Background

Pain management racial disparities exist, yet it is unclear whether disparities exist in pain management in advanced cancer.

Objective

To examine the effect of race on physicians' pain assessment and treatment in advanced lung cancer and the moderating effect of patient activation.

Design

Randomized field experiment. Physicians consented to see two unannounced standardized patients (SPs) over 18 months. SPs portrayed 4 identical roles-a 62-year-old man with advanced lung cancer and uncontrolled pain-differing by race (black or white) and role (activated or typical). Activated SPs asked questions, interrupted when necessary, made requests, and expressed opinions.

Participants

Ninety-six primary care physicians (PCPs) and oncologists from small cities, and suburban and rural areas of New York, Indiana, and Michigan. Physicians' mean age was 52 years (SD = 27.17), 59% male, and 64% white.

Main measures

Opioids prescribed (or not), total daily opioid doses (in oral morphine equivalents), guideline-concordant pain management, and pain assessment.

Key results

SPs completed 181 covertly audio-recorded visits that had complete data for the model covariates. Physicians detected SPs in 15% of visits. Physicians prescribed opioids in 71% of visits; 38% received guideline-concordant doses. Neither race nor activation was associated with total opioid dose or guideline-concordant pain management, and there were no interaction effects (p > 0.05). Activation, but not race, was associated with improved pain assessment (ẞ, 0.46, 95% CI 0.18, 0.74). In post hoc analyses, oncologists (but not PCPs) were less likely to prescribe opioids to black SPs (OR 0.24, 95% CI 0.07, 0.81).

Conclusions

Neither race nor activation was associated with opioid prescribing; activation was associated with better pain assessment. In post hoc analyses, oncologists were less likely to prescribe opioids to black male SPs than white male SPs; PCPs had no racial disparities. In general, physicians may be under-prescribing opioids for cancer pain.

Trial registration

NCT01501006.

Background

Racial disparities exist in the care provided to advanced cancer patients. This article describes an investigation designed to advance the science of healthcare disparities by isolating the effects of patient race and patient activation on physician behavior using novel standardized patient (SP) methodology.

Methods/design

The Social and Behavioral Influences (SBI) Study is a National Cancer Institute sponsored trial conducted in Western New York State, Northern/Central Indiana, and lower Michigan. The trial uses an incomplete randomized block design, randomizing physicians to see patients who are either black or white and who are "typical" or "activated" (e.g., ask questions, express opinions, ask for clarification, etc.). The study will enroll 91 physicians.

Discussion

The SBI study addresses important gaps in our knowledge about racial disparities and methods to reduce them in patients with advanced cancer by using standardized patient methodology. This study is innovative in aims, design, and methodology and will point the way to interventions that can reduce racial disparities and discrimination and draw links between implicit attitudes and physician behaviors.

Trial registration

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ , #NCT01501006, November 30, 2011.

Importance

KRAS mutations are common in pancreatic cancer, but directly targeting the KRAS protein has thus far been unsuccessful. The aim of this trial was to block the MEK and PI3K/AKT pathways downstream of the KRAS protein as an alternate treatment strategy to slow cancer growth and prolong survival. This was the first cooperative group trial to evaluate this strategy using molecularly targeted oral combination therapy for the treatment of chemotherapy-refractory pancreatic cancer.

Objective

To compare selumetinib and MK-2206 vs modified FOLFOX (mFOLFOX) in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer for whom gemcitabine-based therapy had failed.

Design, setting, and participants

SWOG S1115 was a randomized phase 2 clinical trial. Between September 2012 and May 2014, 137 patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma for whom gemcitabine-based chemotherapy had failed were randomized to selumetinib plus MK-2206 or mFOLFOX. Patients were randomized in a 1:1 fashion and stratified according to duration of prior systemic therapy and presence of liver metastases.

Interventions

Patients received selumetinib 100 mg orally per day plus MK-2206 135 mg orally once per week or mFOLFOX (oxaliplatin, 85 mg/m2 intravenous, and fluorouracil, 2400 mg/m2 intravenous infusion over 46-48 hours) on days 1 and 15 of a 28-day cycle.

Main outcomes and measures

The primary end point of the study was overall survival. Secondary objectives included evaluating toxic effects, objective tumor response, and progression-free survival.

Results

There were 58 patients in the selumetinib plus MK-2206 (experimental) arm (60% male; median [range] age, 69 [54-88] years) and 62 patients in the mFOLFOX arm (35% male; median [range] age, 65 [34-82] years). In the experimental arm, median overall survival was shorter (3.9 vs 6.7 months; HR, 1.37; 95% CI, 0.90-2.08; P = .15), as was median progression-free survival (1.9 vs 2.0 months; HR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.07-2.43; P = .02). One vs 5 patients had a partial response and 12 vs 14 patients had stable disease in the experimental arm vs mFOLFOX arm. Grade 3 or higher toxic effects were observed in 39 patients treated with selumetinib and MK-2206 vs 23 patients treated with mFOLFOX. More patients in the experimental arm discontinued therapy due to adverse events (13 vs 7 patients).

Conclusions and relevance

Dual targeting of the MEK and PI3K/AKT pathways downstream of KRAS by selumetinib plus MK-2206 did not improve overall survival in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma for whom gemcitabine-based chemotherapy had failed. This was the first randomized prospective evaluation of mFOLFOX in the US population that showed comparable results to CONKO-003 and PANCREOX.

Trial registration

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01658943.

INTRODUCTION: Personalized and tumor-informed circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) testing is feasible and allows for molecular residual disease (MRD) identification in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). METHODS: In this retrospective analysis of commercial cases from multiple US institutions, personalized, tumor-informed, whole-exome sequenced, and germline-controlled ctDNA levels were quantified and analyzed in patients with PDAC. Plasma samples (n = 1329) from 298 clinically validated patients were collected at diagnosis, perioperatively (MRD-window; within 2-12 weeks after surgery, before therapy), and during surveillance (>12 weeks post-surgery if no ACT or starting 4 weeks post-ACT) from November 2019 to March 2023. RESULTS: Of the initially diagnosed patients with stages I-III PDAC who went for resection, the median follow-up time from surgery was 13 months (range 0.1-214). Positive ctDNA detection rates were 29% (29/100) and 29.6% (45/152) during the MRD and surveillance windows, respectively. Positive ctDNA detection was significantly associated with shorter DFS within the MRD window (median DFS of 6.37 months for ctDNA-positive vs 33.31 months for ctDNA-negative patients; HR: 5.45, P < .0001) as well as during the surveillance period (median DFS: 11.40 months for ctDNA-positive vs NR for ctDNA-negative; HR: 12.38, P < .0001). Additionally, DFS was significantly better with KRAS wildtype status followed by KRASG12R (HR: 0.99, P = .97), KRASG12D (HR: 1.42, P = .194), and worse with KRASG12V (HR: 2.19, P = .002) status. In multivariate analysis, ctDNA detection at surveillance was found to be the most significant prognostic factor for recurrence (HR: 24.28, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Perioperative tumor-informed ctDNA detection in PDAC is feasible across all stages and is associated with patient survival outcomes.