(A-031) Patient-reported adverse events and subjective severity and impact among patients diagnosed with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), renal cell cancer (RCC), colorectal cancer (CRC), and metastatic melanoma

Background: Benefit-risk evaluations of oncology drugs involve a complex trade-off between survival benefits and risks of adverse events (AEs). AEs in cancer therapies can greatly impact a patient's quality of life (QOL). It's critical to consider patient-reported outcomes when evaluating these trade-offs.

Objectives: To understand the impact of AEs of oncology treatments on patients’ QOL.

Methods: Study

Design: Data collection was conducted through a cross-sectional survey.
Setting: A convenience sample of US patients 18 years or older with a cancer diagnosis; received systemic treatment in the last 6-months; had at least 1 AE.
Statistical analysis: Descriptive statistics were used to characterize the patient population and their survey responses.

Results: A total of 404 patients participated in the survey. The mean age was 62 years, 60% were female, and 57.7% were stage 4 at their most recent treatment. Most patients had NSCLC (66%) followed by melanoma (17%), CRC (12%) and RCC (5%). Chemotherapy, immunotherapy, and targeted therapy was received by 55%, 53.2% and 48% of patients respectively.

The most common AEs across treatments were fatigue (experienced by 64-78% of patients across treatments), loss of appetite (28-58%), nausea (26-56%), diarrhea (23-52%), abnormal blood work (21-48%), weight changes (33-47%), rashes (26-42%), constipation (20-41%), neuropathy (21-40%) and joint and muscle pain (32-39%).

On a scale of 0 (no impact) - 10 (extreme impact) patients scored each AE based on its impact on QOL. For all patients, the median impact score for the AEs ranged from 4 to 7 indicating at least a moderate impact of each of these AEs on QOL. The highest median impact score of 7 was given to AEs - diarrhea, fatigue, vomiting, lung inflammation, joint and muscle pain and shortness of breath. Weak/brittle nails, mouth sores and hair loss had the lowest median impact scores, 4 and 5.

Similarly, patients scored each AE on a scale of 0=Not at all likely - 10=Extremely likely to continue taking a prescribed treatment in case of AE. The median likelihood score of continuing treatment ranged from 5-9.5, indicating that patients are likely to continue treatment despite the AEs. Lung inflammation and vomiting had the lowest median scores (5 and 6, respectively) for likelihood of continued treatment. Weak/brittle nails had the highest median likelihood score (9.5) followed by fatigue, hair loss, loss of appetite, weight changes, and constipation with median score of 8.5.

Conclusions: Each of the AEs evaluated had at least a moderate impact on QOL of cancer patients; however, patients were likely to continue taking their prescribed treatment despite the AE. AEs with the largest impact on QOL were among those scoring in both the lower and higher likelihood of continuity of treatment in case of AE.