Validation of diagnosis codes to identify side of colon in an electronic health record registry.

BACKGROUND: The use of real-world data to generate evidence requires careful assessment and validation of critical variables before drawing clinical conclusions. Prospective clinical trial data suggest that anatomic origin of colon cancer impacts prognosis and treatment effectiveness. As an initial step in validating this observation in routine clinical settings, we explored the feasibility and accuracy of obtaining information on tumor sidedness from electronic health records (EHR) billing codes. METHODS: Nine thousand four hundred three patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) were selected from the Flatiron Health database, which is derived from de-identified EHR data. This study included a random sample of 200 mCRC patients. Tumor site data derived from International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes were compared with data abstracted from unstructured documents in the EHR (e.g. surgical and pathology notes). Concordance was determined via observed agreement and Cohen's kappa coefficient (κ). Accuracy of ICD codes for each tumor site (left, right, transverse) was determined by calculating the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV), and corresponding 95% confidence intervals, using abstracted data as the gold standard. RESULTS: Study patients had similar characteristics and side of colon distribution compared with the full mCRC dataset. The observed agreement between the ICD codes and abstracted data for tumor site for all sampled patients was 0.58 (κ = 0.41). When restricting to the 62% of patients with a side-specific ICD code, the observed agreement was 0.84 (κ = 0.79). The specificity (92-98%) of structured data for tumor location was high, with lower sensitivity (49-63%), PPV (64-92%) and NPV (72-97%). Demographic and clinical characteristics were similar between patients with specific and non-specific side of colon ICD codes. CONCLUSIONS: ICD codes are a highly reliable indicator of tumor location when the specific location code is entered in the EHR. However, non-specific side of colon ICD codes are present for a sizable minority of patients, and structured data alone may not be adequate to support testing of some research hypotheses. Careful assessment of key variables is required before determining the need for clinical abstraction to supplement structured data in generating real-world evidence from EHRs.

Association of Patient Characteristics and Tumor Genomics With Clinical Outcomes Among Patients With Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Using a Clinicogenomic Database.

Importance: Data sets linking comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) to clinical outcomes may accelerate precision medicine. Objective: To assess whether a database that combines EHR-derived clinical data with CGP can identify and extend associations in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Design, Setting, and Participants: Clinical data from EHRs were linked with CGP results for 28 998 patients from 275 US oncology practices. Among 4064 patients with NSCLC, exploratory associations between tumor genomics and patient characteristics with clinical outcomes were conducted, with data obtained between January 1, 2011, and January 1, 2018. Exposures: Tumor CGP, including presence of a driver alteration (a pathogenic or likely pathogenic alteration in a gene shown to drive tumor growth); tumor mutation burden (TMB), defined as the number of mutations per megabase; and clinical characteristics gathered from EHRs. Main Outcomes and Measures: Overall survival (OS), time receiving therapy, maximal therapy response (as documented by the treating physician in the EHR), and clinical benefit rate (fraction of patients with stable disease, partial response, or complete response) to therapy. Results: Among 4064 patients with NSCLC (median age, 66.0 years; 51.9% female), 3183 (78.3%) had a history of smoking, 3153 (77.6%) had nonsquamous cancer, and 871 (21.4%) had an alteration in EGFR, ALK, or ROS1 (701 [17.2%] with EGFR, 128 [3.1%] with ALK, and 42 [1.0%] with ROS1 alterations). There were 1946 deaths in 7 years. For patients with a driver alteration, improved OS was observed among those treated with (n = 575) vs not treated with (n = 560) targeted therapies (median, 18.6 months [95% CI, 15.2-21.7] vs 11.4 months [95% CI, 9.7-12.5] from advanced diagnosis; P < .001). TMB (in mutations/Mb) was significantly higher among smokers vs nonsmokers (8.7 [IQR, 4.4-14.8] vs 2.6 [IQR, 1.7-5.2]; P < .001) and significantly lower among patients with vs without an alteration in EGFR (3.5 [IQR, 1.76-6.1] vs 7.8 [IQR, 3.5-13.9]; P < .001), ALK (2.1 [IQR, 0.9-4.0] vs 7.0 [IQR, 3.5-13.0]; P < .001), RET (4.6 [IQR, 1.7-8.7] vs 7.0 [IQR, 2.6-13.0]; P = .004), or ROS1 (4.0 [IQR, 1.2-9.6] vs 7.0 [IQR, 2.6-13.0]; P = .03). In patients treated with anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapies (n = 1290, 31.7%), TMB of 20 or more was significantly associated with improved OS from therapy initiation (16.8 months [95% CI, 11.6-24.9] vs 8.5 months [95% CI, 7.6-9.7]; P < .001), longer time receiving therapy (7.8 months [95% CI, 5.5-11.1] vs 3.3 months [95% CI, 2.8-3.7]; P < .001), and increased clinical benefit rate (80.7% vs 56.7%; P < .001) vs TMB less than 20. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with NSCLC included in a longitudinal database of clinical data linked to CGP results from routine care, exploratory analyses replicated previously described associations between clinical and genomic characteristics, between driver mutations and response to targeted therapy, and between TMB and response to immunotherapy. These findings demonstrate the feasibility of creating a clinicogenomic database derived from routine clinical experience and provide support for further research and discovery evaluating this approach in oncology.

Characteristics of Real-World Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients Treated with Nivolumab and Pembrolizumab During the Year Following Approval.

BACKGROUND: Evidence from cancer clinical trials can be difficult to generalize to real-world patient populations, but can be complemented by real-world evidence to optimize personalization of care. Further, real-world usage patterns of programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) inhibitors following approval can inform future studies of subpopulations underrepresented in clinical trials. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a multicenter analysis using electronic health record data collected during routine care of patients treated in community cancer care clinics in the Flatiron Health network. Real-world metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients who received nivolumab or pembrolizumab in the metastatic setting (n = 1,344) were selected from a starting random sample of 55,969 NSCLC patients with two or more documented visits from January 1, 2011, through March 31, 2016. The primary study outcome measurement was demographic and treatment characteristics of the cohort. RESULTS: Median age at PD-1 inhibitor initiation was 69 years (interquartile range 61-75). Patients were 56% male, 88% smokers, 65% nonsquamous histology, and 64% diagnosed at stage IV. Of 1,344 patients, 112 (8%) were tested for programmed death-ligand 1 expression. Overall, 50% received nivolumab or pembrolizumab in the second line, with a substantial proportion of third and later line use that began to decline in Q4 2015. CONCLUSION: During the year following U.S. regulatory approval of PD-1 inhibitors for treatment of NSCLC, real-world patients receiving nivolumab or pembrolizumab were older at treatment initiation and more had smoking history relative to clinical trial cohorts. Studies of outcomes in underrepresented subgroups are needed to inform real-world treatment decisions. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Evidence gathered in conventional clinical trials used to assess safety and efficacy of new therapies is not necessarily generalizable to real-world patients receiving these drugs following regulatory approval. Real-world evidence derived from electronic health record data can yield complementary evidence to enable optimal clinical decisions. Examined here is a cohort of programmed cell death protein 1 inhibitor-treated metastatic non-small cell lung cancer patients in the first year following regulatory approval of these therapies in this indication. The analysis revealed how the real-world cohort differed from the clinical trial cohorts, which will inform which patients are underrepresented and warrant additional studies.

Association of Broad-Based Genomic Sequencing With Survival Among Patients With Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer in the Community Oncology Setting.

Importance: Broad-based genomic sequencing is being used more frequently for patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, little is known about the association between broad-based genomic sequencing and treatment selection or survival among patients with advanced NSCLC in a community oncology setting. Objective: To compare clinical outcomes between patients with advanced NSCLC who received broad-based genomic sequencing vs a control group of patients who received routine testing for EGFR mutations and/or ALK rearrangements alone. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective cohort study of patients with chart-confirmed advanced NSCLC between January 1, 2011, and July 31, 2016, and who received care at 1 of 191 oncology practices across the United States using the Flatiron Health Database. Patients were diagnosed with stage IIIB/IV or unresectable nonsquamous NSCLC who received at least 1 line of antineoplastic treatment. Exposures: Receipt of either broad-based genomic sequencing or routine testing (EGFR and/or ALK only). Broad-based genomic sequencing included any multigene panel sequencing assay examining more than 30 genes prior to third-line treatment. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcomes were 12-month mortality and overall survival from the start of first-line treatment. Secondary outcomes included frequency of genetic alterations and treatments received. Results: Among 5688 individuals with advanced NSCLC (median age, 67 years [interquartile range, 41-85], 63.6% white, 80% with a history of smoking); 875 (15.4%) received broad-based genomic sequencing and 4813 (84.6%) received routine testing. Among patients who received broad-based genomic sequencing, 4.5% received targeted treatment based on testing results, 9.8% received routine EGFR/ALK targeted treatment, and 85.1% received no targeted treatment. Unadjusted mortality rates at 12 months were 49.2% for patients undergoing broad-based genomic sequencing and 35.9% for patients undergoing routine testing. Using an instrumental variable analysis, there was no significant association between broad-based genomic sequencing and 12-month mortality (predicted probability of death at 12 months, 41.1% for broad-based genomic sequencing vs 44.4% for routine testing; difference -3.6% [95% CI, -18.4% to 11.1%]; P = .63). The results were consistent in the propensity score-matched survival analysis (42.0% vs 45.1%; hazard ratio, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.73 to 1.11]; P = .40) vs unmatched cohort (hazard ratio, 0.69 [95% CI, 0.62 to 0.77]; log-rank P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer receiving care in the community oncology setting, broad-based genomic sequencing directly informed treatment in a minority of patients and was not independently associated with better survival.

The neoadjuvant treatment of rectal cancer: a review.

Rectal adenocarcinoma is an important cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide, and key anatomic differences between the rectum and the colon have significant implications for management of rectal cancer, especially in the curative setting. For stage II and III rectal cancers, combined chemoradiotherapy offers the lowest rates of local and distant relapse, and is delivered neoadjuvantly to improve tolerability and optimize surgical outcomes, particularly when sphincter-sparing surgery is an endpoint. We review both pivotal trial data that has shaped the current standard of care, fluoropyrimidine-based chemoradiotherapy, while also presenting results from more recent studies, which aim to outperform this standard. Strategies combining 5FU radiotherapy with oxaliplatin, VEGF inhibition, EGFR inhibition, other targeted agents, and/or use of induction chemotherapy hold promise but thus far have failed to improve outcomes in randomized trials. Results of studies such as the ongoing PROSPECT trial may help further define our current therapeutic algorithm for stage II and III rectal cancer.

Analysis of a Real-World Progression Variable and Related Endpoints for Patients with Five Different Cancer Types.

INTRODUCTION: We previously demonstrated that real-world progression (rwP) can be ascertained from unstructured electronic health record (EHR)-derived documents using a novel abstraction approach for patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (base case). The objective of this methodological study was to assess the reliability, clinical relevance, and the need for disease-specific adjustments of this abstraction approach in five additional solid tumor types. METHODS: Patients with metastatic breast cancer (mBC), advanced melanoma (aMel), small cell lung cancer (SCLC), metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), and advanced gastric/esophageal cancer (aGEC) were selected from a real-world database. Disease-specific additions to the base case were implemented as needed. The resulting abstraction approach was applied to each disease cohort to capture rwP events and dates. To provide comprehensive clinical context, real-world progression-free survival (rwPFS) and time to progression (rwTTP) were compared to real-world overall survival (rwOS), time to next treatment (rwTTNT), and time to treatment discontinuation (rwTTD). Endpoint estimates were assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Correlations between real-world endpoints and rwOS were calculated using Spearman's ρ. RESULTS: Additions to the base-case rwP abstraction approach were required for mBC, aMel, and SCLC. Inter-abstractor agreement for rwP occurrence, irrespective of date, ranged from 88% to 97%. Occurrence of clinically relevant downstream events (new antineoplastic systemic therapy start, antineoplastic systemic therapy end, or death relative to the rwP event) ranged from 59% (aMel) to 72% (mBC). Median rwPFS ranged from 3.7 (aMel) to 7.7 (mBC) months, and median rwTTP ranged from 4.6 (aMel) to 8.3 (mRCC) months. Correlations between rwOS and rwPFS ranged from 0.52 (aMel) to 0.82 (SCLC). The correlation between rwOS and rwTTD was often lower relative to other comparisons (range 0.40-0.62). CONCLUSION: Derivation of a rwP variable from EHR documentation is feasible and reliable across the five solid tumors. Endpoint analyses show that rwP produces clinically meaningful information.

Validation analysis of a composite real-world mortality endpoint for patients with cancer in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: We expanded the previous assessment of a mortality variable suited for real-world evidence-focused oncology research. DATA SOURCE: We used a nationwide electronic health record (EHR)-derived de-identified database. DATA COLLECTION: We included patients with at least 1 of 18 cancer types between January 1, 2011 and December 31, 2017. Patient-level structured data (EHRs, obituaries, and Social Security Death Index) and unstructured EHR data (abstracted) were linked to generate a composite mortality variable. STUDY DESIGN: We benchmarked sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and ±15-day agreement against the National Death Index (NDI). Real-world overall survival (rwOS) was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. We performed sensitivity analyses using a smaller patient cohort that underwent next-generation sequencing testing. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Compared with the NDI across 18 cancer types (overall N = 160 436): sensitivity, 83.9%-91.5% (17/18 cancer types had sensitivity ≥85.0%); specificity, 93.5%-99.7%; PPV, 96.3%-98.3%; NPV, 75.0%-98.7%; ±15-day agreement, 95.6%-97.6%; and median rwOS estimates ranging from 2.8% to 12.7% greater. Sensitivity analysis results (n = 17 540) were consistent with the main analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Across all cancer types analyzed, this composite mortality variable showed high sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and ±15-day agreement, and yielded median rwOS values modestly overestimated when compared to NDI-based results.

Characterization of a Real-World Response Variable and Comparison with RECIST-Based Response Rates from Clinical Trials in Advanced NSCLC.

INTRODUCTION: Effectiveness metrics for real-word research, analogous to clinical trial ones, are needed. This study aimed to develop a real-world response (rwR) variable applicable to solid tumors and to evaluate its clinical relevance and meaningfulness. METHODS: This retrospective study used patient cohorts with advanced non-small cell lung cancer from a nationwide, de-identified electronic health record (EHR)-derived database. Disease burden information abstracted manually was classified into response categories anchored to discrete therapy lines (per patient-line). In part 1, we quantified the feasibility and reliability of data capture, and estimated the association between rwR status and real-world progression-free survival (rwPFS) and real-world overall survival (rwOS). In part 2, we investigated the correlation between published clinical trial overall response rates (ORRs) and real-world response rates (rwRRs) from corresponding real-world patient cohorts. RESULTS: In part 1, 85.4% of patients (N = 3248) had at least one radiographic assessment documented. Median abstraction time per patient-line was 15.0 min (IQR 7.8-28.1). Inter-abstractor agreement on presence/absence of at least one assessment was 0.94 (95% CI 0.92-0.96; n = 503 patient-lines abstracted in duplicate); inter-abstractor agreement on best confirmed response category was 0.82 (95% CI 0.78-0.86; n = 384 with at least one captured assessment). Confirmed responders at a 3-month landmark showed significantly lower risk of death and progression in rwOS and rwPFS analyses across all line settings. In part 2, rwRRs (from 12 rw cohorts) showed a high correlation with trial ORRs (Spearman's ρ = 0.99). CONCLUSIONS: We developed a rwR variable generated from clinician assessments documented in EHRs following radiographic evaluations. This variable provides clinically meaningful information and may provide a real-world measure of treatment effectiveness.

An observational study of concomitant immunotherapies and denosumab in patients with advanced melanoma or lung cancer.

After a case report of profound clinical response in a melanoma patient following treatment with an immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) and RANK-ligand inhibitor denosumab, we identified similar patients from electronic health records (EHR) and described patient characteristics and outcomes. This 2017 observational study used Flatiron Health's EHR database from ~255 US cancer clinics. Included were advanced melanoma or non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients who received denosumab within 30 days of CTLA-4 (ipilimumab) or PD1 (pembrolizumab, nivolumab) inhibitors start with a minimum of 6 months of follow up. Real-world tumor response (rwTR) was analyzed for scans available up to 30 days after concomitant therapy. Preclinical experiments evaluated sequencing of ICI, denosumab vs monotherapy or control. Melanoma (n = 66) patients received concomitant denosumab/ICI for a mean 4.0 months, 3.1 months for NSCLC (n = 241). Two-thirds of patients had best rwTR evaluable (complete [CR], partial response [PR], stable disease [SD], or disease progression [PD]). Longer mean duration of concomitant exposure was associated with overall response rate (ORR; CR+PR) in melanoma (p = 0.0172), NSCLC (p < .0001), and combined cohorts (p < .0001). The disease control rate (ORR plus SD) was 56% amongst melanoma patients and 58% amongst NSCLC patients. Longer concomitant therapy was associated with increased overall survival, primarily in NSCLC (p < .0001). Preclinical data suggest that ICI initiated before or at same time as denosumab was optimal. Results provide proof-of-concept that rwTR is associated with concomitant denosumab/ICI. Crude survival analyses supported the association of concomitant therapy and improved outcomes outside of clinical trials and warrant comparative study.

Speed of Adoption of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors of Programmed Cell Death 1 Protein and Comparison of Patient Ages in Clinical Practice vs Pivotal Clinical Trials.

Importance: The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is increasing its pace of approvals for novel cancer therapeutics, including for immune checkpoint inhibitors of programmed cell death 1 protein (anti-PD-1 agents). However, little is known about how quickly anti-PD-1 agents agents reach eligible patients in practice or whether such patients differ from those studied in clinical trials that lead to FDA approval (pivotal clinical trials). Objectives: To assess the speed with which anti-PD-1 agents agents reached eligible patients in practice and to compare the ages of patients treated in clinical practice with the ages of those treated in pivotal clinical trials. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study, performed from January 1, 2011, through August 31, 2016, included patients from the Flatiron Health Network who were eligible for anti-PD-1 agents treatment of selected cancer types, which included melanoma, non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), and renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Main Outcomes and Measures: Cumulative proportions of eligible patients receiving anti-PD-1 agents treatment and their age distributions. Results: The study identified 3089 patients who were eligible for anti-PD-1 agents treatment (median age, 66 [interquartile range, 56-75] years for patients with melanoma, 66 [interquartile range, 58-72] years for patients with RCC, and 67 [interquartile range, 59-74] years for patients with NSCLC; 1742 male [56.4%] and 1347 [43.6%] female; 2066 [66.9%] white). Of these patients, 2123 (68.7%) received anti-PD-1 agents treatment, including 439 eligible patients with melanoma (79.1%), 1417 eligible patients with NSCLC (65.6%), and 267 eligible patients with RCC (71.2%). Within 4 months after FDA approval, greater than 60% of eligible patients in each cohort had received anti-PD-1 agents treatment. Overall, similar proportions of older and younger patients received anti-PD-1 agents treatment during the first 9 months after FDA approval. However, there were significant differences in age between clinical trial participants and patients receiving anti-PD-1 agents treatment in clinical practice, with more patients being older than 65 years in clinical practice (range, 327 of 1365 [60.6%] to 46 of 72 [63.9%]) than in pivotal clinical trials (range, 38 of 120 [31.7%] to 223 of 544 [41.0%]; all P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: Anti-PD-1 agents rapidly reached patients in clinical practice, and patients treated in clinical practice differed significantly from patients treated in pivotal clinical trials. Future actions are needed to ensure that rapid adoption occurs on the basis of representative trial evidence.