A prospective, real-world, multinational study of febrile neutropenia (FN) occurrence in oncology patients receiving chemotherapy with intermediate risk of FN: a MASCC Neutropenia, Infection, and Myelosuppression Study Group initiative.

PURPOSE: Limited knowledge is available on the incidence of febrile neutropenia (FN) in intermediate-risk patients and the rationale for use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) in these patients. We aimed to estimate the rate at which patients associated with intermediate risk (10-20%) of FN would develop ≥ 1 episode of FN with a commonly used chemotherapy regimen in clinical practice. METHODS: This prospective, real-world, observational, multinational, multicenter study (December 2016-October 2019) recruited patients with solid tumors or Hodgkin's/non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Patients receiving chemotherapy with intermediate risk of FN, but not G-CSF as primary prophylaxis were included and observed for the duration of the chemotherapy (≤ 6 cycles and ≤ 30 days after the last chemotherapy administration). RESULTS: In total, 364 patients (median age, 56 years) with 1601 cycles of chemotherapy were included in the analysis. The incidence of FN was 5% in cycle 1, 3% in cycles 2-3, and 1% in cycles 4-6. The rate of patients with ≥ 1 episode of FN was 9%, and 59% of FN events were reported during cycle 1. The rate of grade 4 neutropenia in cycle 1 was 11%, and 15% of patients experienced ≥ 1 episode of grade 4 neutropenia. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the incidence of FN was low, with a high incidence in cycle 1 and a decrease in the subsequent cycles. These results provide the real FN risk for common chemotherapy regimens in patients generally excluded from clinical trials. Prophylactic G-CSF in intermediate-risk patients could be considered as per clinician's judgement.

Longitudinal analysis of quality of life following treatment with Asunercept plus reirradiation versus reirradiation in progressive glioblastoma patients.

PURPOSE: Glioblastoma is an aggressive malignant cancer of the central nervous system, with disease progression associated with deterioration of neurocognitive function and quality of life (QoL). As such, maintenance of QoL is an important treatment goal. This analysis presents time to deterioration (TtD) of QoL in patients with recurrent glioblastoma receiving Asunercept plus reirradiation (rRT) or rRT alone. METHODS: Data from patients with a baseline and ≥ 1 post-baseline QoL assessment were included in this analysis. TtD was defined as the time from randomisation to the first deterioration in the EORTC QLQ-C15, PAL EORTC QLQ-BN20 and Medical Research Council (MRC)-Neurological status. Deterioration was defined as a decrease of ≥ 10 points from baseline in the QLQ-C15 PAL overall QoL and functioning scales, an increase of ≥ 10 points from baseline in the QLQ-C15 PAL fatigue scale and the QLQ-BN20 total sum of score, and a rating of "Worse" in the MRC-Neurological status. Patients without a deterioration were censored at the last QoL assessment. Kaplan-Meier estimates were used to describe TtD and treatment groups (Asunercept + rRT or rRT alone) were compared using the log-rank test. RESULTS: Treatment with Asunercept + rRT was associated with significant improvement of TtD compared with rRT alone for QLQ-CL15 PAL overall QoL and physical functioning, and MRC Neurological Status (p ≤ 0.05). In the Asunercept + rRT group, QoL was maintained beyond progresison of disease (PoD). CONCLUSION: Treatment with Asunercept plus rRT significantly prolongs TtD and maintains QoL versus rRT alone in recurrent glioblastoma patients.

The evolution of value with filgrastim in oncology.

The recombinant G-CSF filgrastim was first approved in 1991, and its value has been evolving ever since. Initial health technology assessments suggested low value due to high drug cost and no evidence for significant gain in overall survival. However, more recent meta-analyses of placebo-controlled randomized trial data show falling costs due to biosimilar competition and absolute overall survival gains of 3.2% (95% CI: 2.1-4.2%) from filgrastim support of cytotoxic chemotherapy. The launch of biosimilar alternatives merits a re-evaluation of decisions by health technology assessments and explains the first inclusion of filgrastim in the WHO Essential Drug List for cancer >20 years after its original approval in 1991, thus demonstrating the power of biosimilar medicines in transforming healthcare.

Safety analysis of proposed pegfilgrastim biosimilar in Phase I and Phase III studies.

Aim: This analysis compares safety data for Sandoz proposed biosimilar (LA-EP2006) and reference pegfilgrastim from a Phase I pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic study in healthy volunteers (HVs) and two Phase III confirmatory studies in patients with breast cancer (BC; total n = 808). Patients & methods: Baseline characteristics were summarized, and event rates of bone pain and headache calculated. Results: HVs in the Phase I pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic study were generally younger, with lower mean body mass index, versus BC patients in PROTECT-1/-2. Bone pain was the most frequent adverse event with similar incidences with reference versus proposed biosimilar in all studies. Conclusion: No differences in adverse events were found between Sandoz proposed biosimilar and reference pegfilgrastim, notwithstanding some differences between HVs and BC patients.

Meta-analysis comparing incidence of grade 3-4 neutropenia with ALK inhibitors and chemotherapy in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer.

Aim: This meta-analysis compared incidence of grade 3-4 neutropenia with ALK inhibitors versus chemotherapy in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer. Materials & methods: PubMed/MEDLINE was searched to identify Phase II and III randomized clinical trials published up to 25 October 2018. Summary incidence, relative risk and corresponding 95% CIs were calculated for grade 3-4 neutropenia. Results: Five randomized clinical trials were included. Relative risk (95% CI) of developing grade 3-4 neutropenia with ALK inhibitor versus chemotherapy was 0.27 (0.07-1.06). Probabilities of developing grade 3-4 neutropenia were 6.56 and 14.19%, respectively; no significant difference was found. Conclusion: In patients with non-small-cell lung cancer, incidence of grade 3-4 neutropenia with ALK-targeted therapy is not significantly different compared with chemotherapy.

Chemotherapy-induced neutropenia/febrile neutropenia prophylaxis with biosimilar filgrastim in solid tumors versus hematological malignancies: MONITOR-GCSF study.

AIM: This study aimed to report patterns of biosimilar filgrastim prophylaxis and outcomes of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia (CIN)/febrile neutropenia (FN) in patients with hematological malignancies or solid tumors. PATIENTS & METHODS: MONITOR-GCSF is a real-world study of 1447 cancer patients receiving CIN/FN prophylaxis with biosimilar filgrastim (solid tumors: 77.2%; hematological malignancies: 22.8%). RESULTS: Differences in prophylaxis intensity and day of initiation relative to guideline recommendations were observed. In hematology patients, higher rates of CIN and FN occurred at cycle level, and rate of FN was higher at patient level (9.1 vs 5.0% in solid tumor patients). CONCLUSION: Adequate GCSF support in hematology and solid tumor patients is important to prevent CIN/FN and related hospitalizations and chemotherapy disturbances.

Outcomes of chemotherapy-induced (febrile) neutropenia prophylaxis with biosimilar filgrastim (Zarzio®) initiated "same-day" (< 24 h), "per-guidelines" (24-72 h), and "late" (> 72 h): findings from the MONITOR-GCSF study.

PURPOSE: Granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSFs) are indicated for prophylaxis or management of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia (CIN) and febrile neutropenia (FN). Guidelines recommend G-CSF 24-72 h following chemotherapy; however, some evidence suggests that G-CSF initiated < 24 h may benefit some patients. METHODS: MONITOR-GCSF was a prospective, observational, multicenter, pan-European study of 1447 chemotherapy-treated patients receiving daily biosimilar (standard) filgrastim (Zarzio®/Zarxio®, filgrastim-sndz, Hexal AG, Sandoz Inc.). In this analysis, cycles were classified as same-day, per-guidelines, or late if G-CSF support was initiated < 24 h, 24-72 h, and > 72 h after chemotherapy. Outcomes included occurrence of CIN of any grade (CIN1/4), grade 3 or 4 (CIN3/4), grade 4 (CIN4), or FN: CIN/FN-related hospitalization or CIN/FN-related chemotherapy disturbance. RESULTS: A total of 5930 chemotherapy cycles from 1423 evaluable patients from MONITOR-GCSF had data for day of G-CSF initiation: 795 cycles (13.4%) classified as same-day, 3320 (56.0%) as per-guidelines, and 1815 (30.6%) as late. Groups did not differ as to CIN1/4 and FN episodes, or CIN/FN-related hospitalizations or chemotherapy disturbances. Patients in the same-day and per-guidelines groups had statistically similar odds of not experiencing any outcomes of interest in any given cycle. Patients in the late group had worse odds of experiencing CIN1/4, CIN3/4, and CIN4 episodes in any given cycle. Proportions of patients reporting clinical events of interest were generally similar. CONCLUSIONS: This real-world evidence indicates that CIN/FN prophylaxis initiated with biosimilar filgrastim within 24-72 h post-chemotherapy is effective and safe. Filgrastim administration on the day of chemotherapy may be appropriate in some patients.

Potential life-years gained over a 5-year period by correcting DOPPS-identified modifiable practices in haemodialysis: results from the European MONITOR-CKD5 study.

BACKGROUND: DOPPS reported that thousands of life-years could be gained in the US and Europe over 5 years by correcting six modifiable haemodialysis practices. We estimated potential life-years gained across 10 European countries using MONITOR-CKD5 study data. METHODS: The DOPPS-based target ranges were used, except for haemoglobin due to label changes, as well as DOPPS-derived relative mortality risks. Percentages of MONITOR-CKD5 patients outside targets were calculated. Consistent with the DOPPS-based analyses, we extrapolated life-years gained for the MONITOR-CKD5 population over 5 years if all patients were within targets. RESULTS: Bringing the 10 MONITOR-CKD5 countries' dialysis populations into compliance on the six practices results in a 5-year gain of 97,428 patient-years. In descending order, survival impact was the highest for albumin levels, followed by phosphate levels, vascular access, haemoglobin, dialysis adequacy, and interdialytic weight gain. CONCLUSIONS: Optimal management of the six modifiable haemodialysis practices may achieve 6.2% increase in 5-year survival. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01121237 . Clinicaltrials.gov registration May 12, 2010 (retrospectively registered).

Treatment patterns and outcomes in patients with non-small cell lung cancer receiving biosimilar filgrastim for prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced/febrile neutropaenia: Results from the MONITOR-GCSF study.

OBJECTIVE: Real-world evidence data on the use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are limited. MONITOR-GCSF is a pan-European, multicentre, prospective, non-interventional study designed to describe patient characteristics, treatment patterns and clinical outcomes in patients receiving biosimilar filgrastim in the prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced neutropaenia (CIN) and febrile neutropaenia (FN). METHODS: In this subanalysis, patient characteristics, treatment patterns, and outcomes are described for 345 patients with stage 3 or 4 NSCLC, receiving up to six chemotherapy cycles. Patients were treated with biosimilar filgrastim as per their treating physician's best judgement. RESULTS: CIN (any grade) occurred in 13.6% of patients in Cycle 1 and in 36.5% of patients in all cycles. FN occurred in 1.4% of patients in Cycle 1 and in 5.2% of patients in all cycles. Grade 3-4 FN occurred in 1.2% of patients in Cycle 1 and in 3.8% of patients in all cycles. CONCLUSION: Results show that in real-life practice in patients with NSCLC, biosimilar filgrastim has similar effectiveness and safety to the known effectiveness and safety profile of reference filgrastim, supporting the use of biosimilar filgrastim for the real-world treatment of neutropaenia in patients with NSCLC.

Safety Profile of Biosimilar Filgrastim (Zarzio/Zarxio): A Combined Analysis of Phase III Studies.

BACKGROUND: Evaluation of adverse events (AEs) in pivotal registration trials and ongoing postmarketing surveillance is important for all biologics, including biosimilars. A combined analysis of two pivotal registration studies was performed to strengthen evidence on safety for biosimilar filgrastim EP2006 in patients with breast cancer receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy, a sensitive clinical setting to confirm biosimilarity of filgrastim. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data were combined from two phase III studies of biosimilar filgrastim EP2006. The U.S. registration study was a randomized, double-blind comparison of biosimilar and reference filgrastim in women aged ≥18 years with breast cancer, receiving (neo)adjuvant treatment with TAC (docetaxel + doxorubicin + cyclophosphamide). The European Union registration study was a single-arm, open-label study of biosimilar filgrastim in women aged ≥18 years with breast cancer receiving doxorubicin + docetaxel. Patients received filgrastim as a subcutaneous injection on day 2 of each cycle for <14 days or until the absolute neutrophil count reached 10 × 109/L after the expected nadir. Results were combined for cycles 1-4. RESULTS: A total of 277 patients received biosimilar filgrastim EP2006. Patients had a mean (± standard deviation) age of 51.1 (± 10.8) years, and 78.7% of patients had stage II or III breast cancer. A total of 46 (20.6%) patients receiving biosimilar filgrastim had AEs considered filgrastim-related. The most frequently reported filgrastim-related AEs were musculoskeletal or connective tissue disorders (15.2%), including bone pain (7.2%). One death (due to pulmonary embolism) occurred of a patient receiving biosimilar filgrastim (not considered filgrastim-related). No patient developed antidrug antibodies during the study. CONCLUSION: Biosimilar filgrastim has a safety profile consistent with previous filgrastim studies and is effective in preventing febrile neutropenia in patients with breast cancer. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The biosimilar filgrastim EP2006 (Zarzio, Zarxio, biosimilar filgrastim-sndz) has been approved in Europe since 2009 and in the U.S. since 2015. This combined analysis of two phase III studies provides additional clinical evidence that the biosimilar filgrastim EP2006 has a safety profile consistent with previous studies of reference filgrastim and supports large postmarketing studies of EP2006 in Europe. Strengthening the evidence for biosimilar filgrastim can help improve acceptance of biosimilars and increase patient access to biologics.

Febrile neutropenia (FN) occurrence outside of clinical trials: occurrence and predictive factors in adult patients treated with chemotherapy and an expected moderate FN risk. Rationale and design of a real-world prospective, observational, multinational study.

BACKGROUND: Febrile neutropenia (FN) is a common occurrence during chemotherapy. Granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSFs) can significantly reduce the risk of FN. International guidelines recommend G-CSF for patients receiving chemotherapy with FN risk of ≥20% or 10% to 20% with defined risk factors. Prophylaxis is not typically recommended for FN risk of < 10%; however, few studies have investigated FN incidence in lower-risk patients in real-world settings and tried to identify higher-risk subgroups. METHODS: This real-world prospective, observational, multinational study aims to estimate the rate of development of FN with a chemotherapy line expected to be associated with a 10% to 20% risk of FN. Eligible patients (> 18 years of age) will have a solid tumour or Hodgkin/non-Hodgkin lymphoma and a planned chemotherapy regimen with expected risk of FN of 10% to 20% (according to published guidelines). Patients will be observed for the duration of the chemotherapy line (first cycle administered without FN prophylaxis). Primary endpoint is incidence of FN after the first chemotherapy cycle. Secondary outcomes include: FN-associated morbidity and mortality; time to first FN occurrence; other FN risk factors and impact of FN on quality of life. A risk model using occurrence of FN as a binary outcome will be developed. Data will be stratified by age, comorbidities and other risk factors. DISCUSSION: This study will provide insight into the real FN risk for common chemotherapy regimens and predictive factors for FN, including patients generally excluded from randomised clinical trials, from which reported FN rates have been variable. This study builds on knowledge of predictive factors from other research and will provide information on patients with 10% to 20% FN risk.

MONITOR-GCSF DLBCL subanalysis: Treatment patterns/outcomes with biosimilar filgrastim for chemotherapy-induced/febrile neutropenia prophylaxis.

OBJECTIVE: Prospective data on the use of granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) in non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and its aggressive subtypes, including diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), are limited. MONITOR-GCSF is a pan-European, multicenter, prospective, observational study aiming to describe treatment patterns and clinical outcomes in patients receiving biosimilar filgrastim in the prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia (CIN) and febrile neutropenia (FN). METHODS: This analysis describes patient characteristics, treatment patterns, and outcomes for 245 patients with stage 3 or 4 DLBCL receiving ≤6 chemotherapy cycles as part of MONITOR-GCSF study, including patients aged ≥65 years and ≥70 years. Outcomes of interest included the incidence of CIN and FN, antibiotic prophylaxis, biosimilar filgrastim prophylaxis, and adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: MONITOR-GCSF included 245 patients with DLBCL. Of these patients, 87 (35.5%) experienced one or more CIN (any grade) episode and 24 (9.8%) experienced FN (any grade). The most frequent AE reported was bone pain (n = 7, 2.9%), followed by arthralgia (n = 2, 0.8%) and back pain (n = 2, 0.8%). CONCLUSION: In real-life practice, biosimilar filgrastim demonstrated clinical effectiveness and safety in patients with DLBCL. The large percentage of patients aged ≥65 years adds to the evidence on how to best treat older patients with DLBCL receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy.

Long-term treatment with biosimilar epoetin-α (HX575) in hemodialysis patients with renal anemia: real-world effectiveness and safety in the MONITOR-CKD5 study
.

AIMS: To assess real-world effectiveness and safety of intravenous (IV) HX575, a biosimilar epoetin-α, in hemodialysis (HD) patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective, observational, pharmacoepidemiological study of adult HD patients treated with IV HX575 for renal anemia for up to 24 months was conducted in 114 centers in 10 European countries. Of 2,086 enrolled subjects (safety sample), 2,023 had ≥ 1 follow-up visit (effectiveness sample). RESULTS: Most (59.3%) patients were male, median age was 68 years. At enrollment, most (82.5%) had been treated with an erythropoiesis-stimulating agent, and 73.0% had adequate iron stores. At baseline, mean (± standard deviation) baseline hemoglobin (Hb) was 11.09 (± 1.14) g/dL and HX575 dose 106.5 (± 78.7) international units (IU)/kg/week; at month 24, Hb was 11.25 (± 1.19) g/dL and HX575 dose 113.0 (± 102.5) IU/kg/week. Variations in mean HX575 dose and Hb over the study were not statistically significant. As to safety, 140 patients (6.7%) experienced ≥ 1 adverse event; of these, 19 events (16 patients; 0.8%) were related to HX575 treatment, 148 (108 patients; 5.2%) were reported as serious, including 12 events in 11 patients (0.5%) stated to be related. No cases of anti-epoetin antibodies or pure red cell aplasia were reported. CONCLUSIONS: MONITOR-CKD5 confirmed the real-world effectiveness and safety profile of IV biosimilar HX575. HD patients treated for up to 24 months showed stable dosing patterns and Hb outcomes. The safety profile of HX575 is likewise comparable to reference epoetin-α.
.

Proposed biosimilar pegfilgrastim (LA-EP2006) compared with reference pegfilgrastim in Asian patients with breast cancer: an exploratory comparison from two Phase III trials.

AIM: This is a pooled subgroup analysis of Asian patients enrolled in two Phase III confirmatory studies comparing proposed biosimilar LA-EP2006 with reference pegfilgrastim in women receiving chemotherapy for breast cancer. PATIENTS & METHODS: Women were randomized to LA-EP2006 (n = 90) or reference (n = 84) pegfilgrastim (Neulasta®, Amgen, Inc., CA, USA) for ≤6 cycles of TAC chemotherapy. Primary end point was duration of severe neutropenia during Cycle 1 (number of consecutive days with absolute neutrophil count <0.5 × 109/l) with equivalence confirmed if 95% CIs were within a ±1-day margin. RESULTS: Mean duration of severe neutropenia (days) in Cycle 1 was 1.36 ± 0.98 (LA-EP2006) versus 1.35 ± 1.06 (reference) (difference 0.01 days; 95% CI: -0.30-0.32, indicating equivalence). CONCLUSION: LA-EP2006 showed similar clinical efficacy and safety compared with reference pegfilgrastim.

Over- and under-prophylaxis for chemotherapy-induced (febrile) neutropenia relative to evidence-based guidelines is associated with differences in outcomes: findings from the MONITOR-GCSF study.

PURPOSE: In the MONITOR-GCSF study of chemotherapy-induced (febrile) neutropenia with biosimilar filgrastim, 56.6% of patients were prophylacted according to amended EORTC guidelines, but 17.4% were prophylacted below and 26.0% above guideline recommendations. METHODS: MONITOR-GCSF is a prospective, observational study of 1447 evaluable patients from 140 cancers centers in 12 European countries treated with myelosuppressive chemotherapy for up to 6 cycles receiving biosimilar GCSF prophylaxis. Patients were classified as under-, correctly-, or over-prophylacted with GCSF relative to guideline recommendations based on their chemotherapy risk, individual risk factors, and type of GCSF prophylaxis (primary versus secondary). RESULTS: Differences between under- (17.4%), correctly- (56.6%), or over-prophylacted (26.0%) groups were found in terms of patient risk factors (age, performance status, history of FN, comorbid conditions) as well as prophylaxis patterns (type of prophylaxis, day of GCSF initiation, and GCSF duration). Rates of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia (CIN) (all grades), FN, and CIN-related hospitalizations were consistently lower in over-prophylacted patients relative to under- and correctly-prophylacted patients. No differences were observed between under- and correctly-prophylacted patients except for CIN/FN-related chemotherapy disturbances. No GCSF safety differences were found between groups (except for headaches). CONCLUSIONS: The real-world evidence provided by the MONITOR-GCSF study indicates that providing GCSF support may yield better CIN, FN, and CIN/FN-related hospitalization outcomes if patients are prophylacted at levels above guideline recommendations. Patients who are under-prophylacted are at higher risk for disturbances to their chemotherapy regimens. Our findings support the guideline recommendation that CIN/FN risk be assessed at the beginning of each chemotherapy cycle.

Evaluation of the safety and immunogenicity of subcutaneous HX575 epoetin alfa in the treatment of anemia associated with chronic kidney disease in predialysis and dialysis patients
.

AIM: To assess the safety and immunogenicity of subcutaneous (SC) HX575 (epoetin-α) in dialysis- and nondialysis-dependent adult patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). METHODS: Open-label, single-arm, multicenter study in patients (n = 416) from Germany, Italy, Poland, Romania, Russia, Turkey, and Ukraine. RESULTS: Mean (standard deviation (SD)) age was 52.3 (15.8) years, all patients were Caucasian, and similar proportions were male/female. 250 patients (60.1%) were erythropoiesis-stimulating agent (ESA)-naïve, and 166 (39.9%) were receiving ESA maintenance therapy at study start; mean (SD) on-study treatment duration with HX575 was 43.4 (15.8) weeks and 45.3 (13.7) weeks, respectively. Binding antierythropoietin (EPO) antibodies were detected by radioimmunoprecipitation (RIP) assay in 7 patients (1.7%; incidence 0.019); 5 of these were ESA-naïve at study entry. No patient developed neutralizing antibodies as determined in a cell-based epoetin neutralizing assay. Of the 7 patients with a positive binding anti-EPO RIP assay, 4 tested negative at later time points while continuing HX575 treatment. Three patients had low titers of anti-EPO antibodies at the last study assessment. There were no clinical signs of immunogenicity or hypersensitivity. CONCLUSIONS: SC HX575 was effective for correcting and maintaining correction of anemia, and the mean weekly dose remained stable over time.
.

Medical Affairs and Innovative Medicinal Product Strategy Development.

Innovative medicinal products are required for progress in many therapeutic areas, and in particular, oncology. For these products to succeed, pharmaceutical companies must generate the relevant and robust clinical data required to meet the needs of regulators and healthcare providers. In addition, real-world and health economic evidence is increasingly required to support pricing and reimbursement for innovative medicinal products. To incorporate all of these requirements into the innovative medicinal product strategy early in development, the core principles of how product strategies are developed and applied must be revisited and end-to-end strategic planning implemented. This paper reviews the hurdles faced during development of the integrated strategy for innovative medicinal products, particularly in the oncology field, and examines which functions of a pharmaceutical company should play the greatest role in addressing patient and different stakeholders' needs. It will then illustrate how Medical Affairs activities are evolving to take on this strategic leadership role.

Early access provision: Awareness, educational needs and opportunities to improve oncology patients' access to care.

Background: An unmet medical need exists for many oncology patients who cannot be treated satisfactorily by available therapeutic options. Early access provision (EAP) is endorsed by competent authorities to improve patient access to innovative medicinal products (InMPs). This paper determined awareness and understanding among practicing physicians of integrated EAP protocols, and of the procedures involved in EAP applications for oncology trials prior to marketing authorization. Methods: An on-line, fully anonymous survey reaching out to more than 3,258 physicians (including practicing oncologists) was initiated between November 2020 - January 2021. Participants were questioned about their knowledge and understanding of EAP and the decision processes involved, level of experience, interest for further educational activities and opportunities to improve the process, both in general and specifically during the COVID-19 pandemic. The frequency of EAP protocols for oncology InMPs was identified by a search of ClinicalTrials.gov and EU Clinical Trials registers. Results: Survey results (75% oncologists) indicated 75% of respondents were 'very comfortable' or 'comfortable' with using EAP for their patients, but only 54.5% correctly answered the specific knowledge-based question related to the EAP definition. For 56% of respondents, experience with EAP in daily practice was very limited. Two-thirds indicated an average or lower level of understanding about the application process and regulatory requirements involved (65.2% and 66.0%, respectively). Knowledge on data collection and serious adverse event reporting under EAP was lower at 57.8% and 50.5% of respondents, respectively. Awareness of physician responsibilities was high in 59.7% of respondents, but fewer understood roles and responsibilities of manufacturing companies (31.2%). Most indicated they would consider clinical efficacy and safety data from comparative phase III randomized controlled trials as of high importance to support their decision to apply for EAP (93.4% and 86.8%, respectively). During the COVID-19 pandemic, the majority of respondents highlighted the need to improve and adapt EAP with regard to the application process and documentation (83.8%), InMP supply and logistics (88.4), and safety reporting process (78.0%). Of identified oncology trials with a ClinicalTrials.gov protocol, only 149 (0.4%) included EAP, and 23 used the data to receive a marketing authorization during the period Jan 2015 to December 2020. Of oncology trials with a EudraCT protocol, only 21 (0.23%) included EAP, of which 6 were used to receive a conditional or full marketing authorisation over the same period. Conclusion: Use of EAP in daily practice remains limited. Challenges posed by the EAP process, together with a lack of education on this topic, might contribute to its under-utilization and influence access of oncology patients to care. Continuous educational efforts from different stakeholders are required to better inform and support practicing oncologists during the EAP application process and regulatory framework follow up. Education should also be provided on EAP roles and responsibilities, monitoring, and potential adaptations when faced with specific challenges, such as the current COVID-19 pandemic.

Value of Adaptive Trials and Surrogate Endpoints for Clinical Decision-Making in Rare Cancers.

Despite high-level endorsement, the number of adaptive Phase II/III trials in rare cancers needs to be improved, with better understanding of their value for clinical decisions in daily practice. This paper describes approaches to trial design in rare cancers, which has been supplemented by a search of ClinicalTrials.gov for adaptive trial designs in rare cancer. In addition, an online survey of 3,200 oncologists was conducted. Practicing physicians were questioned on the importance of different evidence levels, types of adaptive trial design, and categories of surrogate endpoints for clinical decision making. The results of the online survey revealed that evidence from Phase II/III trials with an adaptive design and relatively small sample size was considered high value in rare cancer by 97% of responders, similar to the randomized controlled trial rating (82%). Surrogate clinical endpoints were considered valuable alternatives to overall survival by 80% of oncologists. Preferred adaptive designs were futility analysis, interim analysis, adaptive sample size, and adaptive randomization. In conclusion, rare cancer oncologists rate evidence from adaptive clinical trials with as high a value and importance for clinical decision making processes as conventional randomized controlled trials. All stakeholders have a vested interest in advances in clinical trial designs to ensure efficient and timely development of innovative medicinal products to allow more patients faster access to the pivotal treatment.

CD95L and Anti-Tumor Immune Response: Current Understanding and New Evidence.

The ability of FasL/CD95L to induce apoptosis in various Fas/CD95-expressing cells has been described in the context of hematopoiesis or thymic elimination of self-reactive T cells and resolution of an acute immune response under physiological conditions. At the same time, non-apoptotic CD95 activation is widely described in cancer and shown to stimulate invasiveness of cancer cells, promote cancer progression as well as stemness of cancer cells. This paper puts emphasis on the evolving understanding of expression and the non-apoptotic activities of the CD95/CD95L signaling pathway on the function of tumor cells, tumor microenvironment and immune cells. The emerging evidence to support the role of CD95/CD95L signaling in the anti-tumor immune response will be presented in the context of various malignancies and the modalities of potential therapeutic interventions via selective CD95L inhibition in combination with traditional interventions such as RT, chemotherapy and immune checkpoint inhibitors.