Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in NRG Oncology RTOG 0436: A phase III trial evaluating the addition of cetuximab to paclitaxel, cisplatin, and radiation for esophageal cancer treated without surgery Journal Article


Authors: Kachnic, L. A.; Winter, K.; Suntharalingam, M.; Ilson, D.; Konski, A.; Lloyd, S.; McAvoy, S. A.; Lad, T.; Olowokure, O. G.; Samson, P.; Gore, E. M.; Meyer, J. E.; Videtic, G. M. M.; Clump, D. A.; Raben, A.; Kayaleh, O.; Barker, J. Jr; Haddock, M. G.; Hopkins, J. O.; Bruner, D. W.
Article Title: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in NRG Oncology RTOG 0436: A phase III trial evaluating the addition of cetuximab to paclitaxel, cisplatin, and radiation for esophageal cancer treated without surgery
Abstract: Purpose/objectivesNRG/RTOG 0436 evaluated cetuximab added to chemoradiation (CRT) for non-operative esophageal cancer management. PRO objectives assessed improvement in the FACT-Esophageal cancer subscale (ECS), version 4, with cetuximab, and if improved ECS correlated with clinical complete response (cCR).Materials/methodsPatients were randomized to cisplatin/paclitaxel/radiation +/- cetuximab. Overall survival (OS) was the primary endpoint, with a 420 patient target, which also provided 82% power to detect >= 15 increase in the proportion of cetuximab patients with ECS improvement from baseline to 6-8 weeks post-CRT; alpha = 0.05, using a chi2 test. Improvement in ECS and its Swallowing and Eating Indices (SI, EI) was defined as 5, 4 and 2 point increases, respectively, from baseline to 6-8 weeks post-CRT. Univariate logistic regression assessed if cCR was associated with improved ECS. ResultsThis study was stopped early for not meeting a pre-specified OS endpoint and did not show survival benefit. Of 420 planned patients, 344 enrolled and 281 consented to PROs. ECS was completed by 261 (93%) at baseline, 173 (66%) 6-8 weeks post-CRT, and 117 (64%) at 1 year. At 6-8 weeks, patients receiving CRT + Cetuximab didn't have improved ECS; they experienced a lower proportion of improvement compared to standard CRT (37% vs. 53%; P = 0.04). The proportion of CRT patients with improvement in SI was 9% higher than with cetuximab, but not statistically significant (39% vs. 30%, P = 0.22). There was no association between treatment and EI. When examining ECS scores at 1 year by cCR vs. residual disease, a higher proportion of cCR patients improved, but not statistically significant (48% vs. 45%, P = 0.74). ConclusionsThe addition of cetuximab to CRT for the nonoperative management of esophageal cancer did not improve PROs. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved)
Keywords: clinical trial; quality of life; patient-reported outcomes; chemoradiation; esophageal cancer; nrg oncology rtog 0436
Journal Title: Quality of Life Research
Volume: 33
Issue: 10
ISSN: 0962-9343
Publisher: Springer  
Date Published: 2024-10-01
Start Page: 2833
End Page: 2844
Language: English
ACCESSION: 2025-09208-001
DOI: 10.1007/s11136-024-03736-7
PROVIDER: Ovid Technologies
PROVIDER: psycinfo
PUBMED: 39066879
PMCID: PMC11577575
DOI/URL:
Notes: References -- Source: APA PsycInfo
Altmetric
Citation Impact
BMJ Impact Analytics
MSK Authors
  1. David H Ilson
    434 Ilson