PRO Reporting and Methodological Rigor in NSCLC RCTs, a Cause for Concern

Author(s)

Kandikatla R1, Fathima A2, Yakkala VK3, Patel U4, Yunusa I5, Doucette J4, Kallich J4, Eguale T4
1MCPHS University, Malden, MA, USA, 2MCPHS University, Roxbury, MA, USA, 3MCPHS University, east boston, MA, USA, 4MCPHS University, Boston, MA, USA, 5University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC, USA

Presentation Documents

OBJECTIVES:

Patient-reported outcome (PRO) endpoints have been used for at least the last two decades in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving patients with NSCLC. Despite the existing guidance on PRO reporting, which the FDA issued in 2009, most PRO studies on NSCLC used incomplete/modified checklists resulting in misinterpretation and poor reporting practices. This systematic review aims to investigate the methodological quality and PRO reporting of the NSCLC clinical trials using the CONSORT-PRO Extension and ISOQOL checklists.

METHODS:

Embase, Cochrane Library, and PubMed were searched for articles published between 2018-2022. Eligible articles were RCTs of adult advanced NSCLC patients with first-line therapy with PROs in primary or subsequent publications, with a comparison of PROs among treatment groups.

RESULTS:

A total of 1248 studies were assessed, and 20 RCTs, enrolling 6358 patients, were included in the review. Most RCTs (n=15 [75%]) had PRO measures as a secondary or exploratory endpoint. A PRO hypothesis and relevant PRO domains were specified in 4 (20%) RCTs. Statistical approaches for missing data were documented in 4 (20%) RCTs. The most applied PRO tools were the EORTC-QLQ-C30 (11, 55%) and EORTC-QLQ-LC13 (8, 40%). Only 3 (15%) RCTs performed subgroup analyses on mutation type and brain metastasis. Independent Predictor factors significantly associated with higher reporting included having PROs as a primary endpoint (p=0·009) and the presence of a subsequent publication on PROs (p<0·0001).

CONCLUSIONS:

International guidelines for designing, reporting, and analyzing PRO data are available to improve overall study quality, but PRO reporting in clinical trials still needs to be more consistent. Tailored efforts to measure QoL for different subsets of the NSCLC patient are required. The findings can help investigators to focus on critical aspects most in need of attention when reporting PROs in NSCLC trials—further assisting in understanding lung cancer patients' real-life experiences in the era of personalized medicine.

Conference/Value in Health Info

2023-05, ISPOR 2023, Boston, MA, USA

Value in Health, Volume 26, Issue 6, S2 (June 2023)

Code

PCR166

Topic

Patient-Centered Research

Topic Subcategory

Adherence, Persistence, & Compliance, Patient-reported Outcomes & Quality of Life Outcomes

Disease

Oncology

Explore Related HEOR by Topic


Your browser is out-of-date

ISPOR recommends that you update your browser for more security, speed and the best experience on ispor.org. Update my browser now

×