Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland) · 2026
Patient-reported outcomes from the TBCRC 022 study of neratinib and ado-trastuzumab emtansine for HER2-positive breast cancer brain metastases.
Клиническое исследование II фазыСтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Grinda Thomas, Heiling Hillary M, Tayob Nabihah, Smith Karen L, Davis Raechel, Cotter Christine, DeMeo Michelle K, Santa-Maria Cesar A, Van Poznak Catherine, Moy Beverly, Brufsky Adam M, Melisko Michelle E, O'Sullivan Ciara C, Isaacs Claudine, Rauf Yasmeen, Nangia Julie R, Burns Robyn T, Savoie Jennifer, Wolff Antonio C, Winer Eric P, Mayer Erica L, Tolaney Sara M, Rimawi Mothaffar F, Ruddy Kathryn J, Rocque Gabrielle, Krop Ian E, Lin Nancy U, Freedman Rachel A
Аннотация
PURPOSE: In TBCRC 022 (NCT01494662), neratinib and ado-trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) demonstrated intracranial activity among patients with HER2-positive breast cancer brain metastases. However, gastrointestinal (GI) toxicities-particularly diarrhea-were common, potentially impacting quality of life. Clinician-reported adverse event (CTCAE) grading may underestimate the patient experience. We report GI toxicities using patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in TBCRC's neratinib-T-DM1 cohort.
METHODS: Patients received neratinib (160 mg daily) and T-DM1 (3.6 mg/kg IV every 21 days). A pre-planned analysis assessed patient-reported GI toxicities during Cycles 1-4 using the Patient-reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) GI Diarrhea scale, Systemic Therapy-Induced Diarrhea Assessment Tool (STIDAT), and PRO-CTCAE. Descriptive statistics and linear mixed effects models evaluated symptom trajectories over time. We evaluated agreement for PRO and clinician-reported data.
RESULTS: Forty-four patients enrolled; all completed ≥1 PRO. GI symptom burden increased over Cycles 1-3. PROMIS scores worsened significantly by Cycle 2, with a peak mean increase of 6.62 (95% confidence interval (CI): 2.67-10.59; p = 0.002) at Cycle 3. STIDAT scores also worsened by Cycle 3 (mean change 0.50; 95%CI: 0.11-0.90; p = 0.015). Based on maximum PRO-CTCAE scores, moderate-to-severe symptoms were reported by 20.5% (diarrhea), 24.4% (appetite loss), and 41.0% (constipation). Agreement between PRO-CTCAE and clinician-reported CTCAE was low (kappa <0.2) with clinicians reporting less toxicity. PROMIS and STIDAT scores were significantly correlated.
CONCLUSION: This GI-focused PRO analysis highlights the value of PROs in capturing patient-experienced toxicities that impact quality of life yet are underestimated by clinicians. Incorporating PROs into clinical trials can inform supportive care and prophylactic strategies.
METHODS: Patients received neratinib (160 mg daily) and T-DM1 (3.6 mg/kg IV every 21 days). A pre-planned analysis assessed patient-reported GI toxicities during Cycles 1-4 using the Patient-reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) GI Diarrhea scale, Systemic Therapy-Induced Diarrhea Assessment Tool (STIDAT), and PRO-CTCAE. Descriptive statistics and linear mixed effects models evaluated symptom trajectories over time. We evaluated agreement for PRO and clinician-reported data.
RESULTS: Forty-four patients enrolled; all completed ≥1 PRO. GI symptom burden increased over Cycles 1-3. PROMIS scores worsened significantly by Cycle 2, with a peak mean increase of 6.62 (95% confidence interval (CI): 2.67-10.59; p = 0.002) at Cycle 3. STIDAT scores also worsened by Cycle 3 (mean change 0.50; 95%CI: 0.11-0.90; p = 0.015). Based on maximum PRO-CTCAE scores, moderate-to-severe symptoms were reported by 20.5% (diarrhea), 24.4% (appetite loss), and 41.0% (constipation). Agreement between PRO-CTCAE and clinician-reported CTCAE was low (kappa <0.2) with clinicians reporting less toxicity. PROMIS and STIDAT scores were significantly correlated.
CONCLUSION: This GI-focused PRO analysis highlights the value of PROs in capturing patient-experienced toxicities that impact quality of life yet are underestimated by clinicians. Incorporating PROs into clinical trials can inform supportive care and prophylactic strategies.