Febrile neutropenia-related care and associated costs in elderly patients with breast cancer, lung cancer, or non-Hodgkin lymphoma.

PURPOSE: Limited information is available regarding elderly patients experiencing febrile neutropenia (FN). This study evaluated FN-related care among elderly cancer patients who received high/intermediate FN-risk chemotherapy and experienced ≥ 1 FN episodes. METHODS: We used Medicare data to identify patients aged ≥ 66 years who initiated high/intermediate FN-risk chemotherapy between 1 January 2008 and 31 August 2015 to treat breast cancer (BC), lung cancer (LC), or non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) and had ≥ 1 FN episodes. We identified within-cycle FN episodes for each chemotherapy cycle on Part A inpatient claims or outpatient or Part B claims. We described the FN-related care setting (inpatient hospital, outpatient emergency department [ED], or outpatient non-ED) and reported mean total cost of FN-related care per episode overall and by care setting (adjusted to 2015 US$). RESULTS: We identified 2138, 3521, and 2862 patients with BC, LC, and NHL, respectively, with ≥ 1 FN episodes (total episodes: 2407, 3840, 3587, respectively). Most FN episodes required inpatient care (BC, 88.1%; LC, 93.0%; NHL, 93.2%) with mean hospital length of stay (LOS) 6.2, 6.5, and 6.8 days, respectively. Intensive care unit admission was required for 20.4% of BC, 29.0% of LC, and 25.7% of NHL hospitalizations (mean LOS: 4.7, 4.7, 5.5 days, respectively). The mean total cost of FN care per episode was $11,959 BC, $14,388 LC, and $15,006 NHL, with inpatient admission the costliest care component ($11,826; $14,294; and $14,873; respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Among elderly patients with BC, LC, or NHL who experienced FN, most FN episodes required costly hospital care, highlighting the FN burden on healthcare systems.

Prevalence of RAS and BRAF mutations in metastatic colorectal cancer patients by tumor sidedness: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Studies have shown that the prevalence of RAS and BRAF mutations may differ by tumor sidedness among metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients. Both mutation status and tumor sidedness may impact survival and disease progression and RAS mutation status has been shown to predict response to anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) therapy. A systematic literature review and meta-analysis were conducted to estimate the pooled prevalence of RAS and BRAF mutations by tumor sidedness in studies of mCRC patients. Forty-four studies comprising 15 981 mCRC patients tested for RAS and/or BRAF mutations were included in the meta-analyses. The prevalence of RAS mutations differed significantly by tumor side (32.4% among left-sided tumors, 41.3% among right-sided tumors; P = .017), as did the prevalence of KRAS mutations (35.8% among left-sided tumors, 46.3% among right-sided tumors; P < .0001) and BRAF mutations (4.3% among left-sided tumors, 16.3% among right-sided tumors; P < .0001). Among right-sided tumors, the prevalence of RAS and KRAS mutations varied significantly by study design, with higher prevalence among observational studies than clinical trials, and there was significant variation by study location for the prevalence of KRAS mutations in left-sided tumors and the prevalence of BRAF mutations in right-sided tumors. These results help to better characterize the mCRC population to better inform clinicians and researchers. Few of the included studies reported overall or progression-free survival (PFS) by both tumor sidedness and mutation status. As both of these factors may have prognostic impact, future studies should consider evaluating survival by these variables.

A National Survey of Medical Oncologist's Opinions and Perceptions for Managing Rash Among mCRC Patients Treated with Panitumumab.

INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to describe medical oncologist's opinions and perceptions regarding the management of dermatologic toxicities among metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients who were treated with panitumumab in the USA and assess if there were differences across demographic and clinical characteristics. METHODS: We developed a survey based on the current literature and expert opinions regarding the management of dermatologic toxicities. The survey was implemented online in September 2016. Eligible oncologists were board certified and had treated at least five new or continuing patients with mCRC in the last 3 months, among whom at least three patients had received or were currently receiving panitumumab. RESULTS: A total of 250 oncologists completed the survey. The data suggest that approximately 82% of patients received recommendations for moisturizer, 88% for sunscreen and 67% for ultraviolet (UV)-protective garments prior to or at the time of initiation of panitumumab therapy. There were minor differences in how dermatologic toxicities were managed across specific demographic or clinical groups. The data also suggest that the management associated with panitumumab use among mCRC patients can be greatly improved. CONCLUSIONS: Our results highlight the urgent need for heightened education regarding dermatologic toxicity management among oncologists who treated mCRC patients with panitumumab. Easily implemented strategies, such as moisturizer, sunscreen, and UV-protective garments should be recommended to all patients. FUNDING: Amgen, Inc. Plain language summary available for this article.

Risk of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia with early discontinuation of pegfilgrastim prophylaxis: a retrospective evaluation using Medicare claims.

BACKGROUND: Two recent evaluations reported that many cancer chemotherapy patients discontinue pegfilgrastim prophylaxis (PP) following the first cycle, and that these patients have a higher subsequent risk of febrile neutropenia (FN). Such evidence is based principally on the experience of younger adults with private healthcare coverage, and the generalizability of results to elderly Medicare patients is unknown. METHODS: A matched-cohort design and data from the Medicare Claims Research Identifiable Files were employed. The source population comprised cancer patients aged ≥65 years who received chemotherapy with intermediate/high-risk for FN and first-cycle PP. From the source population, beginning with the second cycle, all patients who received PP in all previous cycles were identified. From this sub-set, patients who did not receive PP in the cycle of interest ("comparison patients") were matched to those who received PP in that cycle ("PP patients"); the same process was repeated for subsequent cycles. Odds ratios (OR) for FN (broad and narrow definitions) were estimated using generalized estimating equations. RESULTS: Among 77,616 elderly patients in the source population, 5.3% did not receive second-cycle PP and were matched to those who did. In cycle 2, FN odds were significantly higher among comparison patients vs PP patients when employing the broad definition (OR = 1.9, p < .001) and the narrow definition (OR = 2.1, p < .001). Results for subsequent cycles (broad definition: OR = 2.0, p < .001; narrow definition: OR = 2.1, p < .001) and for the last cycle (broad definition: OR = 1.4, p = .060; narrow definition: OR = 1.7, p = .055) were largely comparable. CONCLUSIONS: In this large-scale evaluation of elderly Medicare patients who received myelosuppressive chemotherapy and first-cycle PP in recent US clinical practice, FN risk was substantially lower among patients who continued to receive PP in subsequent cycles vs those who discontinued PP.

A within-trial cost-effectiveness analysis of panitumumab compared with bevacizumab in the first-line treatment of patients with wild-type RAS metastatic colorectal cancer in the US.

AIMS: This analysis investigated the cost-effectiveness of panitumumab plus mFOLFOX6 (oxaliplatin, 5-fluorouracil, and leucovorin) compared with bevacizumab plus mFOLFOX6 in the first-line treatment of patients with wild-type RAS metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The cost-effectiveness analysis was developed from a third-party payer perspective in the US and was implemented using a partitioned survival model with health states for first-line treatment (progression-free), disease progression with and without subsequent active treatment, and death. Survival analyses of patients with wild-type RAS mCRC from the PEAK head-to-head clinical trial of panitumumab vs bevacizumab were performed to estimate time in the model health states. Additional data from PEAK informed the amount of each drug consumed, duration of therapy, subsequent therapy use, and toxicities related to mCRC treatment. Literature and US public data sources were used to estimate unit costs associated with treatment and duration of subsequent active therapies. Utility weights were calculated from patient-level data from panitumumab trials in the first-, second-, and third-line settings. A life-time perspective was taken with future costs and outcomes discounted at 3% per annum. Scenario, one-way, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: Compared with bevacizumab, the use of panitumumab resulted in an incremental cost of US $60,286, and an incremental quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) of 0.445, translating into a cost per QALY gained of US $135,391 in favor of panitumumab. Results were sensitive to wastage and dose rounding assumptions modeled. LIMITATIONS: Progression-free and overall survival were extrapolated beyond the follow-up of the primary analysis using fitted parametric curves. Costs and quality of life were estimated from multiple and different data sources. CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy of panitumumab in extending progression-free and overall survival and improving quality of life makes it a cost-effective option for first-line treatment of patients with wild-type RAS mCRC compared with bevacizumab.

Risk of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia with same-day versus next-day pegfilgrastim prophylaxis among patients aged ≥65 years: a retrospective evaluation using Medicare claims.

BACKGROUND: Two recent evaluations reported that risk of febrile neutropenia (FN) may be higher when pegfilgrastim prophylaxis (PP) is administered on same day as chemotherapy rather than per recommendation (1-3 days following chemotherapy). Such evidence is based largely on the experience of younger privately insured adults and may not be generalizable to older patients in US clinical practice. METHODS: A retrospective cohort design and data from Medicare Claims Research Identifiable Files (January 2008-September 2015) were employed. Patients were aged ≥65 years, had breast cancer or non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, received chemotherapy with intermediate/high risk for FN, and received PP in ≥1 cycle; cycles with PP were stratified based on administration day (same-day ["Day 0"] vs. 1-3 days following chemotherapy ["Days 1-3"]) and were pooled for analyses. Adjusted odds ratios (ORs) for FN during the cycle were estimated for patients who received PP on Day 0 versus Days 1-3. RESULTS: Study population included 65,003 patients who received PP in 261,184 cycles; in 5% of cycles, patients received PP on Day 0. Incidence proportion for FN in cycle 1 was 11.4% for Day 0 versus 8.4% for Days 1-3; adjusted OR was 1.4 (p < .001). Incidence proportion for FN when considering all cycles was 7.7% for Day 0 and 6.0% for Days 1-3; adjusted OR was 1.3 (p < .001). Adjusted ORs when considering all cycles and only inpatient FN episodes (1.3, p < .001) and the narrow definition for FN (1.5, p < .001) were similar. CONCLUSIONS: Among Medicare patients receiving chemotherapy and PP in US clinical practice, PP was administered before the recommended timing in 5% of cycles and FN incidence was significantly higher in these cycles. Along with prior research, study findings support recently updated US practice guidelines indicating that PP should be administered the day after chemotherapy.

Dermatologic Toxicity Occurring During Anti-EGFR Monoclonal Inhibitor Therapy in Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review.

Monoclonal antibody inhibitors of the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) have been shown to improve outcomes for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) without RAS gene mutations. However, treatment with anti-EGFR agents can be associated with toxicities of the skin, nails, hair, and eyes. Because these dermatologic toxicities can result in treatment discontinuation and affect patient quality of life, their management is an important focus when administering anti-EGFR monoclonal antibodies. The present systematic review describes the current data reporting the nature and incidence of, and management and treatment options for, dermatologic toxicities occurring during anti-EGFR treatment of mCRC. A search of the National Library of Medicine PubMed database from January 1, 2009, to August 18, 2016, identified relevant reports discussing dermatologic toxicity management among patients with mCRC receiving anti-EGFR therapy. The studies were grouped by type and rated by level of evidence using the GRADE approach developed by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Overall, 269 reports were reviewed (nonrandomized trials, n = 120; randomized trials, n = 31; retrospective studies, n = 15; reviews, n = 39). Dermatologic toxicity of any grade occurs in most patients who receive anti-EGFR therapy; approximately 10% to 20% of patients experienced grade 3/4 toxicity. The most common dermatologic toxicities include papulopustular/acneiform rash, xerosis, and pruritus; however, nail changes, hair abnormalities, and ocular conditions also occur. Guidance for managing these toxicities includes the use of inexpensive emollient ointments and moisturizers, avoidance of sun exposure, avoidance of irritants, and the use of short showers. Several studies also found that preemptive treatment was more effective than reactive treatment at limiting the incidence and severity of skin toxicity. With appropriate treatment, the dermatologic toxicities associated with anti-EGFR monoclonal antibody therapy can be managed, minimizing patient discomfort and the need for therapy interruption and/or discontinuation. Additionally, preemptive treatment can reduce dermatologic toxicity severity, ultimately yielding better quality of life.

RAS mutation prevalence among patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis of real-world data.

AIM: A confirmed wild-type RAS tumor status is commonly required for prescribing anti-EGFR treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer. This noninterventional, observational research project estimated RAS mutation prevalence from real-world sources. MATERIALS & METHODS: Aggregate RAS mutation data were collected from 12 sources in three regions. Each source was analyzed separately; pooled prevalence estimates were then derived from meta-analyses. RESULTS: The pooled RAS mutation prevalence from 4431 tumor samples tested for RAS mutation status was estimated to be 43.6% (95% CI: 38.8-48.5%); ranging from 33.7% (95% CI: 28.4-39.3%) to 54.1% (95% CI: 51.7-56.5%) between sources. CONCLUSION: The RAS mutation prevalence estimates varied among sources. The reasons for this are not clear and highlight the need for further research.