Patient-Reported Outcomes, Tumor Markers, and Survival Outcomes in Advanced GI Cancer

Abstract

ImportancePatient-reported outcomes (PROs), such as quality of life (QOL) and symptoms, are often associated with clinical outcomes in patients with cancer. In practice, oncologists use serum tumor markers (TMs) (ie, carcinoembryonic antigen [CEA] and carbohydrate antigen 19-9 [CA 19-9]) and imaging to monitor clinical outcomes in patients with gastrointestinal cancer.ObjectiveTo examine associations of 1-month changes in PROs and TMs with treatment response and survival among patients with gastrointestinal cancer.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis cohort study enrolled patients at Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center with at least 1 month follow-up from May 2019 to December 2020. Included patients were beginning first-line systemic therapy, aged 18 years or older, and had been diagnosed with metastatic pancreaticobiliary, colorectal, or gastroesophageal cancer. Data analyses took place from January 2021 to January 2022.InterventionPROs were collected, including QOL (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy General [FACT-G]), physical symptoms (Edmonton Symptom Assessment System [ESAS]), and psychological symptoms (Patient Health Questionnaire-4 [PHQ4] total, PHQ4-depression, and PHQ4-anxiety), as well as TMs (CEA and CA 19-9), at the time of chemotherapy initiation and 1 month later.Main Outcomes and MeasuresAssociations of 1-month changes in PROs and TMs with treatment response (clinical benefit vs disease progression) at first scan, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS), adjusted for baseline values using regression models.ResultsThis study included 159 patients, with 134 patients (84.3%) evaluable for analysis. Patients had a median (range) age of 64.0 (28.0-84.0) years and 86 (64.2%) were male. One-month PRO changes (FACT-G: OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.03-1.11; P = .001; ESAS-total: OR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.94-1.00; P = .02; ESAS-physical: OR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.92-1.00; P = .03; PHQ4-depression: OR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.49-0.92; P = .01) were significantly associated with treatment response, but PHQ4-total or TMs were not. Changes in FACT-G (HR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.95-0.99; P = .003), ESAS-total (HR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.01-1.05; P = .004), ESAS-physical (HR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.00-1.05; P = .02), PHQ4-depression (HR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.01-1.48; P = .04), and CEA (HR, 1.00; 95% CI, 1.001-1.004; P = .001) were associated with PFS, but changes in PHQ4-total or TMs were not. Changes in ESAS-total (HR, 1.03, 95% CI, 1.01-1.06; P = .006) and ESAS-physical (HR, 1.04, 95% CI, 1.01-1.06; P = .015) were associated with OS, but changes in TMs were not associated with OS.Conclusions and RelevanceThese findings suggest that 1-month changes in PROs can be associated with treatment response and survival in patients with advanced gastrointestinal cancer. Notably, 1-month changes in TMs were not consistently associated with these outcomes. These findings highlight the potential for monitoring early changes in PROs to associate with clinical outcomes while underscoring the need to address the QOL and symptom concerns of patients with advanced cancer.

Improving Diagnosis and Care for Patients With Sarcoma: Do Real-World General Practitioners Data and Prospective Data Collections Have a Place Next to Clinical Trials?

“…4,20 Quantifying the potential negative impact of a prolonged diagnostic trajectory on patient outcomes through the integration of EHR data (eg, clinical outcomes such as overall survival [OS]) with the growing collection of PRO data (eg, diaries or social media platforms) in daily clinical practice can provide valuable insights into groups at risk. 28,29 Other RWD sources that could be valuable for research on sarcoma diagnostics include histology and tumor molecular data (to reduce misdiagnosis) and hospital data (to create symptom signatures). Furthermore, within clinical practice, imaging plays a crucial role in diagnosis and treatment decisions.…”

“…4,20 Quantifying the potential negative impact of a prolonged diagnostic trajectory on patient outcomes through the integration of EHR data (eg, clinical outcomes such as overall survival [OS]) with the growing collection of PRO data (eg, diaries or social media platforms) in daily clinical practice can provide valuable insights into groups at risk. 28,29…”