Dr Camidge talks to ecancer about a recent paper he co-authored in the Journal of Thoracic Oncology which looked at the use of investigator-assigned subjective or judgmental efficacy and toxicity reporting in early phase clinical trials of lung cancer treatments.

The analysis shone a light on how objective efficacy and toxicity data can sometimes be described in potentially misleading subjective terms.

He offers ways in which reporting could be improved to be more objective and draw more heavily on patients’ responses to detailed surveys about side effects.

Dr Camidge notes that ideally there would be an end to misleading language in presentations about trials and more appropriate descriptions of side effects, including the duration a patient experiences a side effect and at what level.  

He also reflects on his experience as a lung cancer patient to offer advice to both oncologists and patients, and touches on some of his research from a distinguished career, some of which has impacted his own treatment.