at >2 to almost 3 years later. The effect of ipilimumab and nivolumab was associated with exceptional responses in a subset of patients versus no activity. This combination warrants further investigation in MpBC, with special attention to understanding mechanism of action, and carefully designed to weigh against the significant risks of irAEs.</p></div>

ObjectivesThe ECOG‐ACRIN Cancer Research Group trial E2511 recently demonstrated a potential benefit for the addition of veliparib to cisplatin‐etoposide (CE) in patients with extensive stage small cell lung cancer (ES‐SCLC) in a phase II randomized controlled trial. Secondary trial endpoints included comparison of the incidence and severity of neurotoxicity, hypothesized to be lower in the veliparib arm, and tolerability of the addition of veliparib to CE. Physician‐rated and patient‐reported neurotoxicity was also compared.Materials and MethodsPatients randomized to veliparib plus CE (n = 64) or placebo plus CE (n = 64) completed the 11‐item Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy Gynecologic Oncology Group Neurotoxicity (questionnaire pre‐treatment, end of cycle 4 [ie 3 months after randomization] and 3 months post‐treatment [ie 6‐months]). Adherence analysis was based on treatment forms.Results and ConclusionNo significant differences in mean or magnitude of change in neurotoxicity scores were observed between treatment arms at any time point. However, patients in the placebo arm reported worsening neurotoxicity from baseline to 3‐months (M difference = −1.5, P = .045), compared to stable neurotoxicity in the veliparib arm (M difference = −0.2, P = .778). Weakness was the most common treatment‐emergent (>50%) and moderate to severe (>16%) symptom reported, but did not differ between treatment arms. The proportion of adherence to oral therapy in the overall sample was 75%. Three percent of patients reported clinically significant neurotoxicity that was not captured by physician assessment. Neurotoxicity scores were not different between treatment arms. The addition of veliparib to CE appeared tolerable, though weakness should be monitored.ClinicalTrials.gov IdentifierNCT01642251.

Patients in rural areas face limited access to medical and oncology providers, long travel times, and low recruitment to clinical trials, all of which affect quality of care and health outcomes. Rural counties also have high rates of cancer-related mortality and other negative treatment outcomes. On April 10, 2019, ASCO hosted Closing the Rural Cancer Care Gap, the second event in its State of Cancer Care in America series. The event focused on two aspects of rural cancer care: a review of the major issues and concerns in delivering rural cancer care and a discussion of creative solutions to address rural-nonrural disparities. This article draws from the event and supporting literature to summarize the challenges to delivering high-quality care in rural communities, update ASCO's workforce data on the geographic distribution of oncologists, and highlight 3 institutional approaches to addressing these challenges in diverse rural settings. The experience of the 3 institutions featured in the article suggests that increasing rural patients' access to care requires expanding services and decreasing travel distances, mitigating financial burdens when insurance coverage is limited, opening avenues to clinical trial participation, and creating partnerships between providers and community leaders to address local gaps in care. Because the characteristics of rural communities, health care resources, and patient populations are not homogeneous, rural health disparities require local solutions that are based on community needs, available resources, and trusting and collaborative partnerships.

In metastatic colorectal cancer, induction combination chemotherapy with a targeted agent is considered the mainstay of treatment. Multiple randomized clinical trials have examined different strategies of continuing cytotoxic therapy until progression compared with a period of either observation or the use of various maintenance agents. However, those randomized clinical trials have shown inconsistent efficacy results that make it challenging to draw any conclusion on which strategy is preferred. Therefore, a network meta-analysis is helpful to compare different agents across randomized clinical trials. To evaluate the comparative effectiveness of different treatment strategies for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for randomized clinical trials evaluating different strategies for patients with previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer. Trials of interest included those including patients with metastatic colorectal cancer who were treated with an initial period of cytotoxic chemotherapy (with or without a biologic) and then switched to one of the following strategies: observation; maintenance with bevacizumab (Bev), fluoropyrimidine (FP), or both (FP + Bev); or continuing the induction regimen until progression. Outcomes of interest included overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). The overall effect was pooled using the DerSimonian and Laird random-effects model. Network meta-analysis was conducted using a random-effects consistency model to pool evidence from direct and indirect comparisons. Agents were ranked using surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) probabilities. Higher SUCRA scores correspond to greater efficacy. Initial analysis was performed on December 18, 2018. An updated search was performed in April 2019, and no additional studies were added. Twelve trials at low risk of bias (5540 patients; age range, 23-85 years; 64.4 % male) were included. Network meta-analysis showed no benefit of continuing full cytotoxic chemotherapy until progression vs observation in terms of PFS (hazard ratio, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.46-1.09) and OS (hazard ratio, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.85-1.07). Compared with observation, maintenance therapy showed a PFS benefit (hazard ratio, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.43-0.77) but not an OS benefit (hazard ratio, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.83-1.01). All maintenance strategies (FP, FP + Bev, and Bev) showed significant improvement in PFS vs observation. On SUCRA analysis, maintenance treatment (FP or FP + Bev) had the highest likelihood of achieving improved PFS (67.1% for FP, 99.8% for FP + Bev, and 36.5% for Bev) and OS (81.3% for FP, 73.2% for FP + Bev, and 32.6% for Bev). For patients with metastatic colorectal cancer, there is no benefit to continuing the full induction regimen until progression, without a period of either observation or maintenance treatment. A maintenance strategy with a fluoropyrimidine, with or without the addition of bevacizumab, is preferred. However, given the lack of a clear OS benefit, shared decision-making should include observation as an acceptable alternative.

Although topical agents are often provided during radiation therapy, there is limited consensus and evidence for their use prophylactically to prevent or reduce radiation dermatitis. This was a multi-site, randomized, placebo-controlled, blinded study of 191 breast cancer patients to compare the prophylactic effectiveness of three topical agents (Curcumin, HPR Plus™, and Placebo) for reducing radiation dermatitis and associated pain. Patients applied the topical agent to their skin in the radiation area site three times daily starting the first day of radiation therapy (RT) until 1 week after RT completion. Of the 191 randomized patients, 171 patients were included in the final analyses (87.5% white females, mean age = 58 (range = 36-88)). Mean radiation dermatitis severity (RDS) scores did not significantly differ between study arms (Curcumin = 2.68 [2.49, 2.86]; HPR Plus™ = 2.64 [2.45, 2.82]; Placebo = 2.63 [2.44, 2.83]; p = 0.929). Logistic regression analyses showed that increased breast field separation positively correlated with increased radiation dermatitis severity (p = 0.018). In patients with high breast field separation (≥ 25 cm), RDS scores (Curcumin = 2.70 [2.21, 3.19]; HPR Plus™ = 3.57 [3.16, 4.00]; Placebo = 2.95 [2.60, 3.30]; p = 0.024) and pain scores (Curcumin = 0.52 [- 0.28, 1.33]; HPR Plus™ = 0.55 [- 0.19, 1.30]; Placebo = 1.73 [0.97, 2.50]; p = 0.046) significantly differed at the end of RT. Although there were no significant effects of the treatment groups on the overall population, our exploratory subgroup analysis suggests that prophylactic treatment with topical curcumin may be effective for minimizing skin reactions and pain for patients with high breast separation (≥ 25 cm) who may have the worst skin reactions.

Abstract BACKGROUND NRG-CC001 sought to evaluate the neuro-protective effects of avoiding the peri-hippocampal stem cell niche using intensity-modulated radiotherapy during WBRT. METHODS Patients with brain metastasis were stratified by RPA class and prior radiosurgery/surgery and randomized to WBRT+M or HA-WBRT+ Memantine (M) (30Gy in 10 fractions). Standardized NCF tests and the M.D. Anderson Symptom Inventory Brain Tumor (MDASI-BT) were obtained at baseline, 2, 4, 6, and 12 months (mos). The primary endpoint was NCF failure defined using the reliable change index. Pre-specified secondary endpoints included patient-reported symptoms using the MDASI-BT. Time to NCF was reported as cumulative incidence (with death without NCF failure as a competing risk); between-arms differences were tested using Gray’s test. Deterioration at discrete time-points were tested using chi-square tests. MDASI-BT symptom burden, interference, and cognitive and neurologic burden were analyzed using mixed effects models and t-tests within the model using Hochberg’s multiplicity adjustment. RESULTS A total of 518 patients were randomized from 7/2016 to 3/2018. Median follow-up for alive patients was 12.1 mos, with no difference between arms in terms of toxicity, overall survival or intracranial progression-free survival. HA-WBRT+M was associated with lower risk of NCF failure (adjusted HR=0.739, 95% CI: 0.577–0.945, p=0.0.016), with differences first noted at 4 mos in Trail Making Test Part-B (23.3% vs. 40.4% deteriorated, p=0.012). Age did not dilute treatment effect. HA-WBRT+M was associated with reduced cognitive symptom burden in an imputed model (estimate=-0.29, p=0.0425), and also reduced overall symptom burden (p< 0.0001) and interference (p< 0.0016) at 6 mos. CONCLUSIONS The addition of HA to WBRT+M preserved NCF and reduced patient reported cognitive symptom burden, overall symptom burden and symptom interference and should be considered standard of care for any patient fit enough to have WBRT. Supported by grants UG1CA189867 (NCORP), U10CA180868 (NRG Oncology Operations), DCP from the National Cancer Institute.