Racial and Ethnic Characteristics and Outcomes of Patients Diagnosed with CLL/SLL in the USA.

INTRODUCTION: This study was designed to compare outcomes among patients by race and ethnicity in the post-covalent Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor (cBTKi) treatment era. METHODS: A nationwide electronic health record (EHR)-derived de-identified database was utilized that included patients diagnosed with CLL from 2013 to 2022 who received systemic therapy for their disease. Use of cBTKi therapy, time to next treatment or death (TTNT-D), and overall survival (OS) were compared by race in unadjusted (Kaplan-Meier method) and adjusted analyses (Cox proportional hazards regression). RESULTS: This study included 4,572 White (71.8%) and 558 Black (8.8%) patients with CLL; 270 were Hispanic or Latino (4.2%). Patients who were Black were significantly younger, more were female, had later stage disease, were of lower socioeconomic status (SES), and were more likely to have unmutated immunoglobulin heavy chain gene (IGHV) and to have received cBTKi therapy than White patients (all p ≤ 0.002). SES was also significantly different by ethnicity. TTNT-D and OS were not different by race in either unadjusted or adjusted analyses (all p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: In unadjusted and adjusted analyses, TTNT-D and OS were not different by race. These data did not identify racial healthcare disparities in the era following the introduction of cBTKi therapy despite differences in baseline characteristics.

Bayesian survival extrapolation for cost-effectiveness analysis: a case study of RELAY for ramucirumab in combination with erlotinib in the treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer.

AIM: Increasing trend for progression-free survival (PFS)-based primary endpoint in oncology has led to lack of mature overall survival (OS) data at the time of approval. To address this evidence gap in economic evaluations, we used a joint Bayesian approach to predict survival outcomes using immature OS data from the RELAY trial. METHODS: Patient data from RELAY and systematic literature review (SLR) of phase 3 randomized clinical trials with hazard ratio (HR) estimates of mature PFS and immature OS were considered. OS and PFS were analyzed individually using a univariate model; bivariate analysis was performed using a joint model based on modified Bayesian normal induced copula estimation model. First, a Bayesian univariate model incorporated informative priors based on predicted HR and acceleration factor for OS and PFS. Second, a Bayesian-based joint model of RELAY PFS and OS data was based on the correlation between PFS and OS established in trials of similar populations. Marginal distribution of PFS was used to estimate the same for OS. RESULTS: Publications (N = 122) of first-line treatments in patients with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutated non-small cell lung cancer were identified in the SLR, of which 36 trials were linked to RELAY. Twenty-six trials with HR data were used. The univariate model could predict OS with reduced uncertainty compared with the frequentist approach. In the joint model, the marginal OS distribution borrowed strength from the marginal PFS distribution through the established correlation coefficient. LIMITATIONS: Bayesian approach was successfully used in RELAY analysis but may not be universally applied to oncology trials due to the different associations of OS and PFS and different trial patient populations. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated that both the univariate and joint Bayesian models reduced uncertainty in predicting OS compared to frequentist method. The methodology introduced here will have potential applications in clinical decision-making for other oncology trials.

Patient Characteristics, Testing and Treatment Patterns, and Outcomes in EGFR-Mutated Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Multinational, Real-World Study.

INTRODUCTION: Treatment landscape for advanced/metastatic NSCLC (aNSCLC) has evolved considerably over the past few decades with the advent of targeted therapies for epidermal growth factor receptor-mutated (EGFRm+) aNSCLC treatment. This study described real-world patient and disease characteristics, treatment and practice patterns, and clinical, economic, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in patients with EGFRm+ aNSCLC. METHODS: Data were derived from the Adelphi NSCLC Disease Specific Programme™ (DSP™), a point-in-time survey conducted between July and December 2020. The survey included oncologists and pulmonologists, and their consulting patients (with physician-confirmed EGFRm+ aNSCLC) from nine countries: the US, Brazil, the UK, Italy, France, Spain, Germany, Japan, and Taiwan. All analyses were descriptive. RESULTS: Overall, 542 physicians reported data for 2857 patients (mean age 65.6 years), and most patients were female (56.0%), white (61.0%), and had stage IV disease at initial diagnosis (76.0%), and adenocarcinoma histology (89.0%). Most patients received EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) therapy in first- (91.0%), second- (74.0%), and third-line (67.0%). The most common tumor samples and methods for EGFR detection were EGFR-specific mutation detection tests (44.0%) and core needle biopsy (56.0%). Median time to next treatment was 14.0 (IQR 8.0-22.0) months and disease progression was the main physician-reported reason for early discontinuation. The most common physician-reported disease symptoms were cough (51.0%), fatigue (37.0%), and dyspnea (33.0%). In patients assessed for PROs, mean EQ-5D-5L index and FACT-L health utility scores were 0.71 and 83.5, respectively. On average, patients lost 10.6 h of work/week for approximately 29.2 weeks due to EGFRm+ aNSCLC. CONCLUSION: This real-world multinational data set showed that most patients with EGFRm+ aNSCLC were treated per the country relevant clinical guidelines, with progression as the main reason for early treatment discontinuation. For the included countries, these findings may offer a useful benchmark for decision makers to determine future allocation of healthcare resources for patients with EGFRm+ aNSCLC.

A network meta-analysis of immunotherapy-based treatments for advanced nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer.

Introduction: In the absence of head-to-head trials comparing immunotherapies for advanced nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NsqNSCLC), a network meta-analysis (NMA) was conducted to compare the relative efficacy of these treatments. Materials & methods: A systematic literature review of randomized controlled trials evaluating first-line-to-progression and second-line treatments for advanced NsqNSCLC informed Bayesian NMAs for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) end points. Results: Among first-line-to-progression treatments, pembrolizumab + pemetrexed + platinum showed the greatest OS benefit versus other regimens and a PFS benefit versus all but three regimens. Among second-line treatments, an OS benefit was seen for atezolizumab, nivolumab and pembrolizumab versus docetaxel. Conclusion: Pembrolizumab + pemetrexed + platinum showed the maximum OS benefit in the first-line setting. In the second-line setting, anti-PD-1/anti-PD-L1 monotherapies were better than docetaxel.

Efficacy and safety of first-line therapies in EGFR-mutated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a network meta-analysis.

Aim: To evaluate the comparative efficacy and safety of identified first-line therapies for patients with EGFR mutation-positive (EGFRm+) advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), with a focus on ramucirumab + erlotinib. Methods: In the absence of head-to-head studies, a Bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted using randomized clinical trial data to evaluate first-line systemic therapies with erlotinib/gefitinib as the reference treatment. Results: For progression-free survival, ramucirumab + erlotinib was comparable to osimertinib and dacomitinib in the primary analysis. Conclusion: The analysis showed ramucirumab + erlotinib efficacy to be comparable to best-in-class treatment options for previously untreated patients with EGFRm+ advanced NSCLC. Registration information: PROSPERO ID: CRD42020136247.

Study of patient characteristics, treatment patterns, EGFR testing patterns and outcomes in real-world patients with EGFRm+ non-small cell lung cancer.

OBJECTIVE: This retrospective, observational study examined patient characteristics, treatment patterns, testing patterns, and outcomes of US patients receiving first-/second- or third-generation epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). METHODS: This study used an electronic health record-derived de-identified database. Eligible patients had advanced EGFRm+ non-small cell lung cancer. Descriptive statistics were used to describe demographic, clinical, and treatment characteristics. Logistic regression models were used to identify patient characteristics that were associated with the use of osimertinib vs. a first-/second-generation EGFR TKI. Kaplan-Meier methods were used for survival analysis. RESULTS: Of the 782 patients who received first-line (1L) therapy with first-/second-generation EGFR TKIs in cohort A, erlotinib was the most common (58%), and osimertinib was the most widely prescribed second-line (2L) therapy (52%). Of the patients who received 1L therapy with osimertinib, a greater range of treatments were prescribed in 2L. A third of patients treated with first-/second-generation EGFR TKIs underwent EGFR testing near the end of 1L, and 44% of these patients had T790M positive disease. The median time on targeted therapy (TTT) of the cohort was 11.1 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 9.7, 12.3), and the median overall survival from the start of 1L therapy was 23.5 months (95% CI 20.7, 24.8). CONCLUSIONS: The majority of patients treated with first-/second-generation EGFR TKIs went on to receive osimertinib in the 2L setting, but overall, only a third of patients had received molecular testing at progression. Improved testing frequency is vital to inform treatment decisions.

Data Integration to Improve Real-world Health Outcomes Research for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer in the United States: Descriptive and Qualitative Exploration.

BACKGROUND: The integration of data from disparate sources could help alleviate data insufficiency in real-world studies and compensate for the inadequacies of single data sources and short-duration, small sample size studies while improving the utility of data for research. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to describe and evaluate a process of integrating data from several complementary sources to conduct health outcomes research in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The integrated data set is also used to describe patient demographics, clinical characteristics, treatment patterns, and mortality rates. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study integrated data from 4 sources: administrative claims from the HealthCore Integrated Research Database, clinical data from a Cancer Care Quality Program (CCQP), clinical data from abstracted medical records (MRs), and mortality data from the US Social Security Administration. Patients with lung cancer who initiated second-line (2L) therapy between November 01, 2015, and April 13, 2018, were identified in the claims and CCQP data. Eligible patients were 18 years or older and received atezolizumab, docetaxel, erlotinib, nivolumab, pembrolizumab, pemetrexed, or ramucirumab in the 2L setting. The main analysis cohort included patients with claims data and data from at least one additional data source (CCQP or MR). Patients without integrated data (claims only) were reported separately. Descriptive and univariate statistics were reported. RESULTS: Data integration resulted in a main analysis cohort of 2195 patients with NSCLC; 2106 patients had CCQP and 407 patients had MR data. The claims-only cohort included 931 eligible patients. For the main analysis cohort, the mean age was 62.1 (SD 9.27) years, 48.56% (1066/2195) were female, the median length of follow-up was 6.8 months, and for 37.77% (829/2195), death was observed. For the claims-only cohort, the mean age was 66.6 (SD 12.69) years, 52.1% (485/931) were female, the median length of follow-up was 8.6 months, and for 29.3% (273/931), death was observed. The most frequent 2L treatment was immunotherapy (1094/2195, 49.84%), followed by platinum-based regimens (472/2195, 21.50%) and single-agent chemotherapy (441/2195, 20.09%); mean duration of 2L therapy was 5.6 (SD 4.9, median 4) months. We describe challenges and learnings from the data integration process, and the benefits of the integrated data set, which includes a richer set of clinical and outcome data to supplement the utilization metrics available in administrative claims. CONCLUSIONS: The management of patients with NSCLC requires care from a multidisciplinary team, leading to a lack of a single aggregated data source in real-world settings. The availability of integrated clinical data from MRs, health plan claims, and other sources of clinical care may improve the ability to assess emerging treatments.

Real-world characteristics and outcomes of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer patients with EGFR exon 19 deletions or exon 21 mutations.

Aim: To estimate real-world (rw) outcomes for first-line therapy in patients with advanced EGF receptor (EGFR)-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), focusing on specific mutation types. Patients & methods: Retrospective observational study (n = 244 patients). Results: Univariate/multivariate analyses showed longer rw progression-free survival (rwPFS) and rwPFS2 in patients with ex19del versus Leu858Arg mutations. Median overall survival was 12.3 months longer with ex19del versus Leu858Arg mutations (HR: 1.47 [95% CI: 0.96-2.25]; p = 0.074). With EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitor monotherapy, unadjusted rwPFS for ex19del mutations was longer than for Leu858Arg mutations (HR: 1.62 [95% CI: 1.03-2.56]; p = 0.036). Conclusion: In this rw cohort of patients with advanced EGFR+ NSCLC, ex19del mutations conferred a prognostic advantage over Leu858Arg mutations, with significantly better rwPFS and rwPFS2.

Healthcare resource utilization in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: post hoc analysis of the randomized phase 3 REVEL study.

PURPOSE: In REVEL, patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (aNSCLC) and patients with increased tumor aggressiveness (rapid disease progression (RDP), platinum-refractory disease (PRD), and high symptom burden (HSB)) benefited from second-line treatment with ramucirumab plus docetaxel over placebo plus docetaxel. This post hoc analysis describes healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) associated with the treatment. METHODS: aNSCLC patients who had progressed during or after first-line platinum-based chemotherapy were randomized to receive docetaxel and either ramucirumab or placebo until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, withdrawal, or death. HCRU included hospitalizations, transfusions, and concomitant medications. Categorical variables (counts and percentages) were compared using Fisher's exact test. Continuous variables (mean, standard deviation (SD), median, minimum, and maximum) were compared using the Wilcoxon rank sum test. RESULTS: Patient characteristics were largely similar between treatment arms. Within the intent-to-treat (ITT) population (n = 1253), the mean treatment duration was 19.7 and 16.9 weeks in the ramucirumab and control arms, respectively; 51.0% versus 54.9% of patients received subsequent anticancer therapy, respectively. Hospitalization rates were 41.9% versus 42.6% (p = 0.863), mean length of hospital stay was 14.5 days versus 11.3 days (p = 0.066), transfusion rates were 9.9% versus 12.3% (p = 0.206), and use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factors was 41.8% versus 36.6% (p = 0.063), respectively. No significant difference was observed in HCRU between treatment arms in both ITT population and in aggressive disease subgroups including RDP (n = 209), PRD (n = 360), and HSB (n = 497). CONCLUSION: In REVEL, the addition of ramucirumab to docetaxel did not increase HCRU among patients with aggressive aNSCLC disease. These results may help inform economic evaluation of treatment for patients with aNSCLC.

Patient-reported outcomes in RELAY, a phase 3 trial of ramucirumab plus erlotinib versus placebo plus erlotinib in untreated EGFR-mutated metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer.

OBJECTIVE: In the phase 3 RELAY trial, ramucirumab/erlotinib demonstrated superior progression-free survival (PFS) over placebo/erlotinib in patients with EGFR-mutated metastatic NSCLC (median PFS 19.4 versus 12.4 months; HR = 0.59, 95% CI = 0.46-0.76; p < .0001). Safety was consistent with established profiles for ramucirumab and erlotinib in NSCLC. Here, we present patient-reported outcomes. METHODS: Patients received oral erlotinib (150 mg daily) plus intravenous ramucirumab (10 mg/kg) or placebo Q2W until progressive disease or unacceptable toxicity. Patients completed the Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) and EQ-5D questionnaires at baseline and every other cycle. Analyses included time to deterioration (TtD) for LCSS via Kaplan-Meier method and Cox models and changes from baseline using mixed-model repeated-measures regression analysis. RESULTS: Overall patient compliance for LCSS and EQ-5D was >95%. TtD did not differ between treatment arms for LCSS Total Score (HR = 0.962, 95% CI = 0.690-1.343) and Average Symptom Burden Index (HR = 1.012, 95% CI = 0.732-1.400). TtD of individual LCSS items (appetite loss, fatigue, cough, shortness of breath, pain, symptom distress, difficulties with daily activities, quality of life) indicated no difference between arms; however, patient-reported blood in sputum was worse for ramucirumab/erlotinib (HR = 1.987, 95% CI = 1.206-3.275). Results of LCSS mean changes from baseline were consistent with TtD, indicating no significant differences between treatment arms except for blood in sputum. Mean changes from baseline in EQ-5D index score (p = .94) and visual analogue scale (p = .95) revealed no overall differences in health status between treatment arms. CONCLUSIONS: Patients' overall quality of life and symptom burden did not differ with the addition of ramucirumab to erlotinib compared to placebo/erlotinib. These data support the clinical benefit of ramucirumab/erlotinib in untreated EGFR-mutated metastatic NSCLC.

Reweighting Randomized Controlled Trial Evidence to Better Reflect Real Life - A Case Study of the Innovative Medicines Initiative.

Evidence from randomized controlled trials available for timely health technology assessments of new pharmacological treatments and regulatory decision making may not be generalizable to local patient populations, often resulting in decisions being made under uncertainty. In recent years, several reweighting approaches have been explored to address this important question of generalizability to a target population. We present a case study of the Innovative Medicines Initiative to illustrate the inverse propensity score reweighting methodology, which may allow us to estimate the expected treatment benefit if a clinical trial had been run in a broader real-world target population. We learned that identifying treatment effect modifiers, understanding and managing differences between patient characteristic data sets, and balancing the closeness of trial and target patient populations with effective sample size are key to successfully using this methodology and potentially mitigating some of this uncertainty around local decision making.

Relative efficacy of interventions in the treatment of second-line non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Locally advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) that has progressed after first-line treatment has a poor prognosis. Recent randomized clinical trials (RCTs) have demonstrated survival benefits of alternative treatments to docetaxel. However, information is lacking on which patients benefit the most and what drug or regimen is optimal. We report a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) of second-line treatments in all subgroup combinations determined by histology, programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression, and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation. METHODS: MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, Biosciences Information Service (using the Dialog Platform), Cochrane Library, and abstracts from scientific meetings were searched for RCTs published up to September 2015. Key outcomes were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Bayesian hierarchical exchangeable NMAs were conducted to calculate mean survival times and relative differences for eight subgroups, using docetaxel as the reference comparator. For OS, the NMA was based on hazard ratios applied to a first-order fractional polynomial model fitted to the reference treatment. For PFS, a second-order fractional polynomial model was fitted to reconstructed patient-level data for the entire network of evidence. RESULTS: The search identified 30 studies containing 17 different treatment regimens. Docetaxel plus ramucirumab was associated with a significant improvement in OS and PFS, relative to docetaxel, regardless of patient type. Docetaxel plus nintedanib showed similar efficacy to docetaxel plus ramucirumab in the nonsquamous populations. EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) erlotinib and gefitinib showed superior levels of efficacy in EGFR mutation-positive populations and the one PD-1 immunotherapy (nivolumab) studied showed superior efficacy in the populations exhibiting high PD-L1 expression. CONCLUSIONS: In the absence of head-to-head comparisons, we performed a mixed-treatment analysis to synthesize evidence of the efficacy of each treatment. Benefits are optimized by targeting specific treatments to individual patients guided by histology, PD-L1 expression, and EGFR mutation status. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: This review is registered in PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42014013780 available at www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO ).

Association of baseline symptom burden with efficacy outcomes: Exploratory analysis from the randomized phase III REVEL study in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

OBJECTIVES: The REVEL study demonstrated improved efficacy with ramucirumab plus docetaxel versus placebo plus docetaxel for previously treated advanced/metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) without further detriment to patient quality of life, symptoms, or functioning. This post hoc analysis explored the association between baseline Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) Average Symptom Burden Index (ASBI) and efficacy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Baseline ASBI scores were the average of the 6 LCSS symptom components. Low and high symptom burden (LSB ≤ median, HSB > median) were analyzed across and by treatment arms for effects on overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and objective response rate (ORR) using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: Baseline LCSS compliance was approximately 78% in both REVEL treatment arms. Patients with LSB versus HSB had fewer poor prognostic factors. The HSB patient population significantly overlapped with previously identified aggressive disease subgroups (rapidly progressing disease or refractory to first-line treatment). Patients with LSB versus HSB had significantly improved OS (P < 0.0001), PFS (P < 0.0001), and ORR (P = 0.0003) regardless of treatment, with superior ORR and PFS but not OS in the ramucirumab plus docetaxel arm. Patients with HSB treated with ramucirumab plus docetaxel versus docetaxel had improved OS (median, 7.39 vs. 5.95 months; HR 0.749 [95% CI 0.610-0.920]; P = 0.0308), PFS (median, 4.01 vs. 2.63 months; HR 0.749 [0.619-0.907]; P = 0.0202), and ORR (18% vs. 11%; P = 0.0458). Of patients with rapidly progressing disease, 57% (92/162) also had HSB. CONCLUSIONS: Baseline ASBI may be an independent prognostic factor in this large second-line cohort of patients with advanced NSCLC. The preservation of improved PFS and OS in the HSB cohort suggests that the addition of ramucirumab to docetaxel provides benefit in patients with greater symptom burden, consistent with previous data on REVEL patients with aggressive disease.

Treatment Decisions for Advanced Non-Squamous Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Patient and Physician Perspectives on Maintenance Therapy.

INTRODUCTION: Advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is a severe disease with burdensome symptoms and traditionally poor outcomes. The treatment of advance disease is based on chemotherapy, with the recent addition of immunotherapy. Patients who respond to initial treatment can opt to receive maintenance therapy (MT). It is important to understand why patients with advanced NSCLC choose to accept or refuse therapy, and how physician recommendations play into this decision-making process. This study characterized patient and physician decision-making regarding treatment for patients with advanced non-squamous NSCLC in the USA using the example of MT. METHODS AND MATERIALS: This study employed multiple approaches: patient interviews, a patient survey, and a physician survey. Qualitative interviews were conducted among patients who had been offered MT to identify factors influencing treatment decision-making. The patient survey explored the decision-making process and quantified challenges and motivators for receiving MT. The physician survey included a discrete choice experiment to understand the relationship between physician treatment recommendations and patient characteristics. RESULTS: Interviewed patients (n = 10) were motivated to receive MT in the hope of extending their lives and being proactive against their cancer, and they anticipated reduced adverse effects compared with first-line therapy. Surveyed patients (n = 77) described several deterrents to receiving therapy; the most prominent was severity of adverse effects, which was an influencing factor for 34% of patients. The major motivator for receiving therapy was the potential to extend life, which influenced 97% of patients. A total of 100 oncologists participated in the physician survey. Patients' lack of treatment motivation/inconvenience, disease progression, presence of severe renal co-morbidities, and older age decreased the likelihood of physicians recommending the use of MT. CONCLUSION: This study identified challenges and motivators influencing advanced NSCLC patients' decisions to accept or refuse therapy, as well as patient and disease characteristics associated with physician's treatment recommendations for MT.

Treatment patterns, duration and outcomes of pemetrexed maintenance therapy in patients with advanced NSCLC in a real-world setting.

OBJECTIVES: In patients with non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), maintenance therapy regimens, including pemetrexed, have been shown to prolong overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). The purpose of this study was to describe real-world maintenance use of pemetrexed and associated outcomes in patients with advanced NSCLC. METHODS: This was a retrospective, observational study that used longitudinal, demographically and geographically diverse electronic health record data in the United States. Eligible patients were adults with advanced non-squamous NSCLC who had received maintenance treatment with pemetrexed monotherapy or pemetrexed plus bevacizumab. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the patient population and multivariable logistic regression was used to identify the factors associated with duration of maintenance therapy. Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox regression models were used for time-to-event analysis. RESULTS: Patients receiving pemetrexed maintenance therapy were treated with either pemetrexed monotherapy (66.0%) or pemetrexed plus bevacizumab (34.0%). Carboplatin and pemetrexed (37.9%) or carboplatin, pemetrexed and bevacizumab (36.1%) were the most commonly used first-line therapies observed. The majority (84.9%) of these maintenance patients responded to first-line therapy. The median duration of maintenance therapy was 6.0 months for pemetrexed and bevacizumab and 4.1 months for pemetrexed monotherapy. The median OS from the start of first-line therapy of the total study cohort was 21.5 months (95% CI 20.0, 22.9). CONCLUSION: Real-world effectiveness of pemetrexed maintenance therapy is similar to that observed in published randomized controlled trials, confirming a role for pemetrexed maintenance in eligible patients in clinical practice.

Treatment Patterns by EGFR Mutation Status in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients in the USA: A Retrospective Database Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Targeted therapies, including tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) that target the sensitizing epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) gene are recommended for patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Most patients with NSCLC who test positive for the EGFR mutation and receive TKIs develop resistance to these drugs. Questions remain regarding which treatment sequence is optimal for patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC, and few studies have evaluated patterns of TKI treatment use in NSCLC, irrespective of EGFR mutation status, in a real-world setting. This population-based study aimed to evaluate treatment patterns at a national level in the USA. METHODS: This retrospective observational study used data from the US Oncology Network's iKnowMed database. Patients with advanced NSCLC who initiated first-line therapy with erlotinib and/or intravenous chemotherapy between January 1, 2012 and June 30, 2015 and met all other study criteria were included. Descriptive analyses assessed demographic and clinical characteristics and treatment patterns among the overall study cohort, as well as for specific erlotinib treatment subgroups, stratified by EGFR status. RESULTS: Among the 3108 patients identified, 18.5% were EGFR positive, 49.8% were EGFR negative, and 31.7% were EGFR documented unknown. For the overall cohort, 18.4% received first-line erlotinib monotherapy, fewer than 1% received first-line combination therapy (erlotinib plus chemotherapy), 4.7% received second-line erlotinib monotherapy, and 3.3% received second-line combination therapy. First-line erlotinib monotherapy was used in 77.8% of all EGFR positive patients. Almost two-thirds of the overall cohort were not observed to have advanced to second-line therapy. CONCLUSIONS: As treatment options evolve, this study provides real-world treatment patterns that suggest concordance with NCCN guidelines and confirm the remaining need to understand sequencing of therapies and related outcomes. FUNDING: Eli Lilly and Company.

Antiangiogenic therapy for patients with aggressive or refractory advanced non-small cell lung cancer in the second-line setting.

A majority of patients with advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) will experience disease progression after first-line therapy. Patients who have advanced NSCLC that is especially aggressive, which is defined as disease that rapidly progresses on first-line treatment or disease that is refractory to first-line treatment, have a critical unmet medical need. These patients have a poor prognosis in the second-line setting. Several studies have recently shown that treatment with an antiangiogenic therapy may benefit these patients. This review summarizes the approved antiangiogenic therapies for the treatment of patients with advanced NSCLC in the second-line setting, specifically focusing on the outcomes from subgroups of patients with rapidly progressing or refractory disease. Several antiangiogenic agents, as monotherapy or in combination with other treatments, have been or are currently being studied in patients with advanced NSCLC. Antiangiogenics that are approved for use in patients with advanced NSCLC are limited to bevacizumab in combination with chemotherapy (nonsquamous NSCLC), ramucirumab in combination with docetaxel (all histologies), and nintedanib in combination with docetaxel (adenocarcinoma histology). This review focuses on the efficacy, safety, and quality of life outcomes in the subpopulation of patients with rapidly progressing or refractory NSCLC treated with approved antiangiogenic therapies in the second-line setting. We also discuss the impact of newly approved immunotherapy agents on the outcomes of patients with aggressive or refractory disease. Studies in progress and planned future research will determine if combination treatment with antiangiogenics and immunotherapies will benefit patients with aggressive, advanced NSCLC.

Efficacy and Safety of Ramucirumab With Docetaxel Versus Placebo With Docetaxel as Second-Line Treatment of Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Subgroup Analysis According to Patient Age in the REVEL Trial.

INTRODUCTION: Ramucirumab, a recombinant human immunoglobulin G1 monoclonal antibody receptor antagonist designed to block the ligand-binding site of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-2 (VEGFR-2), was evaluated as second-line treatment in combination with docetaxel in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer in the REVEL trial (NCT01168973). Ramucirumab significantly improved overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). We report age subgroup analysis results primarily on the basis of a 65-year cutoff. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomized 1:1 to ramucirumab with docetaxel or placebo with docetaxel (n = 1253). Of these, 798 were younger than 65 years (ramucirumab, n = 391; control, n = 407) and 455 were 65 years or older (ramucirumab, n = 237; control, n = 218). Treatment comprised 21-day cycles of 75 mg/m2 docetaxel with 10 mg/kg ramucirumab or placebo. Prespecified age subgroup analyses were performed, including OS, PFS, and objective response rate. Quintiles age analysis was conducted to establish a relationship between efficacy and age. The Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) measured quality of life outcomes. Safety was assessed according to adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: Patients younger than 65 years showed favorable OS outcomes with ramucirumab treatment (hazard ratio [HR], 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.62-0.87; P < .001) and PFS (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.59-0.79; P < .001). In patients 65 years or older, benefits of ramucirumab were not as evident; after model adjustment for prognostic factors, OS and PFS HRs were 0.96 (95% CI, 0.77-1.21; P = .04) and 0.87 (95% CI, 0.71-1.05; P = .03), respectively. Age analysis according to quintiles showed HRs favoring ramucirumab for all age groupings. LCSS scores and AEs did not considerably differ between age groups. CONCLUSION: In this subgroup analysis, true treatment effect differences on the basis of age have not been established, and treatment should not be deterred solely because of age.

A cost-effectiveness analysis of first-line induction and maintenance treatment sequences in patients with advanced nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer in France.

BACKGROUND: Comparative effectiveness and cost-effectiveness data for induction-maintenance (I-M) sequences for the treatment of patients with nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer (nsqNSCLC) are limited because of a lack of direct evidence. This analysis aimed to compare the cost-effectiveness of I-M pemetrexed with those of other I-M regimens used for the treatment of patients with advanced nsqNSCLC in the French health-care setting. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A previously developed global partitioned survival model was adapted to the France-only setting by restricting treatment sequences to include 12 I-M regimens most relevant to France, and incorporating French costs and resource-use data. Following a systematic literature review, network meta-analyses were performed to obtain hazard ratios for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) relative to gemcitabine + cisplatin (induction sequences) or best supportive care (BSC) (maintenance sequences). Modeled health-care benefits were expressed as life-years (LYs) and quality-adjusted LYs (QALYs) (estimated using French EuroQol five-dimension questionnaire tariffs). The study was conducted from the payer perspective (National Health Insurance). Cost- and benefit-model inputs were discounted at an annual rate of 4%. RESULTS: Base-case results showed pemetrexed + cisplatin induction followed by (→) pemetrexed maintenance had the longest mean OS and PFS and highest LYs and QALYs. Costs ranged from €12,762 for paclitaxel + carboplatin → BSC to €35,617 for pemetrexed + cisplatin → pemetrexed (2015 values). Gemcitabine + cisplatin → BSC, pemetrexed + cisplatin → BSC, and pemetrexed + cisplatin → pemetrexed were associated with fully incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) of €16,593, €80,656, and €102,179, respectively, per QALY gained versus paclitaxel + carboplatin → BSC. All other treatment sequences were either dominated (ie, another sequence had lower costs and better/equivalent outcomes) or extendedly dominated (ie, the comparator had a higher ICER than a more effective comparator) in the model. Sensitivity analyses showed the model to be relatively insensitive to plausible changes in the main assumptions, with none increasing or decreasing the ICER by more than ~€20,000 per QALY gained. CONCLUSION: In the absence of direct comparative trial evidence, this cost-effectiveness analysis indicated that of a large number of I-M sequences used for the treatment of patients with nsqNSCLC in France, pemetrexed + cisplatin → pemetrexed achieved the best clinical outcomes (0.28 incremental QALYs gained) versus paclitaxel + carboplatin → BSC.