Stefan Symeonides

Integrated collaborative care for comorbid major depression in patients with cancer (SMaRT Oncology-2): a multicentre randomised controlled effectiveness trial

BACKGROUND Medical conditions are often complicated by major depression, with consequent additional impairment of quality of life. We aimed to compare the effectiveness of an integrated treatment programme for major depression in patients with cancer (depression care for people with cancer) with usual care. METHODS SMaRT Oncology-2 is a parallel-group, multicentre, randomised controlled effectiveness trial. We enrolled outpatients with major depression from three cancer centres and their associated clinics in Scotland, UK. Participants were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to the depression care for people with cancer intervention or usual care, with stratification (by trial centre) and minimisation (by age, primary cancer, and sex) with allocation concealment. Depression care for people with cancer is a manualised, multicomponent collaborative care treatment that is delivered systematically by a team of cancer nurses and psychiatrists in collaboration with primary care physicians. Usual care is provided by primary care physicians. Outcome data were collected up until 48 weeks. The primary outcome was treatment response (≥50% reduction in Symptom Checklist Depression Scale [SCL-20] score, range 0-4) at 24 weeks. Trial statisticians and data collection staff were masked to treatment allocation, but participants could not be masked to the allocations. Analyses were by intention to treat. This trial is registered with Current Controlled Trials, number ISRCTN40568538. FINDINGS 500 participants were enrolled between May 12, 2008, and May 13, 2011; 253 were randomly allocated to depression care for people with cancer and 247 to usual care. 143 (62%) of 231 participants in the depression care for people with cancer group and 40 (17%) of 231 in the usual care group responded to treatment: absolute difference 45% (95% CI 37-53), adjusted odds ratio 8·5 (95% CI 5·5-13·4), p<0·0001. Compared with patients in the usual care group, participants allocated to the depression care for people with cancer programme also had less depression, anxiety, pain, and fatigue; and better functioning, health, quality of life, and perceived quality of depression care at all timepoints (all p<0·05). During the study, 34 cancer-related deaths occurred (19 in the depression care for people with cancer group, 15 in the usual care group), one patient in the depression care for people with cancer group was admitted to a psychiatric ward, and one patient in this group attempted suicide. None of these events were judged to be related to the trial treatments or procedures. INTERPRETATION Our findings suggest that depression care for people with cancer is an effective treatment for major depression in patients with cancer. It offers a model for the treatment of depression comorbid with other medical conditions. FUNDING Cancer Research UK and Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Government.

Prevalence, associations, and adequacy of treatment of major depression in patients with cancer: a cross-sectional analysis of routinely collected clinical data

BACKGROUND Major depression is an important complication of cancer. However, reliable data are lacking for the prevalence of depression in patients with cancer in different primary sites, the association of depression with demographic and clinical variables within cancer groupings, and the proportion of depressed patients with cancer receiving potentially effective treatment for depression. We investigated these questions with data from a large representative clinical sample. METHODS We analysed data from patients with breast, lung, colorectal, genitourinary, or gynaecological cancer who had participated in routine screening for depression in cancer clinics in Scotland, UK between May 12, 2008, and Aug 24, 2011. Depression screening was done in two stages (first, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale; then, major depression section of the Structured Clinical Interview for the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th Edition). Data for depression status were linked with demographic and clinical data obtained from the Scottish National Cancer Registry. FINDINGS We analysed data for 21 151 patients. The prevalence of major depression was highest in patients with lung cancer (13·1%, 95% CI 11·9-14·2%), followed by gynaecological cancer (10·9%, 9·8-12·1), breast cancer (9·3%, 8·7-10·0), colorectal cancer (7·0%, 6·1-8·0), and genitourinary cancer (5·6%, 4·5-6·7). Within these cancer groupings, a diagnosis of major depression was more likely in patients who were younger, had worse social deprivation scores, and, for lung cancer and colorectal cancer, female patients. 1130 (73%) of 1538 patients with depression and complete patient-reported treatment data were not receiving potentially effective treatment. INTERPRETATION Major depression is common in patients attending cancer clinics and most goes untreated. A pressing need exists to improve the management of major depression for patients attending specialist cancer services. FUNDING Cancer Research UK and Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Government.

Integrated collaborative care for major depression comorbid with a poor prognosis cancer (SMaRT Oncology-3): a multicentre randomised controlled trial in patients with lung cancer

BACKGROUND The management of depression in patients with poor prognosis cancers, such as lung cancer, creates specific challenges. We aimed to assess the efficacy of an integrated treatment programme for major depression in patients with lung cancer compared with usual care. METHODS Symptom Management Research Trials (SMaRT) Oncology-3 is a parallel-group, multicentre, randomised controlled trial. We enrolled patients with lung cancer and major depression from three cancer centres and their associated clinics in Scotland, UK. Participants were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to the depression care for people with lung cancer treatment programme or usual care by a database software algorithm that used stratification (by trial centre) and minimisation (by age, sex, and cancer type) with allocation concealment. Depression care for people with lung cancer is a manualised, multicomponent collaborative care treatment that is systematically delivered by a team of cancer nurses and psychiatrists in collaboration with primary care physicians. Usual care is provided by primary care physicians. The primary outcome was depression severity (on the Symptom Checklist Depression Scale [SCL-20], range 0-4) averaged over the patients time in the trial (up to a maximum of 32 weeks). Trial statisticians and data collection staff were masked to treatment allocation, but patients and clinicians could not be masked to the allocations. Analyses were by intention to treat. This trial is registered with Current Controlled Trials, number ISRCTN75905964. FINDINGS 142 participants were recruited between Jan 5, 2009, and Sept 9, 2011; 68 were randomly allocated to depression care for people with lung cancer and 74 to usual care. 43 (30%) of 142 patients had died by 32 weeks, all of which were cancer-related deaths. No intervention-related serious adverse events occurred. 131 (92%) of 142 patients provided outcome data (59 in the depression care for people with lung cancer group and 72 in the usual care group) and were included in the intention-to-treat primary analysis. Average depression severity was significantly lower in patients allocated to depression care for people with lung cancer (mean score on the SCL-20 1·24 [SD 0·64]) than in those allocated to usual care (mean score 1·61 [SD 0·58]); difference -0·38 (95% CI -0·58 to -0·18); standardised mean difference -0·62 (95% CI -0·94 to -0·29). Self-rated depression improvement, anxiety, quality of life, role functioning, perceived quality of care, and proportion of patients achieving a 12-week treatment response were also significantly better in the depression care for people with lung cancer group than in the usual care group. INTERPRETATION Our findings suggest that major depression can be treated effectively in patients with a poor prognosis cancer; integrated depression care for people with lung cancer was substantially more efficacious than was usual care. Larger trials are now needed to estimate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of this care programme in this patient population, and further adaptation of the treatment will be necessary to address the unmet needs of patients with major depression and even shorter life expectancy. FUNDING Cancer Research UK and Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Government.

Treatment of depression in adults with cancer: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND Depression is a leading cause of disease burden worldwide and is especially problematic in people with chronic diseases, including cancer. Although depression can be effectively treated in the general population using antidepressant medication and psychological treatments, these treatments may have different benefits and harms in cancer patients. Previous reviews have not adequately addressed this topic. We therefore aimed to determine which, if any, treatments are effective for patients with diagnoses of both cancer and depression. METHOD We conducted a systematic review of relevant randomized controlled trials identified through searches of Medline, EMBASE, PsycINFO and The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL). RESULTS Seven relatively small trials met the selection criteria. These provided some evidence that antidepressant medication, given alone or in combination with a psychological treatment, may be effective. We found no good evidence for psychological treatments given alone or for any other forms of treatment. CONCLUSIONS There is very limited evidence from clinical trials to guide the treatment of cancer patients with a diagnosis of depression, especially for psychological treatments. High quality trials of treatments for depression in patients with cancer are urgently needed.

Treatment of depression in people with lung cancer: a systematic review.

Lung cancer commonly occurs in older adults who live in deprived areas and have multiple medical comorbidities. As well as suffering severe physical deterioration they are aware of their poor prognosis. It is therefore unsurprising that people with lung cancer have a high rate of depression. Whilst there are effective treatments for depression in people who do not have cancer, it is uncertain which treatments, if any, are effective in depressed cancer patients; the special characteristics of the condition only increase that uncertainty for people with lung cancer. We therefore conducted a systematic review of relevant randomised controlled trials to determine which, if any, treatments have been found to be effective for depression in patients with lung cancer. Surprisingly, we found no completed trials of treatments in patients selected for having depression and no trials that had evaluated treatments known to be effective for depression in the general population. We did, however, find six trials of interventions intended to improve quality of life in unselected patients with lung cancer. These suggested that enhanced care is more effective in reducing depressive symptoms than standard care. Whilst it may be reasonable to treat depression in individuals with lung cancer with standard treatments until more specific evidence is available, clinicians should be aware that the effectiveness and potential adverse effects of these treatments remain unknown in this patient group. Evidence from randomised trials is urgently required.

Ovarian Cancer Molecular Stratification and Tumor Heterogeneity: A Necessity and a Challenge

Only two new drugs have been licensed for the treatment of epithelial ovarian cancer in the last 5 years (bevacizumab and olaparib). These are also the only two molecularly targeted agents licensed in this disease. As we continue to move into the genomic era of cancer therapy, it is clear that optimal therapy is going to depend on molecular stratification and that the stratification itself is going to need to contend with tumor heterogeneity. In this article, we discuss molecular stratification and tumor heterogeneity in the context of high-grade serous ovarian cancer. The development of bevacizumab and olaparib has provided contrasting examples of stratification in molecularly targeted agents. Bevacizumab is licensed as an unselected agent, currently without molecular (or indeed histological) stratification. However, emerging data may be able to help us refine which patients may benefit the most from this agent (and which may not require it). Any such refinement can be expected to increase the median benefit in the selected population and reinforce the cost:benefit advantage. Conversely, olaparib is licensed as a highly selected agent, currently by genomic or somatic BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation in high-grade serous cancer. However, emerging data may be able to help us expand its role into tumors with other homologous recombination deficits (while also determining if all BRCA1/BRCA2 mutations respond equally). For both agents, however, cancers progress even on continuous therapy and targeting the resistant clones that have emerged from tumor heterogeneity will be key to extending benefit for these patients.

Does depression treatment improve the survival of depressed patients with cancer? A long-term follow-up of participants in the SMaRT Oncology-2 and 3 trials

BACKGROUND Comorbid major depression has been associated with worse survival in patients with cancer. However, we do not know if treating depression improves survival. In the SMaRT Oncology-2 (good prognosis cancers) and SMaRT Oncology-3 (lung cancer, a poor prognosis cancer) trials, we found that a depression treatment programme, Depression Care for People with Cancer (DCPC), was effective in reducing comorbid major depression. In this analysis, we aimed to identify whether DCPC also had an effect on survival. METHODS The trials were conducted in three cancer centres and their associated clinics in Scotland, UK. In SMaRT Oncology-2, outpatients with good prognosis cancers and major depression were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to DCPC or usual care, with stratification (by trial centre) and minimisation (by age, primary cancer, and sex) with allocation concealment. In SMaRT Oncology-3, outpatients with lung cancer and major depression were randomly assigned (1:1 ratio) to DCPC or usual care with stratification (by trial centre) and minimisation (by age, sex, and cancer type) with allocation concealment. For this analysis, we obtained long-term data on deaths (all causes) in the SMaRT Oncology-2 and 3 trial participants, censored at July 31, 2015, and analysed survival as a trial outcome. We estimated unadjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for each trial using Cox regression, and pooled the log HRs in a fixed-effects meta-analysis. FINDINGS We recruited 642 participants; between May 12, 2008, and May 13, 2011, 500 participants were recruited to the SMaRT Oncology-2 trial and between Jan 5, 2009, and Sept 9, 2011, 142 participants were recruited to the SMaRT Oncology-3 trial. We followed up SMaRT Oncology-2 and SMaRT Oncology-3 participants for a median of 5 years and 1 year, respectively. 135 (27%) of 500 SMaRT Oncology-2 participants and 114 (80%) of 142 SMaRT Oncology-3 participants died within this period. We found no significant effect of DCPC on survival in the total follow-up period for either SMaRT Oncology 2 (HR 1·02, 95% CI 0·72-1·42, p=0·93) or SMaRT Oncology-3 (HR 0·82, 95% CI 0·56-1·18, p=0·28; pooled HR 0·92, 95% CI 0·72-1·18, p=0·51). INTERPRETATION DCPC is highly effective in improving depression and quality of life in depressed patients with cancer, but there was no evidence for a significant effect on survival. Despite the absence of an effect on length of life, the management of depression remains important for its beneficial effect on quality of life. FUNDING NIHR CLAHRC Oxford, Cancer Research UK, and the Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Government.

FAK-inhibition opens the door to checkpoint immunotherapy in Pancreatic Cancer

Immunotherapy has had remarkable success in the treatment of some cancer types. However, pancreatic cancer has remained largely refractory to immunotherapy, including immune checkpoint inhibitors. Recently, Jiang and colleagues identified a key role for FAK in regulating the composition of the fibrotic and immuno-suppressive pancreatic tumour niche, and showed that FAK inhibitors can be used in combination with immune checkpoint blockade and gemcitabine chemotherapy to significantly delay pancreatic tumour progression. This study further supports the use of FAK inhibitors in combination with immunotherapy.

Continual reassessment method for dose escalation clinical trials in oncology: a comparison of prior skeleton approaches using AZD3514 data

BackgroundThe continual reassessment method (CRM) requires an underlying model of the dose-toxicity relationship (“prior skeleton”) and there is limited guidance of what this should be when little is known about this association. In this manuscript the impact of applying the CRM with different prior skeleton approaches and the 3 + 3 method are compared in terms of ability to determine the true maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and number of patients allocated to sub-optimal and toxic doses.MethodsPost-hoc dose-escalation analyses on real-life clinical trial data on an early oncology compound (AZD3514), using the 3 + 3 method and CRM using six different prior skeleton approaches.ResultsAll methods correctly identified the true MTD. The 3 + 3 method allocated six patients to both sub-optimal and toxic doses. All CRM approaches allocated four patients to sub-optimal doses. No patients were allocated to toxic doses from sigmoidal, two from conservative and five from other approaches.ConclusionsPrior skeletons for the CRM for phase 1 clinical trials are proposed in this manuscript and applied to a real clinical trial dataset. Highly accurate initial skeleton estimates may not be essential to determine the true MTD, and, as expected, all CRM methods out-performed the 3 + 3 method. There were differences in performance between skeletons. The choice of skeleton should depend on whether minimizing the number of patients allocated to suboptimal or toxic doses is more important.Trial registrationNCT01162395, Trial date of first registration: July 13, 2010.

Abstract A24: Comprehensive PI3K pathway inhibition through combination of the PI3Kβ/δ inhibitor AZD8186 and the mTORC1/2 inhibitor AZD2014 drives tumor regression in vivo

AZD8186 inhibits the PI3K isoforms PI3Kβ and δ In solid tumors when the tumor suppressor PTEN is deleted, mutated or downregulated PI3Kβ becomes a key driver of tumor cell growths. In hematological tumors such as DLBCL PTEN is down-regulated, moreover PI3Kδ is important in signaling from the B-cell receptor, creating potential for targeted treatment of hematological malignancies. AZD8186 has single agent activity in a range of pre-clinical models representative of different tumor types. However efficacy of agents in the PI3K pathway are anticipated to be limited by compensatory PI3K isoform activation or relief of feedback loops. As a result it is likely that maximal benefit will be seen when combining different agents that target the PI3K pathway. Unlike other inhibitors of the PI3K pathway AZD8186 does not affect peripheral glucose levels. However AZD8186 specifically modulates tumor FDG uptake in the PTEN null tumor model 786-0. This is associated with tumor specific modulation of the PI3K pathway biomarkers. Therefore in PTEN null tumors AZD8186 can be combined with other PI3K pathway inhibitors to give increased pathway suppression without increasing normal tissue toxicity. To test this AZD8186 has been combined with the mTORC1/2 inhibitor AZD2014 in a number of different PTEN null tumors. The combination increased reduction in tumor growth, and even induced tumor regression. This is associated with increase depth or duration of pathway suppression. Interestingly tumor regressions can be achieved with intermittent of both AZD8186 and AZD2014, implying that acute complete pathway suppression is sufficient to drive the anti-tumor effect. This data establishes the potential for AZD8186 to be used in combination with a mTOR inhibitors with the ability to customize dose and schedule to optimize both tolerability as well as anti-tumor effects. Further exploration of the combination opportunities for AZD8186 with other molecular targeted agents would inform on the potential for inhibitors of PI3Kβ and δ to give benefit in different tumor types. Citation Format: Urs Hancox, Urszula Polanska, Lyndsay Hanson, Rebecca Ellston, Julia Maynard, Manfred Kraus, jon Curwen, Teresa Klinowska, Lara Ward, Francisco Cruzalegui, Stephen Green, Stefan Symeonides, Kathryn Cronin, Simon Barry. Comprehensive PI3K pathway inhibition through combination of the PI3Kβ/δ inhibitor AZD8186 and the mTORC1/2 inhibitor AZD2014 drives tumor regression in vivo. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR Special Conference: Targeting the PI3K-mTOR Network in Cancer; Sep 14-17, 2014; Philadelphia, PA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Mol Cancer Ther 2015;14(7 Suppl):Abstract nr A24.