Search

Abstract Background Ewing sarcoma (EWS) is an aggressive sarcoma with few treatment options for patients with relapsed disease. Cyclin‐dependent kinase 4 (CDK4) is a genomic vulnerability in EWS that is synergistic with IGF‐1R inhibition in preclinical studies. We present the results of a phase 2 study combining palbociclib (CDK4/6 inhibitor) with ganitumab (IGF‐1R monoclonal antibody) for patients with relapsed EWS. Patients and Methods This open‐label, non‐randomized, phase 2 trial enrolled patients ≥12 years with relapsed EWS. All patients had molecular confirmation of EWS and RECIST measurable disease. Patients initially received palbociclib 125 mg orally on Days 1–21 and ganitumab 18 mg/kg intravenously on Days 1 and 15 of a 28‐day cycle. The primary endpoints were objective response (complete or partial) per RECIST and toxicity by CTCAE. An exact one‐stage design required ≥4 responders out of 15 to evaluate an alternative hypothesis of 40% response rate against a null of 10%. The study was closed following enrollment of the 10th patient due to discontinuation of ganitumab supply. Results Ten evaluable patients enrolled [median age 25.7 years (range 12.3–40.1)]. The median duration of therapy was 2.5 months (range 0.9–10.8). There were no complete or partial responders. Three of 10 patients had stable disease for >4 cycles and 2 had stable disease at completion of planned therapy or study closure. Six‐month progression‐free survival was 30% (95% CI 1.6%–58.4%). Two patients had cycle 1 hematologic dose‐limiting toxicities (DLTs) triggering palbociclib dose reduction to 100 mg daily for 21 days. Two subsequent patients had cycle 1 hematologic DLTs at the reduced dose. Eighty percent of patients had grade 3/4 AEs, including neutropenia (n = 8), white blood cell decreased (n = 7), and thrombocytopenia (n = 5). Serum total IGF‐1 significantly increased (p = 0.013) and ctDNA decreased during the first cycle. Conclusions This combination lacks adequate therapeutic activity for further study, though a subset of patients had prolonged stable disease.

Abstract Introduction: Operationalizing multi-site Community Engagement (CE) Studios to inform a research program is valuable for researchers. We describe the process and outcomes of hosting three CE Studios with Community Experts aged 65 years or older with chronic conditions and care partners of older adults. Experts gave feedback about processes for testing the feasibility, efficacy, effectiveness, and implementation of audio recording clinic visits and sharing recordings with patients who have multimorbidity and their care partners. Methods: The CE Cores of the Clinical and Translational Science Awards Programs at three academic health science centers created a joint CE Studio guide. Studios were conducted iteratively by site. Following receipt of the final reports, responses were compared to find themes, similarities, and differences on four topics in addition to overall commentary: Recruitment and Retention, Study Protocol, Study Reminders and Frequency, and Recording Technology. Results: Eighteen older adults and care partners in three states provided valuable feedback to inform multi-site trials. Feedback influenced multiple aspects of trials in process or subsequently funded. Experts provided critique on the wording of study invitations, information sheets, and reminders to engage in study procedures. Experts were concerned for participants being disappointed by randomization to a control arm and advised how investigators should prepare to address that. Conclusions: Multi-site CE Studios should be consecutive, so each team can learn from the previous teams. Using the CES Toolkit ensures that final reports were easily comparable and utilized to develop a research program that now includes three federally funded clinical trials.

Rationale & Objective: Stigma contributes to ineffective treatment for pain among individuals with kidney failure on dialysis, particularly with buprenorphine pain treatment. To address stigma, we adapted a Design Sprint, an industry-developed structured exercise where an interdisciplinary group works over 5 days to clarify the problem, identify and choose a solution, and build and test a prototype. Study Design: Adapted Design Sprint which clarified the problem to be solved, proposed solutions, and created a blueprint for the selected solution. Settings & Participants: Five individuals with pain and kidney disease receiving dialysis, 5 physicians (nephrology, palliative care, and addiction medicine) and 4 large dialysis organization leaders recruited for specific expertise or experience. Conducted through online platform (Zoom) and virtual white board (Miro board). Analytical Approach: Descriptions of the Design Sprint adaptations and processes. Results: To facilitate patient comfort, a patient-only phase included four 90-minute sessions over 2-weeks, during which patient participants used a mapping process to define the critical problem and sketch out solutions. In a physician-only phase, consisting of two 120-minute sessions, participants accomplished the same tasks. During a combined phase of two 120-minute sessions, patients, physicians, and large dialysis organization representatives vetted and developed solutions from earlier phases, leading to an intervention blueprint. Videoconferencing technology allowed for geographically diverse representation and facilitated participation from patients experiencing medical illness. The electronic whiteboard permitted interactive written contributions and voting on priorities instead of only verbal discussion, which may privilege physician participants. A skilled qualitative researcher facilitated the sessions. Limitations: Challenges included the time commitment of the sessions, absences owing to illness or emergencies, and technical difficulties. Conclusions: An adapted Design Sprint is a novel method of efficiently and rapidly incorporating multiple stakeholders to develop solutions for clinical challenges in kidney disease. Plain Language Summary: Stigma contributes to ineffective treatment for pain among individuals with kidney failure on dialysis, particularly when using buprenorphine, an opioid pain medicine with a lower risk of sedation used to treat addiction. To develop a stigma intervention, we adapted a Design Sprint, an industry-developed structured exercise where an interdisciplinary group works over 5 days to clarify the problem, identify and choose a solution, and build and test a prototype. We conducted 3 sprints with (1) patients alone, (2) physicians alone, and (3) combined patients, physicians, and dialysis organization representatives. This paper describes the adaptations and products of sprints as a method for gathering diverse stakeholder voices to create an intervention blueprint efficiently and rapidly.

Abstract Background Many individuals living with chronic kidney disease (CKD) have comorbid Type 2 diabetes (T2D). We sought to explore if efficacious interventions that improve glycemic control may also have potential to reduce CKD progression. Methods REACH is a text message-delivered self-management support intervention, which focused on medication adherence, diet, and exercise that significantly improved glycemic control in N = 506 patients with T2D. Using data from the trial, we characterized kidney health in the full sample and explored the intervention’s effect on change in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) at 12 months in a subsample of N=271 patients with eGFR data. Results In a diverse sample with respect to race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status, 37.2% had presence of mild or heavy proteinuria and/or an eGFR

Introduction Decision aids (DAs) are helpful instruments used to support shared decision making (SDM). Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) face complex decisions regarding stroke prevention strategies. While a few DAs have been made for AF stroke prevention, an encounter DA (EDA) and patient DA (PDA) have not been created to be used in conjunction with each other before. Design Using iterative user-centered design, we developed 2 DAs for anticoagulation choice and stroke prevention in AF. Prototypes were created, and we elicited feedback from patients and experts via observations of encounters, usability testing, and semistructured interviews. Results User testing was done with 33 experts (in AF and SDM) and 51 patients from 6 institutions. The EDA and PDA underwent 1 and 4 major iterations, respectively. Major differences between the DAs included AF pathophysiology and a preparation to meet with the clinician in the PDA as well as different language throughout. Content areas included personalized stroke risk, differences between anticoagulants, and risks of bleeding. Based on user feedback, developers 1) addressed feelings of isolation with AF, 2) improved navigation options, 3) modified content and flow for users new to AF and those experienced with AF, 4) updated stroke risk pictographs, and 5) added structure to the preparation for decision making in the PDA. Limitations These DAs focus only on anticoagulation for stroke prevention and are online, which may limit participation for those less comfortable with technology. Conclusions Designing complementary DAs for use in tandem or separately is a new method to support SDM between patients and clinicians. Extensive user testing is essential to creating high-quality tools that best meet the needs of those using them. Highlights First-time complementary encounter and patient decision aids have been designed to work together or separately. User feedback led to greater structure and different experiences for patients naïve or experienced with anticoagulants in patient decision aids. Online tools allow for easier dissemination, use in telehealth visits, and updating as new evidence comes out.

Rationale and Objective: The ‘PEER-HD’ multicenter study tests the effectiveness of peer mentorship to reduce hospitalizations in patients receiving maintenance hemodialysis. In this study, we describe the feasibility, efficacy, and acceptability of the mentor training program. Study Design: Educational program evaluation including the following aspects: (1) description of training content, (2) quantitative analysis of feasibility and acceptability of the program, and (3) quantitative pre-post analysis of efficacy of the training to impart knowledge and self-efficacy. Setting and Participants: Data were collected using baseline clinical and sociodemographic questionnaires from mentor participants enrolled in Bronx, NY, and Nashville, TN, themselves receiving maintenance hemodialysis. Analytical Approach: The outcome variables were the following: (1) feasibility measured by training module attendance and completion, (2) efficacy of the program to impart knowledge and self-efficacy measured by kidney knowledge and self-efficacy surveys, and (3) acceptability as measured by an 11-item survey of trainer performance and module content. Results: The PEER-HD training program included 4 2-hour modules that covered topics including dialysis-specific knowledge and mentorship skills. Of the 16 mentor participants, 14 completed the training program. There was complete attendance to all training modules, though some patients required flexibility in scheduling and format. Performance on posttraining quizzes was consistent with high knowledge (mean scores ranged from 82.0%-90.0% correct). Mean dialysis-specific knowledge scores trended higher post training than at baseline though this difference was not statistically significant (90.0% vs 78.1%; P = 0.1). No change in mean self-efficacy scores was demonstrated from before to after training, among mentor participants (P = 0.2). Program evaluation assessments of acceptability were favorable [mean of all patient scores (0-4) within each module ranged from 3.43-3.93]. Limitations: Small sample size. Conclusions: The PEER-HD mentor training program required accommodation to patients’ schedules but was feasible. Participants rated the program favorably, and although the comparison of performance on knowledge assessments post- and pre-program showed uptake of knowledge, this was not statistically significant.

Abstract Background Patients receiving in-center hemodialysis experience disproportionate morbidity and incur high healthcare-related costs. Much of this cost stems from potentially avoidable hospitalizations. Peer mentorship has been used effectively to improve outcomes for patients with complex chronic diseases. We propose testing the efficacy of peer mentorship on hospitalization rates among patients receiving hemodialysis. Methods This is a multicenter parallel group randomized controlled pragmatic trial of patients treated at hemodialysis facilities in Bronx, NY and Nashville, TN. The study has two phases. Phase 1 will enroll and train 16 hemodialysis patients (10 in Bronx, NY and 6 in Nashville TN) to be mentors using a program focused on enhancing self-efficacy, dialysis self-management and autonomy-supportive communication skills. Phase 2 will enroll 200 high risk adults receiving hemodialysis (140 in Bronx, NY and 60 in Nashville, TN), half of whom will be randomized to intervention and half to usual care. Intervention participants are assigned to weekly telephone calls with trained mentors (see Phase 1) for a 3-month period. The primary outcome of Phase 1 will be engagement of mentors with training and change in knowledge scores and autonomy skills from pre- to post-training. The primary outcome of Phase 2 will be the composite count of ED visits and hospitalizations at the end of study follow-up in patient participants assigned to intervention as compared to those assigned to usual care. Secondary outcomes for Phase 2 include the change over the trial period in validated survey scores measuring perception of social support and self-efficacy, and dialysis adherence metrics, among intervention participants as compared to usual care participants. Discussion The PEER-HD study will test the feasibility and efficacy of a pragmatic peer-mentorship program designed for patients receiving hemodialysis on ED visit and hospitalization rates. If effective, peer-mentorship holds promise as a scalable patient-centered intervention to decrease hospital resource utilization, and by extension morbidity and cost, for patients receiving maintenance in-center hemodialysis. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT03595748 ; 7/23/2018. Trial sponsor National Institutes of Diabetes, Digestive and Kidney Disease (NIDDK) 5R18DK118471. Funding Funding for this study was provided by the National Institutes of Diabetes, Digestive and Kidney Disease: R18DK118471. Study status This is an ongoing study and not complete. We are still collecting data for observational follow-up on participants. Related articles No related articles for this study have been submitted to any journal. The study sponsor and funders had no role in the design, analysis or interpretation of this data. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.

Rationale & Objective: Thrice-weekly hemodialysis can result in adequate urea clearance; however, the morbidity and mortality rates of patients treated with maintenance dialysis remain unacceptably high, partly because of nonadherence. African Americans have a higher prevalence of kidney failure treated with dialysis, greater dialysis nonadherence, and higher odds of hospitalization. We hypothesized that more precise ways of assessing dialysis treatment adherence will reflect the severity of nonadherence, distinguish patterns of nonadherence, and inform the design of personalized behavioral interventions. Study Design: Retrospective cohort study. Setting & Participants: African American patients receiving hemodialysis for >90 days. Exposure: Hemodialysis. Outcome: Dialysis adherence. Analytical Approach: Dialysis attendance data were displayed using a dot plot, categorized based on missed and shortened treatments, and examined for patterns. Descriptive characteristics were reported. In an exploratory analysis, associations between dialysis treatment adherence and participant characteristics were evaluated using ordinary least squares regression. An analysis was performed using missed minutes of dialysis and current metrics for measuring dialysis treatment adherence (ie, missed and shortened treatments). Results: Among 113 African American patients treated with dialysis, 47% were men; the median age was 57 years (interquartile range, 46-70 years), and the median dialysis vintage was 54 months (interquartile range, 22-90 months). With rows ordered based on the total missed minutes of dialysis, the dot plot displayed a decreasing gradient in the severity of nonadherence, with novel dialysis treatment adherence categories termed as follows: consistent underdialysis, inconsistent dialysis, and consistent dialysis. Distinct patterns of nonadherence and heterogeneity emerged within these categories. Older age was consistently associated with better adherence, as determined by the analyses performed using the total missed minutes of dialysis as well as missed and shortened treatments. Limitations: The study findings, although replicable and paradigm-shifting, might be limited by the short timeline, focus on adherence data specific to African American patients treated with dialysis, and restriction to dialysis units affiliated with 1 academic center. Conclusions: This study presents more precise and novel ways of measuring and displaying dialysis treatment adherence. The findings introduce a more personalized approach for evaluating actual dialysis uptake. Identification of unique patterns of adherence behavior is important to inform the design of effective behavioral interventions and improve outcomes for vulnerable African American patients treated with dialysis.

BackgroundDiverticular disease is a common gastrointestinal diagnosis with over 2.7 million clinic visits yearly. National guidelines from the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons state that “the decision to recommend elective sigmoid colectomy after recovery from uncomplicated acute diverticulitis should be individualized.” However, tools to individualize this decision are lacking. ObjectiveThis study aimed to develop an online educational decision aid (DA) to facilitate effective surgeon and patient communication about treatment options for recurrent left-sided diverticulitis. MethodsWe used a modified design sprint methodology to create a prototype DA. We engaged a multidisciplinary team and adapted elements from the Ottawa Personal Decision Guide. We then iteratively refined the prototype by conducting a mixed methods assessment of content and usability testing, involving cognitive interviews with patients and surgeons. The findings informed the refinement of the DA. Further testing included an in-clinic feasibility review. ResultsOver a 4-day in-person rapid design sprint, including patients, surgeons, and health communication experts, we developed a prototype of a diverticulitis DA, comprising an interactive website and handout with 3 discrete sections. The first section contains education about diverticulitis and treatment options. The second section clarifies the potential risks and benefits of both clinical treatment options (medical management vs colectomy). The third section invites patients to participate in a value clarification exercise. After navigating the DA, the patient prints a synopsis that they bring to their clinic appointment, which serves as a guide for shared decision-making. ConclusionsDesign sprint methodology, emphasizing stakeholder co-design and complemented by extensive user testing, is an effective and efficient strategy to create a DA for patients living with recurrent diverticulitis facing critical treatment decisions.