Hepatic and Overall Progression-Free Survival After Percutaneous Hepatic Perfusion (PHP) as First-Line or Second-Line Therapy for Metastatic Uveal Melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Uveal melanoma often metastasizes to the liver, portending a poor prognosis. Melphalan/hepatic delivery system (HDS) via percutaneous hepatic perfusion (PHP) is a minimally invasive means of circulating high-dose chemotherapy through the affected liver. This study evaluated melphalan/HDS use as either first-line or second-line treatment to guide treatment sequencing. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective review included patients with hepatic-dominant metastatic uveal melanoma who underwent melphalan/HDS treatment via PHP from 2008 to 2023. RESULTS: A total of 30 patients were identified; 53.3% female, with a median age of 63.5 years (37-78 years). Median follow-up time was 14.5 months. First-line therapies included melphalan/HDS (n = 17), liver-directed (n = 7), and immunotherapy (n = 6). Second-line therapies included melphalan/HDS (n = 6), immunotherapy (n = 5), and liver-directed (n = 3). Median hepatic progression-free survival (hPFS) for first-line melphalan/HDS, immunotherapy, and liver-directed therapy was 17.6/8.8/9.2 months, respectively (P = 0.002). Median hPFS for second-line melphalan/HDS, immunotherapy, and liver-directed therapy was not reached/14.7/7.5 months, respectively (P < 0.001). Median overall PFS for first-line melphalan/HDS, immunotherapy, and liver-directed therapy was 15.4/8.8/9.2 months, respectively (P = 0.04). Median overall PFS for second-line melphalan/HDS, immunotherapy, and liver-directed therapy was 22.2/14.7/7.5 months, respectively (P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Melphalan/HDS via PHP for metastatic uveal melanoma to the liver was found to have significantly improved hPFS and overall PFS when used as first-line therapy compared with immunotherapy or liver-directed therapy. PHP continued to demonstrate improved hPFS and PFS when used as second-line therapy compared with second-line immunotherapy or liver-directed therapy.

Treatment patterns and clinical outcomes in patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer: a large-scale data analysis using the Japanese claims database.

PURPOSE: This study evaluated treatment patterns and clinical outcomes among patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC) in real-world clinical settings in Japan. METHODS: The treatment patterns, time to next treatment or death (TTNTD), time to treatment discontinuation, adverse events of interest, and medical costs of treating patients with mTNBC in first-, second-, and third-line settings were investigated using data of patients meeting the inclusion criteria between January 2017 and March 2022 in a Japanese medical claims database. The treatment regimens for mTNBC were defined according to the Japanese Breast Cancer Society Clinical Practice Guidelines. RESULTS: In this study, 2236 patients with mTNBC (median age 66.0 years; 99.8% female) were included in the first-line cohort. Of these, 46.6% and 20.8% were included in the second- and third-line cohorts, respectively. The two most frequently used treatments were capecitabine (19.1%) and S-1 (tegafur-gimeracil-oteracil) (14.5%) in the first-line cohort, eribulin (18.3%) and bevacizumab/paclitaxel (14.4%) in the second-line cohort, and eribulin (19.4%) and bevacizumab/paclitaxel (17.5%) in the third-line cohort. The TTNTD shortened as the line of therapy progressed (median 8.0, 6.5, and 5.2 months for the first-, second-, and third-line treatments, respectively). Nausea/vomiting and neutropenia/leukopenia occurred in 62.8% and 18.3% of all patients, respectively. The medical total costs per day were 6.7, 10.2, and 12.9 thousand yen during the first-/second-/third-line treatments, respectively. CONCLUSION: This study provides insight into current treatment patterns for mTNBC in Japan. The cost-benefit balance worsens with later-line treatment and a high unmet need for mTNBC drug treatment remains.

Real-World Treatment Patterns Among Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Initiating Treatment with Oral Semaglutide.

INTRODUCTION: The treatment landscape for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is complex and constantly evolving, and real-world evidence of prescribing patterns is limited. The objectives of this study were to characterize lines of therapy (LOTs), calculate the length of time spent on each LOT, and identify the reasons for the LOT end among patients who initiated oral semaglutide for T2DM. METHODS: This retrospective, claims-based study included commercial and Medicare Advantage adults with T2DM. Data from November 1, 2019, and June 30, 2020, were obtained from Optum Research Database. Patients with ≥ 1 claim for oral semaglutide and continuous health plan enrollment for ≥ 12 months prior to (baseline period) and ≥ 6 months following (follow-up period) the date of the first oral semaglutide claim were included. LOT 1 began on the date of the first oral semaglutide claim. The start date of any subsequent LOTs was the date of the first claim for an additional non-insulin anti-diabetic drug class or a reduction in drug class with use of commitment medications. The LOT ended at the first instance of medication class discontinuation, change in regimen or end of follow-up. RESULTS: Of the 1937 patients who initiated oral semaglutide, 950 (49.0%) remained on their initial regimen over the 6-month follow-up period, 844 (43.6%) had at least one subsequent LOT, and 89 (4.6%) had at least two subsequent LOTs. Among patients with more than one LOT, approximately 20%-25% used oral semaglutide as monotherapy or combination therapy during LOTs 2 and 3. Metformin was frequently used during treatment across all LOTs. CONCLUSION: This study provides insight for physicians and payers into the real-world prescribing practices within the first 6 months following oral semaglutide initiation and fills the gap in understanding the frequency of regimen changes in the constantly evolving and complex environment of T2DM care.

Type 2 diabetes mellitus is a disease which, over time, can cause higher than normal levels of sugar in the blood (hyperglycemia) which can be harmful if not treated. Treatment for type 2 diabetes mellitus can be complex, and how doctors prescribe medications is always changing. For some people with type 2 diabetes mellitus who are overweight or obese, it is recommended for patients to use certain medications that can help with weight management such as semaglutide and metformin. This study aims to fill gaps in current treatment knowledge about type 2 diabetes mellitus patients and their treatment of oral semaglutide. Researchers in this study explored how patients treated with oral semaglutide differentiated among line of therapies, how long patients stuck to them and why they stopped. The study found that those patients who started with oral semaglutide, almost half of those patients stuck to their initial treatment plan for the entire 6 months. When it came to the top ten treatment plans, about 20% of patients used oral semaglutide alone and about 25% of patients used oral semaglutide plus an additional treatment option. Metformin was frequently used during treatment across all line of therapies. There is little information on the real-life setting of treatment after the start of therapy for type 2 diabetes mellitus. The results from this study show what happens when patients start using oral semaglutide and helps healthcare providers understand how often treatment plans can change in type 2 diabetes mellitus care.

Evolving treatments and outcomes in HER2-Positive metastatic breast cancer: Data from the GIM14/BIOMETA study.

BACKGROUND: Treatment for HER2-positive (+) metastatic breast cancer has improved in the last decade. We analyzed treatment changes over time and their impact on patients outcomes in a real-world dataset. METHODS: Data from 637 HER2+ patients with metastatic breast cancer enrolled in the multicenter Italian GIM14/BIOMETA study were retrieved. Progression-free survival (PFS) over time was evaluated according to the type of anti-HER2 therapy, disease onset (de novo vs. relapsing), metastatic site, and year of treatment (2000-2013 vs. 2014-2020). RESULTS: Median follow-up was 64.4 months. Overall, for first-line therapies, mPFS was 16.5 vs 19.5 months for patients treated in 2000-2013 vs 2014-2020 (HR: 0.78, 95% CI:0.65-0.94, P = 0.008). mPFS improved over time in all patients except for those with brain metastasis. Interestingly mPFS was 17.4 vs13.4 months (HR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.13-1.98, P = 0.005) in 2000-2013 and 24.4 vs 20.9 months (HR 1.04; 95% CI 0.78-1.40 p = 0.77) in 2014-2020 in pts without vs with liver metastases. For second line therapies, the overall median PFS was 9.6 months (95% CI, 8.31-10.97) and did not change over time. CONCLUSION: Median first-line PFS improved since 2014, mainly due to the introduction of pertuzumab. The outcome of patients with liver metastases appears to have improved in recent years. Patients with brain metastases had the worst PFS, which also did not improve over time.

Predicting line of therapy transition via similar patient augmentation.

Analyzing large EHR databases to predict cancer progression and treatments has become a hot trend in recent years. An increasing number of modern deep learning models have been proposed to find the milestones of essential patient medical journey characteristics to predict their disease status and give healthcare professionals valuable insights. However, most of the existing methods are lack of consideration for the inter-relationship among different patients. We believe that more valuable information can be extracted, especially when patients with similar disease statuses visit the same doctors. Towards this end, a similar patient augmentation-based approach named SimPA is proposed to enhance the learning of patient representations and further predict lines of therapy transition. Our experiment results on a real-world multiple myeloma dataset show that our proposed approach outperforms state-of-the-art baseline approaches in terms of standard evaluation metrics for classification tasks.

Analysis of real-world data to investigate evolving treatment sequencing patterns in advanced non-small cell lung cancers and their impact on survival.

Background: Although optimal sequencing of systemic therapy in cancer care is critical to achieving maximal clinical benefit, there is a lack of analysis of treatment sequencing in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (aNSCLC) in real-world settings. Methods: A retrospective cohort study of 13,340 lung cancer patients within the Mount Sinai Health System (MSHS) was performed. Systemic therapy data of aNSCLC in 2,106 patients was the starting point in our analysis to investigate how treatment sequencing has evolved, the impact of sequencing patterns on clinical outcomes, and the effectiveness of 2nd line chemotherapy after patients progressed on immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-based therapy as the 1st line of therapy (LOT). Results: There is a significant shift to more ICI-based therapy and multiple lines of targeted therapy after 2015. We compared clinical outcomes of two patient populations with different treatment sequencing patterns, with the 1st group receiving chemotherapy as the 1st LOT followed by ICI-based treatment, and the 2nd group treated in the opposite order receiving a 1st line ICI-containing regimen followed by a 2nd line chemotherapy. No statistically significant difference in overall survival (OS) was observed between the two groups [group 2 vs. group 1, adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) =1.36, P=0.39]. We assessed the efficacy of the 2nd line chemotherapy in three patient populations given either 1st line ICI single agent, 1st line ICI-chemotherapy combination, or 1st line chemotherapy alone, there was no statistically significant difference in time-to-next treatment (TTNT) and in OS among the three patient groups. Conclusions: Analysis of real-world data has shown two treatment sequencing patterns in aNSCLC, ICI followed by chemotherapy or chemotherapy followed by ICI, achieved similar clinical benefit. The chemotherapies routinely used following platinum doublet 1st LOT, is effective as the 2nd line option after ICI-chemotherapy combination in the 1st line setting.

Identifying Patient Populations in Texts Describing Drug Approvals Through Deep Learning-Based Information Extraction: Development of a Natural Language Processing Algorithm.

BACKGROUND: New drug treatments are regularly approved, and it is challenging to remain up-to-date in this rapidly changing environment. Fast and accurate visualization is important to allow a global understanding of the drug market. Automation of this information extraction provides a helpful starting point for the subject matter expert, helps to mitigate human errors, and saves time. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to semiautomate disease population extraction from the free text of oncology drug approval descriptions from the BioMedTracker database for 6 selected drug targets. More specifically, we intended to extract (1) line of therapy, (2) stage of cancer of the patient population described in the approval, and (3) the clinical trials that provide evidence for the approval. We aimed to use these results in downstream applications, aiding the searchability of relevant content against related drug project sources. METHODS: We fine-tuned a state-of-the-art deep learning model, Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers, for each of the 3 desired outputs. We independently applied rule-based text mining approaches. We compared the performances of deep learning and rule-based approaches and selected the best method, which was then applied to new entries. The results were manually curated by a subject matter expert and then used to train new models. RESULTS: The training data set is currently small (433 entries) and will enlarge over time when new approval descriptions become available or if a choice is made to take another drug target into account. The deep learning models achieved 61% and 56% 5-fold cross-validated accuracies for line of therapy and stage of cancer, respectively, which were treated as classification tasks. Trial identification is treated as a named entity recognition task, and the 5-fold cross-validated F1-score is currently 87%. Although the scores of the classification tasks could seem low, the models comprise 5 classes each, and such scores are a marked improvement when compared to random classification. Moreover, we expect improved performance as the input data set grows, since deep learning models need to be trained on a large enough amount of data to be able to learn the task they are taught. The rule-based approach achieved 60% and 74% 5-fold cross-validated accuracies for line of therapy and stage of cancer, respectively. No attempt was made to define a rule-based approach for trial identification. CONCLUSIONS: We developed a natural language processing algorithm that is currently assisting subject matter experts in disease population extraction, which supports health authority approvals. This algorithm achieves semiautomation, enabling subject matter experts to leverage the results for deeper analysis and to accelerate information retrieval in a crowded clinical environment such as oncology.

Heart Failure Among Patients with Multiple Myeloma Treated with Carfilzomib-Based Versus Non-Carfilzomib-Based Regimens in the United States by Race.

BACKGROUND: Carfilzomib treatment for multiple myeloma (MM) can increase heart failure risk. Whether this risk differs by race is unknown. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We sought to estimate the incidence rates (IRs) of heart failure hospitalization among mostly 65-years-and-older US patients with MM by race treated with carfilzomib- and non-carfilzomib-based regimens in the real-world using Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Medicare Fee-for-Service data, Optum Clinformatics Data Mart, and Humana Research Database. The risk of heart failure hospitalization associated with a carfilzomib-based regimen was evaluated using propensity score matching among Black and White patients receiving second or later lines of therapy. RESULTS: Most patient-episodes (88%) were in persons 65 years or older for the 3 cohorts combined. The IR (95% CI) of heart failure hospitalization was higher for patient-episodes treated with a carfilzomib-based regimen than those with a non-carfilzomib-based regimen for both White (14.5 [12.2-17.0] vs. 10.7 [10.3-11.2] events per person-years) and Black patients (15.8 [10.1-23.5] vs. 12.1 [10.9-13.4] events per person-years) in the Medicare cohort. After propensity score matching, the hazard ratio (95% CI) of increased heart failure hospitalization comparing carfilzomib-based to non-carfilzomib-based regimens for White patients (1.6 [1.3-2.0]) was similar to that of Black patients (1.7 [1.0-2.9]) in the Medicare Database, and in the Humana Database (1.4 [0.8-2.6] and 1.2 [0.4-3.5], respectively). CONCLUSION: Although the IR of heart failure among patients with MM treated with a carfilzomib-based regimen was slightly higher, no evidence suggested the relative risk was different between White and Black patients with MM.

Real-world ramucirumab and immune checkpoint inhibitor sequences in US patients with advanced gastroesophageal cancer.

Aim: To describe real-world treatment sequences of ramucirumab relative to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in patients with advanced gastroesophageal cancer. Methods: Retrospective, observational study including adult patients treated with ramucirumab (April 2014-June 2020) from a nationwide health-record database. Results: In 1117 eligible patients, ramucirumab + paclitaxel was the most common ramucirumab-containing regimen (72.0%). A total of 217 patients also received an ICI. For ramucirumab then ICI (n = 148) and ICI then ramucirumab (n = 50), ramucirumab + taxane and ICI monotherapy were the most frequent approaches, most commonly observed as second- and third-line (2L and 3L). Median time on ramucirumab in 2L and 3L was similar regardless of sequence with ICI. Conclusion: Most patients with advanced gastroesophageal cancer received ramucirumab before ICI, with ramucirumab + paclitaxel as the most common ramucirumab-based regimen.

What is the Order of New Treatments for Gastroesophageal Cancers in the Real World? What is this summary about? Gastroesophageal cancers (cancers of the stomach or food pipe) which cannot be cured are first treated using traditional chemotherapy. Newer anti-cancer therapies with fewer side effects, such as ramucirumab (RAM) and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI), are now available either alone or in combination with chemotherapy. We designed this study to describe the order of use for RAM and ICI. What were the results? The patients in this study were from Flatiron Health database, which includes electronic medical record data of US patients with gastroesophageal cancers. The included patients had been treated with RAM and were grouped based on the treatments received and in the order in which they received RAM and ICI. Of the patients who received both RAM and ICI, RAM then ICI was the most common order, followed by ICI then RAM and then RAM plus ICI at the same time. RAM in combination with paclitaxel (a chemotherapy) was the most common RAM-containing treatment. The duration of RAM therapy was the same whether patients received the treatment before or after ICI. What do results of the study mean? These findings can be used by patients with gastroesophageal cancers and oncologists when making treatment decisions, specifically if RAM might be an option when it is time to change treatments. Real-world studies like this help answer questions that were not addressed in clinical trials.

Survival outcomes for patients with multiple myeloma in France: A retrospective cohort study using the Système National des Données de Santé national healthcare database.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the overall survival (OS) of patients with multiple myeloma (MM) at different treatment stages in France. METHODS: This retrospective observational cohort study used data from the French National Health Insurance database to study patients with MM (diagnosis 2013-2019). Patient outcomes included OS (all-cause mortality), time-to-next treatment (TTNT), and duration of therapy (DoT) from initial diagnosis, the start of different lines of therapy (LOTs), triple-class exposure (TCE), and subsequent treatment following TCE. The Kaplan-Meier method analyzed "time-to-event" data. RESULTS: From diagnosis, death rates increased from 1% at 1 month to 24% at 2 years; median OS was 63.8 months (N = 14 309). Median OS from the start of LOTs declined from 61.0 months (LOT1) to 14.8 months (LOT4). Median OS from TCE start was 14.7 months. There was a large variation in TTNT within LOTs (e.g., LOT1: bortezomib + lenalidomide: TTNT = 26.4 months, OS = 61.7 months; lenalidomide: TTNT = 20.0 months, OS = 39.6 months); DoT was similar for LOT1 and LOT2, then progressively declined at LOT4. Patients with stem cell transplant, younger age, and less comorbidity had better survival outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with MM face a poor prognosis after relapse to multiple LOTs and TCE, demonstrating a worsening of survival outcomes. Access to novel therapies may improve outcomes.

Treatment attrition rates and relevant risk factors in multiple myeloma: A real-world study in China.

Background: For multiple myeloma (MM), the proportions of patients reaching the subsequent line of therapy (LOT) decline gradually and real-world data describing the attrition rates of LOT in Chinese MM were limited. Herein, we investigated the attrition rates by subsequent LOTs and their relevant risk factors in MM patients in China. Methods: MM patients who had been hospitalized and received at least one LOT from January 2008 to August 2019 in West China Hospital Sichuan University were retrospectively recruited. Demographic and clinical characteristic data were obtained from the "HemaTank" Chinese Multiple Myeloma Database. The Cox proportional hazards regression model was applied to analyze the risk factors of frontline treatment attrition. Results: A total of 1,255 newly diagnosed MM were enrolled, with 573 (45.7%) patients receiving only one LOT and 682 (54.3%) patients receiving more than one LOT. Thalidomide with dexamethasone/prednisone was the most common frontline treatment before 2017, while bortezomib-based regimens constituted the majority of frontline treatment in 2017 and beyond. The attrition rates from the first to the fifth LOT exhibited a gradual upward trend (45.7%, 48.7%, 58.9% and 62.5%, respectively). Meanwhile, 54.3%, 27.9%, 11.5%, and 4.3% of all the enrolled MM patients received a second, third, fourth and fifth LOT. MM who underwent autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) showed lower attrition rates across all LOTs (range 12%-56.8%) than MM without ASCT (range 49.1%-64.5%). The multivariate Cox regression model revealed that ISS stage III (HR 2.07, p < .001), elevated LDH (HR 1.47, p = .006), and comorbidities such as amyloidosis (HR 1.63, p = 0 .01), hepatic disease (HR 1.36, p = .022), pulmonary disease (HR 1.38, p = .022), and cardiac disease (HR 1.62, p = .004) were independent risk factors for MM patients attritted from the frontline treatment. Conclusion: In this study, the attrition rates were generally high and increased gradually across all LOTs. Nearly half of MM patients received only one LOT, and higher tumor burden and more comorbidities may be associated with fewer subsequent LOTs. The high attrition rates highlight the importance of applying the most optimal frontline treatment regimen rather than salvaging subsequent LOTs.

Assessing the treatment pattern, health care resource utilisation, and economic burden of multiple myeloma in France using the Système National des Données de Santé (SNDS) database: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Real-world data on health care resource utilisation (HCRU) and costs for French patients with multiple myeloma (MM) are limited due to the quickly evolving MM treatment landscape. This retrospective, national-level study quantified the MM economic burden in France. METHODS: The study included patients with newly diagnosed MM from the Système National des Données de Santé coverage claims database between 2013 and 2018 who received active treatment within 30 days of diagnosis. HCRU included hospitalisations, drugs, consultations, procedures, tests, devices, transport, and sick leave. Costs were annualized to 2019 prices. Drug treatments, reported by line of therapy (LOT), were algorithmically defined using drug regimen, duration of therapy, and gaps between treatments. Analyses were stratified by stem cell transplantation status and LOT. RESULTS: Among 6413 eligible patients, 6229 (97.1%) received ≥ 1 identifiable LOT; most received 1 (39.8%) or 2 LOT (27.5%) during follow-up. Average annual hospitalisation was 6.3 episodes/patient/year (median duration: 11.6 days). The average annual cost/patient was €58.3 K. Key cost drivers were treatment (€28.2 K; 39.5% of total HCRU within one year of MM diagnosis) and hospitalisations (€22.2 K; 48.6% of total HCRU costs in first year). Monthly treatment-related costs increased from LOT1 (€2.447 K) and LOT5 + (€7.026 K); only 9% of patients received LOT5 + . At LOT4 + , 37 distinct regimens were identified. Hospitalisation costs were higher in patients with stem cell transplantation than total population, particularly in the first year. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed a high economic burden of MM in France (€72.37 K/patient/year in the first year) and the diversity of regimens used in late-line treatments.

Progression-free Survival After Second Line of Therapy for Metastatic Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma in Patients Treated with First-line Immunotherapy Combinations.

Immunotherapy (IO)-based combinations used to treat metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) include dual immune checkpoint inhibition with ipilimumab and nivolumab (IO/IO) and several combinations of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-targeting tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) with an immune checkpoint inhibitor (TKI/IO). IO/IO and TKI/IO approaches have not been compared directly, and it is unknown whether patients who do not respond to first-line IO/IO can salvage long-term survival by receiving a second-line TKI. Progression-free survival after second-line therapy (PFS-2) evaluates the ability to be salvaged by second-line therapy. We retrospectively evaluated 173 patients treated with first-line IO/IO or TKI/IO for metastatic ccRCC at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and report PFS-2, overall survival, and response to second line of therapy (ORR2nd) for groups defined by first-line category. Although ORR2nd was significantly higher with IO/IO than with TKI/IO (47% vs 13%, p < 0.001), there was no significant difference in median PFS-2 for TKI/IO versus IO/IO (44 vs 23 mo, log-rank p = 0.1) or restricted mean survival time (RMST) for PFS-2 when adjusted for propensity score (33 vs 30 mo; difference 2.6 mo [95% confidence interval {CI}: -2.6, 7.9]; p = 0.3). There was also no significant difference in RMST for overall survival when adjusted for propensity score (38 vs 37 mo; group difference 1.0 mo [95% CI: -3.4, 5.5]; p = 0.7). These findings do not support a change in current utilization practices for IO/IO and TKI/IO treatment strategies for ccRCC. PATIENT SUMMARY: In cases of metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma, no significant difference was observed in progression-free survival after second line of therapy between patients receiving ipilimumab plus nivolumab and those receiving a combination of a tyrosine kinase inhibitor and an immune checkpoint inhibitor.

An Epidemiology Model for Estimating the Numbers of US Patients With Multiple Myeloma by Line of Therapy and Treatment Exposure.

OBJECTIVES: Estimates on the distribution of patients with multiple myeloma (MM) by line of therapy (LOT) are scarce and get outdated quickly as new treatments become available. The objective of this study was to estimate the number of patients with MM by LOT and the number of patients who have received at least 4 previous LOTs including proteasome inhibitors, immunomodulatory agents, and anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies (mAbs). METHODS: A compartmental model was developed to calculate the number of patients by LOT. Two pathways were considered based on stem cell transplant eligibility, and at each pathway, treatments were stratified in 2 types: anti-CD38 mAbs or other. The model population was stratified into 4 subgroups based on age and cytogenetic risk. Model inputs were informed from real-world evidence. RESULTS: The model estimated that, in 2020, 126 869 patients were living with MM in the United States. Of these, 105 701 received treatment in any LOT, with 56 959, 27 252, 11 258, and 5217 in lines 1 to 4, respectively, and 5015 in line 5 or beyond. The model estimated that 3497 patients received at least 4 previous LOTs including proteasome inhibitors, immunomodulatory agents, and anti-CD38 mAbs. The model overall prevalence predictions aligned well with publicly available estimates. CONCLUSIONS: This study proposes a novel framework to estimate MM prevalence. It can assist clinicians to understand future trends in MM epidemiology, healthcare systems to plan for future resource use allocation, and payers to quantify the budget impact of new treatments.

Work productivity among patients with metastatic breast cancer in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize workplace productivity measures in patients with metastatic breast cancer (mBC) using line of therapy (LOT) and first line (1 L) regimen. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using IBM's MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters (CCAE) and Health and Productivity Management (HPM) databases. The cohort included patients diagnosed with mBC who initiated 1 L treatment between 2/3/2015 and 6/30/2018. Productivity was measured using days absent from work and short- and long-term disability (STD, LTD) claims by LOT and 1 L regimen (any cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor [CDK4/6i], endocrine monotherapy, chemotherapy only, or other anti-cancer therapy [OACT]). LOT was defined using regimen-based progression. RESULTS: Overall, 548 patients were included; 148, 129, 145, and 126 received endocrine monotherapy, CDK4/6i, chemotherapy only, and OACT, respectively. The rate of LTD increased significantly by 3.1 and 2.6 times from 1 L to second line (2 L) and from 2 L to subsequent lines, respectively. Patients receiving 1 L chemotherapy had 2.4- and 2.7-times odds of using STD and LTD compared to patients receiving 1 L CDK4/6i. CONCLUSIONS: Regimen-based disease progression is associated with increased use of STD and LTD. Patients with a 1 L regimen of chemotherapy have significantly higher odds of using STD or LTD than patients using 1 L CDK4/6i.

Characteristics and current standard of care among veterans with major depressive disorder in the United States: A real-world data analysis.

BACKGROUND: This study examined MDD treatment regimens received during the first observed and treated major depressive episode (MDE) among US veterans. METHODS: This retrospective study, conducted using the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) database, supplemented with Medicare Part A/B/D data, included adults with ≥1 MDD diagnosis (index date) between 10/1/2015-2/28/2017 and ≥1 line of therapy (LOT) within the first observed complete MDE. Patient baseline (6-month pre-index) characteristics and up to six LOTs received during the first observed and treated MDE were assessed. RESULTS: Of 40,240 veterans with MDD identified (mean age: 50.9 years, 83.9% male, 63.4% White, 88.6% non-Hispanic), hypertension (27.5%), hyperlipidemia (20.8%), and post-traumatic stress disorder (17.5%) were the most common baseline comorbidities. During the first observed and treated MDE, patients received a mean of 1.6 ± 1.0 LOTs, with 14.6% of patients receiving ≥3 LOTs. SSRI-monotherapy was the most commonly observed regimen in the first six LOTs, followed by SNRI-monotherapy in LOT 1 and antidepressants augmented by anticonvulsants in the remaining five LOTs. The antidepressant class of the previous LOT was commonly used in the subsequent LOT. SSRI-SSRI-SSRI was the most common LOT1-to-LOT3 sequencing pattern among patients receiving ≥3 LOTs. LIMITATIONS: The study findings are limited to data in the VHA database and may not be generalizable to the non-veteran US population. CONCLUSIONS: During the first observed and treated MDE, SSRI-monotherapy was the most common therapy in the first six LOTs. Cycling within SSRI class was the leading sequencing pattern of the first three LOTs among veterans who received ≥3 LOTs.

Infigratinib in Early-Line and Salvage Therapy for FGFR3-Altered Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma.

INTRODUCTION: To describe the efficacy of infigratinib, a potent, selective fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) 1-3 tyrosine kinase inhibitor, across lines of therapy (LOT) in patients with metastatic urothelial cancer (mUC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible patients had mUC and prior platinum-based chemotherapy, unless contraindicated, and activating FGFR3 mutation/fusion. Patients received infigratinib 125 mg orally daily (3 weeks on/1 week off) in a single-arm, open-label study. Primary endpoint: investigator-assessed confirmed objective response rate (ORR). Disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS), best overall response (BOR) that included unconfirmed responses, and overall survival (OS) were also assessed. Subgroup analysis of efficacy and safety outcomes by LOT was performed. RESULTS: Sixty-seven patients were enrolled; 13 (19.4%) received infigratinib as early-line therapy for mUC due to ineligibility to receive platinum-based chemotherapy. Overall, ORR was 25.4% (95% CI 15.5-37.5) and DCR was 64.2% (95% CI 51.5-75.5). ORR was 30.8% (95% CI 9.1-61.4) with early-line infigratinib and 24.1% (95% CI 13.5-37.6) for ≥2 LOT. DCR was 46.2% (95% CI 19.2-74.9) for early-line and 68.5% (95% CI 54.4-80.5) for ≥2 LOT. PFS and OS appeared similar in both groups. Thirteen of 59 patients with a bladder primary tumor received early-line treatment with an ORR of 30.5% (95% CI 9.1-61.4), and 46 received ≥2 LOT with an ORR of 20.3% (95% CI 9.4-33.9); BOR was 38.5% (95% CI: 13.9-68.4%) and 42.6% (95% CI: 29.2-56.8%) in the early-line and salvage settings, respectively. Eight patients with upper tract urothelial carcinoma received salvage therapy (ORR, 50.0%; DCR, 100.0%). No significant differences in toxicities between LOT were observed. CONCLUSION: Infigratinib has notable activity in patients with mUC regardless of LOT. The findings support the evaluation of infigratinib across different settings in mUC.

Epidemiology of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) and follicular lymphoma (FL) in the United States and Western Europe: population-level projections for 2020-2025.

Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) and follicular lymphoma (FL) treatments have been rapidly evolving for patients treated in later lines of therapy (LoT). Country-specific cancer registry data for the US and Western Europe (WE) were combined with physician survey results to project the incidence, prevalence, and number of DLBCL and FL patients eligible for and treated by LoT between 2020 and 2025. The total number of incidents and prevalent cases of DLBCL and FL is expected to increase between 2020 and 2025 in the US and WE. 56% and 53% of the third line plus (3L+) eligible DLBCL patients and 60% and 55% of eligible FL patients initiated treatment in the US and WE, respectively. Further research is warranted to understand the reasons behind the high proportion of treatment eligible patients who do not initiate treatment, and potential differences between countries, especially in the 3L + settings.

An Automated Line-of-Therapy Algorithm for Adults With Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Validation Study Using Blinded Manual Chart Review.

BACKGROUND: Extraction of line-of-therapy (LOT) information from electronic health record and claims data is essential for determining longitudinal changes in systemic anticancer therapy in real-world clinical settings. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this retrospective cohort analysis is to validate and refine our previously described open-source LOT algorithm by comparing the output of the algorithm with results obtained through blinded manual chart review. METHODS: We used structured electronic health record data and clinical documents to identify 500 adult patients treated for metastatic non-small cell lung cancer with systemic anticancer therapy from 2011 to mid-2018; we assigned patients to training (n=350) and test (n=150) cohorts, randomly divided proportional to the overall ratio of simple:complex cases (n=254:246). Simple cases were patients who received one LOT and no maintenance therapy; complex cases were patients who received more than one LOT and/or maintenance therapy. Algorithmic changes were performed using the training cohort data, after which the refined algorithm was evaluated against the test cohort. RESULTS: For simple cases, 16 instances of discordance between the LOT algorithm and chart review prerefinement were reduced to 8 instances postrefinement; in the test cohort, there was no discordance between algorithm and chart review. For complex cases, algorithm refinement reduced the discordance from 68 to 62 instances, with 37 instances in the test cohort. The percentage agreement between LOT algorithm output and chart review for patients who received one LOT was 89% prerefinement, 93% postrefinement, and 93% for the test cohort, whereas the likelihood of precise matching between algorithm output and chart review decreased with an increasing number of unique regimens. Several areas of discordance that arose from differing definitions of LOTs and maintenance therapy could not be objectively resolved because of a lack of precise definitions in the medical literature. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings identify common sources of discordance between the LOT algorithm and clinician documentation, providing the possibility of targeted algorithm refinement.

Burden of illness and outcomes in second-line large B-cell lymphoma treatment: real-world analysis of Medicare beneficiaries.

Aims: To characterize elderly large B-cell lymphoma patients who progress to second-line treatment to identify potential unmet treatment needs. Patients & methods: Retrospective USA cohort study, patients receiving second-line autologous stem cell transplant (SCT) preparative regimen ('ASCT-intended') versus those who did not; stratified further into those who received a stem cell transplant and those who did not. Primary outcomes were: healthcare resource utilization, costs and adverse events. Results: 1045 patients (22.0%) were included in the ASCT-intended group, 23.3% of whom received SCT (5.1% of entire second-line population). Non-SCT patients were older and had more comorbidities and generally higher rates of healthcare resource utilization and costs. Conclusion: Elderly second-line large B-cell lymphoma patients incurred substantial costs and a minority received potentially curative SCT, suggesting significant unmet need.

Lay abstract Large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL) is an aggressive form of cancer. Although chemotherapy is often initially successful, LBCL recurs in about 50% of patients. For many years, the standard of care for recurrent LBCL has been a course of strong chemotherapy followed by stem cell transplant (SCT). However, many older patients cannot tolerate or do not respond well to chemotherapy and therefore cannot proceed to SCT. In this real-world study of Medicare patients, we found that only 5.1% of patients with recurrent LBCL ever received potentially curative SCT. They also had higher healthcare costs than similar patients who did receive SCT. This shows a significant unmet need in elderly LBCL patients that may potentially be addressed with recent treatment innovations.