RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: There is limited knowledge of how US managed care professionals view and prioritize quality metrics/performance measures, care models, alternative payment models, and clinical pathways in oncology settings. OBJECTIVE: To characterize payor perspectives on, and the use of, oncology clinical pathways and performance measures in their reimbursement/access decision-making process. METHODS: A survey was implemented via SurveyMonkey software and distributed electronically to a national sample of the Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy (AMCP) Market Insights Panel members from July 11 through August 5, 2022. The survey was created by a steering committee based on literature reviews of the current and future oncology care landscapes. The survey consisted of 47 questions, including those to establish respondents' position, responsibilities, and demographics. The results are presented as descriptive statistics for 7 key questions that covered the perceptions and use of quality metrics/performance measures, alternative payment models, and oncology care pathways as prioritized by the steering committee. RESULTS: Among the 695 AMCP panel members who were sent the survey, 73 responded (response rate 10.5%), 54 were eligible to continue, and 31 completed the entire questionnaire; the low response rate may limit generalizability of the survey results. Specific oncology clinical and economic measures of performance were currently used (70%-88%) but generally received less endorsement for future use (39%-49%) except for chemotherapy during end of life, which was considered for future use by 80% of respondents but was only currently used by 31%. Benchmarking was the primary reason for the use of performance measures; only 27% used these to inform value-based agreements. Real-world data tracked by respondents' institutions primarily focused on managed care and pharmacy utilization (39%-85%), with patient-reported and clinical outcomes tracked by only 17%-34%. Almost one-third (31%) did not use clinical oncology pathways, and among those who did, fewer than half (48%) reported that their organization tracks whether treatment decisions agree with the oncology care pathways, and only 26% reported feedback to oncology providers on how often their treatment decisions agree with the pathways. When considering alternative payment models, patient-related components received lower rankings in importance than clinical relevance, actionability, and costs. CONCLUSIONS: Variation among payors regarding current trends in oncology care management, including on the importance of patient-centric outcomes and the use of oncology clinical pathways, suggests the need to focus on value-based health care and greater uptake of oncology clinical pathways.
Asunto(s)
Programas Controlados de Atención en Salud , Oncología Médica , Humanos , Estados Unidos , Programas Controlados de Atención en Salud/tendencias , Oncología Médica/tendencias , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Toma de Decisiones , Masculino , Femenino , Neoplasias/terapiaRESUMEN
Aim: To evaluate health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in cemiplimab-treated patients with locally advanced basal cell carcinoma (laBCC).Materials & methods: Eighty-four patients with laBCC received cemiplimab 350 mg every 3 weeks (up to 9 cycles). HRQoL was assessed using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Core 30 (QLQ-C30) and Skindex-16 questionnaires at baseline and each cycle. Mixed-effects repeated-measures models evaluated change from baseline across cycles.Results: Clinically meaningful improvement or maintenance was reported by 62-90% of patients on QLQ-C30 scales and by approximately 80% on Skindex-16 scales at Cycle 2, with consistent results at Cycle 9 except fatigue.Conclusion: Most cemiplimab-treated patients with laBCC reported improvement or maintenance of HRQoL with low symptom burden except fatigue.Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT03132636, registered 28 April 2017.
Locally advanced basal cell carcinoma (laBCC) is a type of skin cancer that has the potential to invade surrounding tissues including bone, cartilage, nerve and muscle. Cemiplimab-rwlc is approved in the US for patients with laBCC following a therapy called hedgehog inhibitor (HHI) treatment or for whom HHIs are not appropriate. In a Phase II clinical trial, intravenous (in the vein) cemiplimab 350 mg every 3 weeks for up to nine treatment cycles resulted in clinically meaningful antitumor activity in patients with laBCC who progressed on or were intolerant to HHIs.This analysis evaluated health-related quality of life, symptom burden, emotions and functional status in these patients using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Core 30 (QLQ-C30) and Skindex-16 questionnaires. Baseline scores (scores at the start of the clinical trial) showed moderate to high levels of functioning and low symptom burden that, except for fatigue, were maintained or improved over the course of cemiplimab treatment. These results show that despite the presence of fatigue, health-related quality of life and functional status were maintained with cemiplimab across the study duration.
RESUMEN
Background: Prior to the Food and Drug Administration approval of cemiplimab in 2018, the median overall survival (OS) for adult patients with advanced CSCC receiving systemic therapy was approximately 8 to 15 months. Limited real-world data are available on cemiplimab for this indication in the US. Patients and Methods: This retrospective cohort study included US patients with advanced CSCC initiating cemiplimab monotherapy in a real-world database (2018-2021). A clinical trial-like sub-cohort was identified using select criteria. Time to treatment discontinuation (TTD), time to next treatment (TTNT), and OS were estimated using Kaplan-Meier methods. Cox proportional hazard models were used to examine prognostic factors associated with OS in the main cohort. Results: The main cohort included 622 patients (n = 240 in the trial-like cohort). In the main cohort, the median age was 78 years, 77.8% were male, 21.4% were immunocompromised/immunosuppressed, and 63.8% had metastatic CSCC. Median (95% CI) TTD and TTNT were 8.0 (6.6-9.0) months and 16.4 (13.3-21.0) months, respectively, in the main cohort. Median (95% CI) OS was 24.8 (21.8-29.1) months in the main cohort (not reached in the trial-like cohort). In multivariable analyses, age <60 years (hazard ratio [HR], 0.37), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status <3-4 (HR range, 0.13-0.57), and primary CSCC location in the head and neck only versus extremities only (HR, 0.59) were associated with better OS. Similar OS was observed between patients who had immunosuppressing/immunocompromising conditions and those without. Conclusion: These findings confirm the effectiveness of cemiplimab among a heterogenous, real-world advanced CSCC patient population and substantiate the efficacy of cemiplimab observed in clinical trials.
RESUMEN
C-reactive protein (CRP) is an established acute-phase marker for infection, inflammation and tissue injury, used to guide clinical decision-making in primary and secondary care. This study compared the analytical performance of the quantitative microfluidic point-of-care LumiraDx CRP Test to a laboratory-based reference method (Siemens RCRP Flex assay on the Dimension® Xpand®) and evaluated equivalence of sample matrices (blood versus plasma) in point-of-care settings using samples from patients presenting with symptoms of infection or inflammation. The LumiraDx CRP Test demonstrated close agreement with the lab reference test (range, 5.1 to 245.2 mg/L, r = 0.992, slope = 0.998, intercept = -0.476; n = 205) and notable agreement between fingerstick and venous blood and plasma (r = 0.974-0.983; n = 44). Paired replicate precision had mean coefficients of variation of 6.4 % (plasma), 6.6 % (capillary direct) and 8.1 % (venous blood); overall error rates were 2.9 %. The quantitative LumiraDx CRP Test showed robust analytical performance across sample matrices and close agreement compared to the laboratory reference method when used at the point of care.
RESUMEN
Regulators and Health Technology Assessment (HTA) bodies are increasingly familiar with, and publishing guidance on, external controls derived from real-world data (RWD) to generate real-world evidence (RWE). We recently conducted a systematic literature review (SLR) evaluating publicly available information on the use of RWD-derived external controls to contextualize outcomes from uncontrolled trials submitted to the European Medicines Agency (EMA), the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and/or select HTA bodies. The review identified several key operational and methodological aspects for which more detailed guidance and alignment within and between regulatory agencies and HTA bodies is necessary. This paper builds on the SLR findings by delineating a set of key takeaways for the responsible generation of fit-for-purpose RWE. Practical methodological and operational guidelines for designing, conducting, and reporting RWD-derived external control studies are explored and discussed. These considerations include: (i) early engagement with regulators and HTA bodies during the study planning phase; (ii) consideration of the appropriateness and comparability of external controls across multiple dimensions, including eligibility criteria, temporality, population representation, and clinical evaluation; (iii) ensuring adequate sample sizes, including hypothesis testing considerations; (iv) implementation of a clear and transparent strategy for assessing and addressing data quality, including data missingness across trials and RWD; (v) selection of comparable and meaningful endpoints that are operationalized and analyzed using appropriate analytic methods; and (vi) conduct of sensitivity analyses to assess the robustness of findings in the context of uncertainty and sources of potential bias.
Asunto(s)
Proyectos de Investigación , Evaluación de la Tecnología Biomédica , Humanos , Evaluación de la Tecnología Biomédica/métodos , Tamaño de la Muestra , Agencias GubernamentalesRESUMEN
Real-world data (RWD)-derived external controls can be used to contextualize efficacy findings for investigational therapies evaluated in uncontrolled trials. As the number of submissions to regulatory and health technology assessment (HTA) bodies using external controls rises, and in light of recent regulatory and HTA guidance on the appropriate use of RWD, there is a need to address the operational and methodological challenges impeding the quality of real-world evidence (RWE) generation and the consistency in evaluation of RWE across agencies. This systematic review summarizes publicly available information on the use of external controls to contextualize outcomes from uncontrolled trials for all indications from January 1, 2015, through August 20, 2021, that were submitted to the European Medicines Agency, the US Food and Drug Administration, and/or select major HTA bodies (National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), Haute Autorité de Santé (HAS), Institut für Qualität und Wirtschaftlichkeit im Gesundheitswesen (IQWiG), and Gemeinsamer Bundesausschuss (G-BA)). By systematically reviewing submissions to regulatory and HTA bodies in the context of recent guidance, this study provides quantitative and qualitative insights into how external control design and analytic choices may be viewed by different agencies in practice. The primary operational and methodological aspects identified for discussion include, but are not limited to, engagement of regulators and HTA bodies, approaches to handling missing data (a component of data quality), and selection of real-world endpoints. Continued collaboration and guidance to address these and other aspects will inform and assist stakeholders attempting to generate evidence using external controls.
Asunto(s)
Evaluación de la Tecnología Biomédica , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: In the EMPOWER-Lung 1 trial (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03088540), cemiplimab conferred longer survival than platinum-doublet chemotherapy for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) ≥50%. Patient-reported outcomes were evaluated among trial participants. METHODS: Adults with NSCLC and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 to 1 were randomly assigned cemiplimab 350 mg every 3 weeks or platinum-doublet chemotherapy. At baseline and day 1 of each treatment cycle, patients were administered the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life-Core 30 (QLQ-C30) and Lung Cancer Module (QLQ-LC13) questionnaires. Mixed-model repeated measures analysis estimated overall change from baseline for PD-L1 ≥50% and intention-to-treat populations. Kaplan-Meier analysis estimated time to definitive deterioration. RESULTS: In PD-L1 ≥50% patients (cemiplimab, n = 283; chemotherapy, n = 280), baseline QLQ-C30 and QLQ-LC13 scores showed moderate-to-high functioning and low symptom burden. Change from baseline favored cemiplimab on global health status/quality of life (GHS/QOL), functioning, and most symptom scales. Risk of definitive deterioration across functioning scales was reduced versus chemotherapy; hazard ratios were 0.48 (95% CI, 0.32-0.71) to 0.63 (95% CI, 0.41-0.96). Cemiplimab showed lower risk of definitive deterioration for disease-related (dyspnea, cough, pain in chest, pain in other body parts, fatigue) and treatment-related symptoms (peripheral neuropathy, alopecia, nausea/vomiting, appetite loss, constipation, diarrhea) (nominal p < .05). Results were similar in the intention-to-treat population. CONCLUSIONS: Results support cemiplimab for first-line therapy of advanced NSCLC from the patient's perspective. Improved survival is accompanied by improvements versus platinum-doublet chemotherapy in GHS/QOL and functioning and reduction in symptom burden.
Asunto(s)
Anticuerpos Monoclonales Humanizados , Antineoplásicos Inmunológicos , Carcinoma de Pulmón de Células no Pequeñas , Neoplasias Pulmonares , Adulto , Humanos , Antígeno B7-H1 , Carcinoma de Pulmón de Células no Pequeñas/tratamiento farmacológico , Pulmón , Neoplasias Pulmonares/tratamiento farmacológico , Dolor/etiología , Medición de Resultados Informados por el Paciente , Platino (Metal)/uso terapéutico , Calidad de Vida , Anticuerpos Monoclonales Humanizados/uso terapéutico , Antineoplásicos Inmunológicos/uso terapéuticoRESUMEN
Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are standard-of-care for patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (aNSCLC) and programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression ≥50%. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using the US de-identified electronic health record-derived Flatiron Health aNSCLC database (January 1, 2018, to July 31, 2021) among patients with PD-L1 ≥50% initiating first-line ICIs with or without chemotherapy. A clinical trial-like sub-cohort was also identified with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-1, adequate organ function, and no brain metastases or other primary cancers. Kaplan-Meier methods were used to estimate time to treatment discontinuation, time to next treatment, progression-free survival and overall survival (OS) by ICI regimen (ICI+chemotherapy, ICI monotherapy) and PD-L1 expression (50-69%, 70-89%, 90-100%). Cox proportional hazard models were used to examine associations between ICI regimen, PD-L1 level, and OS, adjusting for baseline demographic and clinical variables. Results: A total of 2631 patients with aNSCLC initiating ICI+chemotherapy (n = 992) or ICI monotherapy (n = 1639) were included; median (Q1, Q3) age was 71 (63-78) years and 51.6% were male. The trial-like sub-cohort (n = 1029) generally had better outcomes vs. the overall cohort. Patients receiving ICI+chemotherapy generally had longer median OS vs. ICI monotherapy. Multivariable analyses showed no association between ICI regimen and OS among patients with PD-L1 70-89% (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.90, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.73-1.09) or 90-100% (HR: 0.91, 95% CI: 0.77-1.08), but patients with PD-L1 50-69% receiving ICI+chemotherapy had longer OS (HR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.64-0.99). Conclusion: Outcomes in real-world clinical trial-like patients with aNSCLC approached those reported in pivotal ICI trials in high PD-L1 expressers. ICI monotherapy offers a potential alternative in patients with PD-L1 ≥70% while avoiding potential chemotherapy toxicity exposure; the benefits are less clear in patients with PD-L1 50-69%. Future studies should confirm these findings.
RESUMEN
Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are standard-of-care as first-line (1L) therapy for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (aNSCLC) without actionable oncogenic driver mutations. While clinical trials demonstrated benefits of ICIs over chemotherapy, variation in outcomes across patients has been observed and trial populations may not be representative of clinical practice. Predictive models can help understand heterogeneity of treatment effects, identify predictors of meaningful clinical outcomes, and may inform treatment decisions. We applied machine learning (ML)-based survival models to a real-world cohort of patients with aNSCLC who received 1L ICI therapy extracted from a US-based electronic health record database. Model performance was evaluated using metrics including concordance index (c-index), and we used explainability techniques to identify significant predictors of overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). The ML model achieved c-indices of 0.672 and 0.612 for OS and PFS, respectively, and Kaplan-Meier survival curves showed significant differences between low- and high-risk groups for OS and PFS (both log-rank test p < 0.0001). Identified predictors were mostly consistent with the published literature and/or clinical expectations and largely overlapped for OS and PFS; Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, programmed cell death-ligand 1 expression levels, and serum albumin were among the top 5 predictors for both outcomes. Prospective and independent data set evaluation is required to confirm these results.
Asunto(s)
Carcinoma de Pulmón de Células no Pequeñas , Inhibidores de Puntos de Control Inmunológico , Neoplasias Pulmonares , Humanos , Carcinoma de Pulmón de Células no Pequeñas/tratamiento farmacológico , Carcinoma de Pulmón de Células no Pequeñas/genética , Inhibidores de Puntos de Control Inmunológico/uso terapéutico , Ligandos , Neoplasias Pulmonares/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias Pulmonares/genética , Aprendizaje Automático , Estudios Prospectivos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Albúmina Sérica , Ensayos Clínicos como AsuntoRESUMEN
Patient-reported outcome (PRO) data are increasingly being included in Health Technology Assessment (HTA) submissions for oncology drugs. This study aims to provide differences in PRO evidence requirements in oncology across key HTA bodies and calls for its harmonization. Method guidance provided by HTA bodies in Germany, France and the UK, and analysis of HTA reports of 20 oncology case studies were evaluated in this review. Differences exist between HTA bodies regarding guidance on how PRO data should be collected, reported and analyzed as well as how the data are reviewed and considered in oncology HTAs. HTA bodies can play a key role to harmonize PRO method guidance in collaboration with regulators and sponsors.
Patient-reported outcomes (PRO) are information provided directly by the person who is experiencing a disease or undergoing a treatment, without additional interpretation by a clinician or caregiver. Along with other outcome measures, PROs may be included in the body of evidence used by health technology assessment bodies in their review. In this article, the authors summarize the guidance documents published by key health technology assessment agencies and reviewed 20 past cancer drug case studies to understand how different agencies use PROs when deciding on recommendations for new cancer treatments.
Asunto(s)
Oncología Médica , Evaluación de la Tecnología Biomédica , Francia , Alemania , Humanos , Medición de Resultados Informados por el Paciente , Evaluación de la Tecnología Biomédica/métodosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: In a phase III, randomised, active-controlled study (EMPOWER-Cervical 1/GOG-3016/ENGOT-cx9; R2810-ONC-1676; NCT03257267) and cemiplimab significantly improved survival versus investigator's choice of chemotherapy among patients with recurrent cervical cancer who had progressed on platinum-based therapy. Here we report patient-reported outcomes in this pivotal study. METHODS: Patients were randomised 1:1 to open-label cemiplimab (350 mg intravenously every 3 weeks) or investigator's choice of chemotherapy in 6-week cycles. Patients completed the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30 during cycles 1-16. Least-squares mean changes from baseline in global health status (GHS)/quality of life (QoL) and physical functioning (PF) were secondary end-points in the statistical hierarchy. RESULTS: Of 608 patients (304/arm), 77.8% patients had squamous cell carcinoma and 22.2% patients had adenocarcinoma. Questionnaire completion rates were â¼90% throughout. In the squamous cell carcinoma population, overall between-group differences statistically significantly favoured cemiplimab in GHS/QoL (8.49; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.77-13.21; P = 0.0003) and PF (8.35; 95% CI: 4.08-12.62; P < 0.0001). Treatment differences favoured cemiplimab in both histologic populations by cycle 2. Overall changes from baseline in most functioning and symptom scales favoured cemiplimab, with clinically meaningful treatment differences in role functioning, appetite loss and pain in both populations. The sensitivity analyses, responder analyses and time to definitive deterioration favoured cemiplimab in both populations. CONCLUSIONS: Cemiplimab conferred favourable differences in GHS/QoL and PF compared with chemotherapy among patients with recurrent cervical cancer, with benefits in PF by cycle 2, and clinically meaningful differences favouring cemiplimab in role functioning, appetite loss, and pain.
Asunto(s)
Carcinoma de Células Escamosas , Neoplasias del Cuello Uterino , Anticuerpos Monoclonales Humanizados , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Carcinoma de Células Escamosas/tratamiento farmacológico , Femenino , Humanos , Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia/tratamiento farmacológico , Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia/etiología , Dolor/tratamiento farmacológico , Medición de Resultados Informados por el Paciente , Calidad de Vida , Neoplasias del Cuello Uterino/tratamiento farmacológicoRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Contemporary real-world data on advanced non-small cell lung cancer (aNSCLC) treatment patterns across programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression levels and testing status are limited. METHODS: A retrospective cohort was selected of adults newly diagnosed with aNSCLC between January 1, 2018, and July 31, 2021, who initiated first-line treatments, which were described by PD-L1 status and expression levels (≥ 50%, 1-49%, < 1%). Treatment received before and after PD-L1 test results were described for patients initiating first-line treatment before PD-L1 results. For patients who initiated chemotherapy alone before PD-L1 results, the probability of receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) after PD-L1 results was estimated by PD-L1 level and associated factors were explored. RESULTS: Among 12,202 patients with aNSCLC initiating first-line treatment [54.7% male, mean (standard deviation) age 69.2 (9.4) years], the most common therapies were ICI-based regimens across PD-L1 levels, and chemotherapy alone among PD-L1-untested patients. Use of chemotherapy alone decreased between 2018 and 2019 and stabilized thereafter, accounting for 21-29% of first-line treatments across PD-L1 levels and 48% of untested patients in 2021. Of 1468 patients initiating first-line treatment before PD-L1 results, treatments remained unchanged in most patients after PD-L1 results. Among patients initiating chemotherapy alone before PD-L1 results, the probability of receiving ICIs within 45 days after test results was 40.5% [95% confidence interval (CI) 31.6-48.3%], 28.6% (95% CI 20.3-36.0%), and 22.9% (95% CI 16.9-28.4%) at PD-L1 ≥ 50%, 1-49%, and < 1%, respectively. CONCLUSION: While ICI-based regimens accounted for most first-line treatments across PD-L1 levels, chemotherapy alone was initiated in > 20% of patients tested for PD-L1 and 48% of untested patients in 2021. Patients who initiated chemotherapy alone had a low probability of receiving ICIs after PD-L1 test results. These results highlight the need for understanding the role and timing of PD-L1 test results for informing treatment decisions for patients with aNSCLC.
Asunto(s)
Carcinoma de Pulmón de Células no Pequeñas , Neoplasias Pulmonares , Anciano , Antígeno B7-H1 , Carcinoma de Pulmón de Células no Pequeñas/tratamiento farmacológico , Femenino , Humanos , Inmunoterapia/métodos , Neoplasias Pulmonares/tratamiento farmacológico , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
Background: Trends/outcomes associated with National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN)-recommended biomarker testing to guide advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (aNSCLC) treatment were assessed. Methods: Patients initiating first-line aNSCLC treatment were included using a nationwide electronic health record-derived database (1/1/2015-10/31/2021). Trends in pre-first-line biomarker testing (PD-L1, major genomic aberrations), factors associated with testing and associations between testing and outcomes were assessed. Results: PD-L1/genomic aberration testing rates increased from 33% (2016) to 81% (2018), then plateaued. Certain clinical and demographic factors were associated with a greater likelihood of PD-L1 testing. Patients tested for PD-L1 or genomic aberrations had longer overall survival (OS). Conclusion: Biomarker testing may be associated with improved OS in aNSCLC, though not all patients had equal access to testing.
Molecular diagnostics play a critical role in precision medicine. Treatment guidelines from the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) recommend that patients newly diagnosed with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (aNSCLC) undergo molecular testing for PD-L1 and genomic aberrations to guide treatment choices. Based on the results of such biomarker testing, physicians can select optimal treatments for individual patients. The aim of this study was to describe the latest trends and disparities in real-world biomarker testing with a focus on PD-L1 and to explore the impact of biomarker testing on outcomes in first-line treatment of aNSCLC in the United States. Patients initiating first-line aNSCLC treatment were identified in the Flatiron Health database (1/1/201510/31/2021; N = 30,631). Annual trends in pre-first-line biomarker testing (PD-L1, major genomic aberrations), demographic and clinical factors associated with PD-L1 testing, and associations between PD-L1 and/or ≥1 genomic aberration testing and outcomes (e.g., overall survival [OS], time-to-next treatment [TTNT]) were assessed. Biomarker testing in patients receiving first-line treatment for aNSCLC increased between 2015 and 2017 and plateaued between 2018 and 2021. By 2021, approximately 20% of patients did not receive PD-L1 testing before first-line treatment and not all patients had equal access to testing. Both PD-L1 and genomic aberration testing were associated with improved OS and TTNT. This is likely due to enhanced treatment decisions leading to optimal treatment selection. Future research is warranted to understand interventions to improve biomarker testing and reduce disparities between different patient populations to improve treatment outcomes.
Asunto(s)
Carcinoma de Pulmón de Células no Pequeñas , Neoplasias Pulmonares , Humanos , Antígeno B7-H1 , Biomarcadores , Carcinoma de Pulmón de Células no Pequeñas/diagnóstico , Carcinoma de Pulmón de Células no Pequeñas/genética , Carcinoma de Pulmón de Células no Pequeñas/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias Pulmonares/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Pulmonares/genética , Neoplasias Pulmonares/tratamiento farmacológico , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Methamphetamine is a stimulant drug of abuse with increasing prevalence of use worldwide leading to public health concern. While previous research by our group a decade ago found no evidence of increasing harms associated with methamphetamine use in the UK, there are conflicting data on whether or not this is still the case. This paper aims to identify trends in methamphetamine-related harms and characterise the clinical features of ED presentations involving methamphetamine with gamma-hydroxybutyrate/gamma-butyrolactone (GHB/GBL). METHODS: We retrospectively interrogated a database of all toxicology-related presentations to two central London EDs, extracting data on drugs involved for presentations relating to methamphetamine between 2005 and 2018 to enable analysis of trends. Further clinical data were extracted for presentations between 2014 and 2018 to give a 4-year case series. RESULTS: A total of 1244 presentations involving the use of methamphetamine were identified. The number of presentations rose from 4 in 2005 (1.9% of all recreational drug presentations) to 294 (16.2%) in 2018. A total of 850 cases were identified for the 2014-2018 case series, 94.9% were male with a median (range) age of 35.1 (16-67) years. The most common clinical features in the methamphetamine presentations were neuropsychiatric: agitation (41.5%), anxiety (35.2%), hallucinations (16.5%) and psychosis (14.8%). GHB/GBL was co-used in 54.2% of presentations and appeared to attenuate the neuropsychiatric features seen. Use of GHB/GBL was associated with a higher Poisoning Severity Score and requirement for level 2/3 (high dependency unit/intensive care unit (ICU)) care. CONCLUSION: ED attendances in central London relating to methamphetamine use have risen over the last decade. Combining methamphetamine with GHB/GBL is common and is associated with a higher Poisoning Severity Score and need for ICU level care. Further work is required to establish whether further resources need to be directed at this clinical and public health problem.
Asunto(s)
Metanfetamina , Oxibato de Sodio , 4-Butirolactona , Adulto , Anciano , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , Femenino , Humanos , Londres/epidemiología , Masculino , Metanfetamina/efectos adversos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Previous audits of antidote stocking in UK hospitals have demonstrated variable but improving compliance with joint Royal College of Emergency Medicine and National Poisons Information Service guidance on antidote availability in emergency departments. The guidance was updated in 2017. AIM: To provide a current picture of compliance with the 2017 antidote guidance and compare this to previous audits. METHODS: Questionnaires were distributed to all hospitals in the UK with an emergency department via medicines information and regional pharmacy procurement networks. Data were collected on availability and stock levels of category A (immediately available) and category B (available within 1 hour) antidotes. Additionally, data were collected on holdings of category C (held supra-regionally) antidotes and arrangements for sourcing these if not stocked locally. RESULTS: 233 hospitals were surveyed and 178 replies (76.4%) were received. There were 73 hospitals (41.7%) fully compliant with guidance for category A, 34 hospitals (19.1%) for category B and 18 hospitals (10.1%) for both categories A and B antidotes. Few hospitals stocked category C antidotes (1.1%-34.8%). Evidence of formalised regional holding arrangements for category C antidotes, as advised in the guidance, was noted in some areas but many regions remain without such agreements. CONCLUSIONS: Most hospitals remain not fully compliant with stocking recommendations for categories A and B antidotes, with limited recent improvement. Category C antidotes are stocked by few hospitals although awareness of where these can be sourced appears to be increasing. Emergency departments should review their antidote stocking arrangements to ensure compliance with guidance. Formal arrangements for stocking of the more rarely used category C antidotes at a regional level are also required, where not already in existence, in order to assure their availability in an equitable way across the country.
Asunto(s)
Antídotos , Servicio de Farmacia en Hospital , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , Hospitales , Humanos , Reino UnidoRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). To provide additional clinical evidence in regulatory submissions for a modified-release (MR) once-daily (QD) tofacitinib formulation, we compared real-world adherence and effectiveness between patients initiating the MR QD formulation and patients initiating an immediate-release (IR) twice-daily (BID) formulation. METHODS: Two noninterventional cohort studies were conducted. First, adherence and two effectiveness proxies were compared between patients with RA who newly initiated tofacitinib MR 11 mg QD or IR 5 mg BID in the IBM® MarketScan® Commercial and Medicare Supplemental US insurance claims databases (March 2016-October 2018). Second, using data collected in the Corrona US RA Registry (February 2016-August 2019), two Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI)-based measures of effectiveness were compared between tofacitinib MR 11 mg QD and IR 5 mg BID, and against noninferiority criteria derived from placebo-controlled clinical trials of the tofacitinib IR formulation. Multiple sensitivity analyses of the registry data were conducted to reassure regulators of consistent results across different assumptions. RESULTS: In each study, approximately two-thirds of patients initiated the MR formulation. In the claims database study, improved adherence and at least comparable effectiveness were observed with tofacitinib MR vs IR over 12 months, particularly in patients without prior advanced therapy. In the registry study, the noninferiority of tofacitinib MR vs IR was demonstrated for both CDAI outcomes at ~6 months; this finding was robust across multiple sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSION: These results demonstrate the value of real-world evidence from complementary data sources in understanding the impact of medication adherence with a QD formulation in clinical practice. These analyses were suitable for regulatory consideration as an important component of evidence for the comparability of tofacitinib MR 11 mg QD vs IR 5 mg BID in patients with RA. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Claims database study: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT04018001, retrospectively registered July 12, 2019. Corrona US RA Registry study: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT04267380, retrospectively registered February 12, 2020.
Asunto(s)
Antirreumáticos , Artritis Reumatoide , Anciano , Antirreumáticos/uso terapéutico , Artritis Reumatoide/tratamiento farmacológico , Humanos , Medicare , Piperidinas , Inhibidores de Proteínas Quinasas/uso terapéutico , Pirimidinas , Pirroles/uso terapéutico , Resultado del Tratamiento , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
The CDC Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommended immunization with the recently licensed 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV13) for high-risk (immunocompromised) adults aged ≥19 years in 2012. This was in addition to the 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (PPSV23). Data on vaccine-specific uptake among these individuals were previously unavailable. This retrospective observational study analyzed PCV13 uptake in immunocompromised patients aged 19-64 years. Data were acquired from insurance claims (N = 267,022) and electronic health records (EHR; N = 572,055) from October 2011-October 2016. Descriptive statistics were provided. Demographics were similar across the two database cohorts: mean age 49.7-51.0 years, 57-62% female, and >70% white. Iatrogenic immunosuppression was the most common high-risk category (33.3-44.2%). PCV13 uptake was 7.3% (95% CI: 7.25-7.45) in insurance claims and 9.9% (95% CI: 9.80-9.96) in EHR. Patients with HIV had the highest rate of PCV13 uptake; patients with multiple risk factors were above the mean in both cohorts. A Kaplan-Meier analysis was conducted to include patients lost to follow-up, with 441,657 and 722,071 patients for insurance claims and EHR, respectively. PCV13 uptake was only slightly higher: 9.3% (95% CI: 9.14-9.47) and 13.1% (95% CI: 12.93-13.19) for insurance claims and EHR, respectively. Four years after the ACIP 2012 recommendation, PCV13 uptake in high-risk adults aged19-64 years was low at <15% in all overall analyses. Clinicians caring for these patients should ensure adherence to the ACIP recommendation to minimize the risk of pneumococcal disease.
Asunto(s)
Huésped Inmunocomprometido , Infecciones Neumocócicas/prevención & control , Vacunas Neumococicas/administración & dosificación , Adulto , Comités Consultivos , Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. , Femenino , Humanos , Esquemas de Inmunización , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores de Riesgo , Estados Unidos , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
Introduction: Tampering with opioid containing medications for use other than their prescribed indication is well documented; however, the published literature has concentrated on stronger, prescription opioids. Less potent opioids, such as codeine, are available without prescription in many European countries in the form of combination analgesic products and these can also be altered, with reports in particular of "cold-water extraction" being a tampering method achievable using household kitchen equipment.Methods: We searched a database of patients attending two South London emergency departments for cases of self-reported ingestion of the products of cold-water extraction, with subsequent review of their case notes. We searched the scientific and grey literature to identify current knowledge of this technique.Results: We identified seven presentations in six patients, none of whom developed paracetamol toxicity or had concentrations suggesting ingestion of a significant dose of paracetamol. A review of the scientific literature on the method also demonstrated that the technique reduces recovered paracetamol in experimental laboratory settings. Additionally, the established literature characterizes the use of codeine in a recreational setting and reports one fatality associated with the method. Review of grey literature user-forums further describes recreational codeine use in relation to the method and frequent adverse events including hospital admission for paracetamol toxicity.Discussion: Whilst the method appears capable of providing a recreational dose of codeine with reduction in the recovered paracetamol, it cannot be considered safe. Pharmaceutical production methods have been successfully developed to prevent tampering through other means but none thus far have been directed at the cold water extraction technique.Conclusions: Clinicians should be aware of the potential toxicity from tampered nonprescription analgesics. There is also the need for public health education regarding the potential risks associated with these methods.
Asunto(s)
Acetaminofén/administración & dosificación , Analgésicos Opioides/administración & dosificación , Codeína/administración & dosificación , Trastornos Relacionados con Opioides , Extracción en Fase Sólida/métodos , Acetaminofén/efectos adversos , Acetaminofén/química , Administración Oral , Analgésicos Opioides/efectos adversos , Analgésicos Opioides/química , Química Farmacéutica , Codeína/efectos adversos , Codeína/química , Combinación de Medicamentos , Humanos , Inyecciones Intravenosas , Trastornos Relacionados con Opioides/epidemiología , Trastornos Relacionados con Opioides/etiología , Solubilidad , Agua/químicaRESUMEN
PURPOSE: In addition to biomarker status, treatment selection for metastatic breast cancer (mBC) includes individual patient and clinical characteristics such as tumor burden, timing of disease recurrence, and comorbidities. Women with mBC may take medications that can increase the risk of drug-induced toxicities, including prolongation of cardiac repolarization (prolongation of QT interval). Corrected QT (QTc) prolongation, a toxicity associated with many cancer treatments, can lead to potentially life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias. As such, it is important to identify patients at risk for QTc prolongation due to comorbid conditions, concomitant medications, or electrolyte abnormalities. This real-world study estimated the proportion of women with hormone receptorâpositive (HR+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2ânegative (HER2â) mBC who may be at risk of developing QTc prolongation. Results in the elderly are also included. METHODS: This retrospective, cross-sectional cohort study used the Truven Health MarketScan and Optum Clinformatics administrative claims databases. Patients' medical and pharmacy data were evaluated to assess the risk of QTc prolongation. Prescription and medication administration claims were evaluated during the 7-day period before the index date (ie, first secondary neoplasm diagnosis). In addition, International Classification of Diseases, Ninth/Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification, codes were evaluated 12 months before the index date to describe congenital long QT syndrome, cardiac disease, and electrolyte abnormalities. FINDINGS: A cohort of 24,340 women with HR+/HER2â mBC were identified, including 5059 women aged 65-74 years and 4851 aged ≥75 years. Based on an overall analysis of risk factors (congenital long QT syndrome, cardiovascular disease, electrolyte abnormalities, or concomitant medications), 29.5% of all patients, 33.2% of patients aged 65-74 years, and 40.5% of patients aged ≥75 years had risk factors for QTc prolongation. IMPLICATIONS: This analysis of real-world data indicates that almost 1 in 3 women with HR+/HER2â mBC had congenital long QT syndrome, cardiovascular disease, and/or electrolyte abnormalities or received a concomitant medication that could increase the risk of developing QTc prolongation. The risk factors for congenital long QT syndrome, cardiovascular disease, or electrolyte abnormalities were more common in older patients. This analysis emphasizes the importance of individualized benefit/risk assessment during treatment decisions, especially when considering drugs with known or possible QTc prolongation risk.