RESUMO
Introduction: Much drug development and published analysis for epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) focuses on early-line treatment. Full sequences of treatment from diagnosis to death and the impact of later lines of therapy are rarely studied. We describe the establishment of an international network of cancer centers configured to compare real-world treatment pathways in UK, Portugal, Germany, South Korea, France and Romania (the Ovarian Real-World International Consortium; ORWIC). Methods: 3344 patients diagnosed with EOC (2012-2018) were analysed using a common data model and hub and spoke programming approach applied to existing electronic medical records. Consistent definition of line of therapy between sites and an efficient approach to analysis within the limitations of local information governance was achieved. Results: Median age of participants was 53-67 years old and 5-29% were ECOG >1. Between 62% and 84% of patients were diagnosed with late-stage disease (FIGO III-IV). Sites treating younger and fitter patients had higher rates of debulking surgery for those diagnosed at late stage than sites with older, more frail patients. At least 21% of patients treated with systemic anti-cancer therapy (SACT) had recurrent disease following second-line therapy (2L); up to 11 lines of SACT treatment were recorded for some patients. Platinum-based SACT was consistently used across sites at 1L, but choices at 2L varied, with hormone therapies commonly used in the UK and Portugal. The use (and type) of maintenance therapy following 1L also varied. Beyond 2L, there was little consensus between sites on treatment choice: trial compounds and unspecified combinations of other agents were common. Discussion: Specific treatment sequences are reported up to 4L and the establishment of this network facilitates future analysis of comparative outcomes per line of treatment with the aim of optimizing available options for patients with recurrent EOC. In particular, this real-world network can be used to assess the growing use of PARP inhibitors. The real-world optimization of advanced line treatment will be especially important for patients not usually eligible for involvement with clinical trials. The resources to enable this analysis to be implemented elsewhere are supplied and the network will seek to grow in coverage of further sites.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have improved outcomes for patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) versus chemotherapy in clinical trials. In Germany, ICIs have been used clinically since 2015 for patients with advanced/metastatic NSCLC without epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)/anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) aberrations. As part of I-O Optimise, a multinational research program utilizing real-world data on thoracic malignancies, we describe real-world treatment patterns and survival following reimbursement of ICIs for advanced NSCLC in Germany. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included patients with locally advanced/metastatic NSCLC without known EGFR/ALK aberrations who received a first line of therapy at Frankfurt University Hospital between January 2012 and December 2018, with follow-up to December 2019 or death, whichever occurred first. Using electronic medical records, treatment patterns and survival outcomes were described by histology (squamous cell [SQ]; non-squamous cell [NSQ]/other) and time period (pre- and post-ICI approval). RESULTS: Among eligible patients who started first-line treatment, 136 (pre-ICI) and 126 (post-ICI) had NSQ/other histology, and 32 (pre-ICI) and 38 (post-ICI) had SQ histology. Use of an ICI in the NSQ/other cohort increased from 5.9% (all second- or third-line) in the pre-ICI period to 57.1% (22.2% in first-line, including 13.5% as monotherapy and 8.7% combined with chemotherapy) in the post-ICI period. This was paralleled by a significant (P < 0.0001) prolongation of median (95% CI) OS from 9.4 (7.1-11.1) to 14.8 (12.7-20.5) months between the pre-ICI and post-ICI periods. A similar increase in the uptake of ICI was observed for the SQ cohort (from 3.1% pre-ICI [fourth-line] to 52.6% post-ICI [28.9% as first-line, including 15.8% as monotherapy and 13.2% combined with chemotherapy]); however, analysis of survival outcomes was limited by small group sizes. CONCLUSION: These real-world data complement clinical trial evidence on the effectiveness of ICIs in patients with advanced NSCLC and NSQ/other histology in Germany.
