An overview of real-world data sources for oncology and considerations for research.

Generating evidence on the use, effectiveness, and safety of new cancer therapies is a priority for researchers, health care providers, payers, and regulators given the rapid pace of change in cancer diagnosis and treatments. The use of real-world data (RWD) is integral to understanding the utilization patterns and outcomes of these new treatments among patients with cancer who are treated in clinical practice and community settings. An initial step in the use of RWD is careful study design to assess the suitability of an RWD source. This pivotal process can be guided by using a conceptual model that encourages predesign conceptualization. The primary types of RWD included are electronic health records, administrative claims data, cancer registries, and specialty data providers and networks. Careful consideration of each data type is necessary because they are collected for a specific purpose, capturing a set of data elements within a certain population for that purpose, and they vary by population coverage and longitudinality. In this review, the authors provide a high-level assessment of the strengths and limitations of each data category to inform data source selection appropriate to the study question. Overall, the development and accessibility of RWD sources for cancer research are rapidly increasing, and the use of these data requires careful consideration of composition and utility to assess important questions in understanding the use and effectiveness of new therapies.

Trends in chemotherapy use for early-stage breast cancer from 2006 to 2019.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about how use of chemotherapy has evolved in breast cancer patients. We therefore describe chemotherapy patterns for women with stage I-IIIA breast cancer in the Optimal Breast Cancer Chemotherapy Dosing (OBCD) Study using data from KPNC (Kaiser Permanente Northern California) and KPWA (Kaiser Permanente Washington). FINDINGS: Among 33,670 women, aged 18 + y, diagnosed with primary stage I-IIIA breast cancer at KPNC and KPWA from 2006 to 2019, we explored patterns of intravenous chemotherapy use, defined here as receipt of intravenous cytotoxic drugs and/or anti-HER2 therapies. We evaluated trends in chemotherapy receipt, duration over which chemotherapy was received, and number of associated infusion visits. In secondary analyses, we stratified by receipt of anti-HER2 therapies (trastuzumab and/or pertuzumab), given their longer duration. 38.9% received chemotherapy intravenously, declining from 40.2% in 2006 to 35.6% in 2019 (p-trend < 0.001). Among 13,089 women receiving chemotherapy, neoadjuvant treatment increased (4.1-14.7%; p-trend < 0.001), as did receipt of anti-HER2 therapies (20.8-30.9%) (p-trend < 0.001). The average treatment duration increased (5.3 to 6.0 months; p-trend < 0.001), as did the number of infusion visits (10.8 to 12.5; p-trend < 0.001). For those receiving anti-HER2 therapies, treatment duration and average number of visits decreased; among those not receiving anti-HER2 therapies, number of visits increased, with no change in duration. CONCLUSIONS: While the prevalence of chemotherapy receipt has decreased over time, the use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy has increased, as has use of anti-HER2 therapies; duration and number of administration visits have also increased. Understanding these trends is useful to inform clinical and administrative planning.

Patient characteristics associated with delayed time to adjuvant chemotherapy among women treated for stage I-IIIA breast cancer.

For patients with breast cancer, delays in chemotherapy initiation have been adversely associated with recurrence and survival. We evaluated patient-level factors associated with delayed chemotherapy initiation, from both diagnosis and surgery, in a community-based cohort of women with early-stage breast cancer. For the Optimal Breast Cancer Chemotherapy Dosing study, we identified a cohort of 34,109 women diagnosed with stage I-IIIA breast cancer at two U.S. integrated healthcare delivery systems between 2004 and 2019. We used logistic regression to calculate odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) to identify patient factors associated with delays in chemotherapy initiation after diagnosis (≥90 days) and surgery (≥60 days). Among 10,968 women receiving adjuvant chemotherapy, 21.1% experienced delays in chemotherapy initiation after diagnosis and 21.3% after surgery. Older age, non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic race and ethnicity, and ER+ and/or PR+ disease were associated with increased likelihood of delays to chemotherapy initiation after diagnosis and surgery. People diagnosed in 2012-2019 (vs. 2005-2011), with a higher grade and larger tumor size were less likely to experience delays. Other factors were associated with a higher likelihood of delays specifically from diagnosis (earlier stage, mastectomy vs. breast-conserving surgery), or surgery (higher comorbidity, increased nodal number). Women diagnosed with breast cancer who were at highest risk of progression and recurrence were less likely to experience delays in chemotherapy initiation after diagnosis and surgery. Understanding reasons for chemotherapy delays beyond patient factors may be potentially important to reduce risk of breast cancer recurrence and progression.

Assessment of breast cancer chemotherapy dose reduction in an integrated healthcare delivery system.

PURPOSE: Most cytotoxic drugs are dosed using body surface area (BSA), yet not all cancer patients receive the full BSA-determined dose. Prior work suggests that breast cancer patients who are obese are more likely to experience dose reduction than normal weight patients. However, the factors driving dose reduction remain unclear. METHODS: In 452 women diagnosed with stage I-IIIA primary breast cancer at Kaiser Permanente Northern California, we evaluated the association between obesity and dose reduction, and further explored other factors in relation to dose reduction, including various sociodemographic characteristics, tumor characteristics, and comorbidities. Study participants were a part of the Pathways Study, diagnosed between 2006 and 2013 and treated with cyclophosphamide + doxorubicin, followed by paclitaxel (ACT). Dose reduction was assessed using first cycle dose proportion (FCDP) and average relative dose intensity (ARDI), a metric of dose intensity over the course of chemotherapy. RESULTS: Overall, 8% of participants received a FCDP < 90% and 21.2% had an ARDI < 90%, with dose reduction increasing with body mass index. In adjusted logistic regression models, obese women had 4.1-fold higher odds of receiving an ARDI < 90% than normal weight women (95% CI: 1.9-8.9; p-trend = 0.0006). Increasing age was positively associated with an ADRI < 90%, as was the presence of comorbidity. Dose reduction was less common in later calendar years. CONCLUSION: Results offer insight on factors associated with chemotherapy dosing for a common breast cancer regimen. Larger studies are required to evaluate relevance to other regimens, and further work will be needed to determine whether dose reductions impact outcomes in obese women.

The landscape of use of NCCN-guideline chemotherapy regimens in stage I-IIIA breast cancer in an integrated healthcare delivery system.

PURPOSE: The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines recommend a variety of drug combinations with specific administration schedules for the treatment of early-stage breast cancer, allowing physicians to deliver treatments recognizing individual patient complexities, including comorbidities, and patient-physician preference. While use of guideline regimens has shifted over time, there is little data to describe changes in how treatment for early-stage breast cancer has evolved over time. METHODS: In a cohort of 34,109 women treated for stage I-IIIA breast cancer between 2006-2019 at Kaiser Permanente Northern California and Kaiser Permanente Washington, we present the changes in chemotherapy regimens over time, and explore use of NCCN-guideline regimens (GR), guideline regimens used when said regimens were not included in guidelines, referred to as time-discordant regimens (TDR), and non-guideline regimens (NGR). Results are presented by drug combination and over time. RESULTS: Among 12,506 women receiving chemotherapy, 77.4% (n = 9681) received GRs, 9.1% (n = 1140) received TDRs, and 13.5% (n = 1685) received NGRs. In 2006, AC-T (cyclophosphamide-doxorubicin, paclitaxel) was the most common regimen, with TC (cyclophosphamide-docetaxel) becoming the most prevalent by 2019. NGRs were more common in cyclophosphamide-methotrexate-5-fluorouracil (CMF); cyclophosphamide-doxorubicin-paclitaxel-trastuzumab (ACTH); and paclitaxel-trastuzumab (TH). The use of GR has increased over time (p-trend < 0.001), while use of NGR (both in terms of administration schedule and drug combination) and TDR have decreased, although patterns vary by drug combination. CONCLUSION: Chemotherapy delivery has changed markedly over time, with a move toward more use of GR. These data are important for understanding the landscape of chemotherapy delivery in community healthcare settings.

Use of quantitative bias analysis to evaluate single-arm trials with real-world data external controls.

PURPOSE: Use of real-world data (RWD) for external controls added to single-arm trials (SAT) is increasingly prevalent in regulatory submissions. Due to inherent differences in the data-generating mechanisms, biases can arise. This paper aims to illustrate how to use quantitative bias analysis (QBA). METHODS: Advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) serves as an example, where many small subsets of patients with molecular tumor subtypes exist. First, some sources of bias that may occur in oncology when comparing RWD to SAT are described. Second, using a hypothetical immunotherapy agent, a dataset is simulated based on expert input for survival analysis of advanced NSCLC. Finally, we illustrate the impact of three biases: missing confounder, misclassification of exposure, and outcome evaluation. RESULTS: For each simulated scenario, bias was induced by removing or adding data; hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated applying conventional analyses. Estimating the bias-adjusted treatment effect and uncertainty required carefully selecting the bias model and bias factors. Although the magnitude of each biased and bias-adjusted HR appeared moderate in all three hypothetical scenarios, the direction of bias was variable. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that QBA can provide an intuitive framework for bias analysis, providing a key means of challenging assumptions about the evidence. However, the accuracy of bias analysis is itself dependent on correct specification of the bias model and bias factors. Ultimately, study design should reduce bias, but QBA allows us to evaluate the impact of unavoidable bias to assess the quality of the evidence.

Clinical impact of COVID-19 on patients with cancer (CCC19): a cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Data on patients with COVID-19 who have cancer are lacking. Here we characterise the outcomes of a cohort of patients with cancer and COVID-19 and identify potential prognostic factors for mortality and severe illness. METHODS: In this cohort study, we collected de-identified data on patients with active or previous malignancy, aged 18 years and older, with confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection from the USA, Canada, and Spain from the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) database for whom baseline data were added between March 17 and April 16, 2020. We collected data on baseline clinical conditions, medications, cancer diagnosis and treatment, and COVID-19 disease course. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality within 30 days of diagnosis of COVID-19. We assessed the association between the outcome and potential prognostic variables using logistic regression analyses, partially adjusted for age, sex, smoking status, and obesity. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04354701, and is ongoing. FINDINGS: Of 1035 records entered into the CCC19 database during the study period, 928 patients met inclusion criteria for our analysis. Median age was 66 years (IQR 57-76), 279 (30%) were aged 75 years or older, and 468 (50%) patients were male. The most prevalent malignancies were breast (191 [21%]) and prostate (152 [16%]). 366 (39%) patients were on active anticancer treatment, and 396 (43%) had active (measurable) cancer. At analysis (May 7, 2020), 121 (13%) patients had died. In logistic regression analysis, independent factors associated with increased 30-day mortality, after partial adjustment, were: increased age (per 10 years; partially adjusted odds ratio 1·84, 95% CI 1·53-2·21), male sex (1·63, 1·07-2·48), smoking status (former smoker vs never smoked: 1·60, 1·03-2·47), number of comorbidities (two vs none: 4·50, 1·33-15·28), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2 or higher (status of 2 vs 0 or 1: 3·89, 2·11-7·18), active cancer (progressing vs remission: 5·20, 2·77-9·77), and receipt of azithromycin plus hydroxychloroquine (vs treatment with neither: 2·93, 1·79-4·79; confounding by indication cannot be excluded). Compared with residence in the US-Northeast, residence in Canada (0·24, 0·07-0·84) or the US-Midwest (0·50, 0·28-0·90) were associated with decreased 30-day all-cause mortality. Race and ethnicity, obesity status, cancer type, type of anticancer therapy, and recent surgery were not associated with mortality. INTERPRETATION: Among patients with cancer and COVID-19, 30-day all-cause mortality was high and associated with general risk factors and risk factors unique to patients with cancer. Longer follow-up is needed to better understand the effect of COVID-19 on outcomes in patients with cancer, including the ability to continue specific cancer treatments. FUNDING: American Cancer Society, National Institutes of Health, and Hope Foundation for Cancer Research.

Linking electronic health data in pharmacoepidemiology: Appropriateness and feasibility.

PURPOSE: To provide guidance on data linkage appropriateness and feasibility to plan purposeful and sustainable new linkages that advance pharmacoepidemiology and healthcare research. Planning a new data linkage requires careful evaluation to weigh the resources required with the potential overall benefits. METHODS: In response to an International Society for Pharmacoepidemiology (ISPE) call for manuscripts, a working group comprised of members from academic, industry, and government determined priority content areas; appropriateness and feasibility of data linkage was selected. Within this topic, scientific and operational considerations were determined, reviewed, and formulated into key areas, and translated into 12 consensus recommendations. RESULTS: Guidance for feasibility assessment was categorized into five key areas: (1) research objectives and justification; (2) data quality and completeness; (3) the linkage process; (4) data ownership and governance; and (5) overall value added by linkage. Within these key areas, recommendations to consider prior to initiation were developed to evaluate suitability of the linkage to meet research objectives, assess source data completeness and population coverage, and ensure well-defined data governance standards and protections. When creating novel linked datasets, researchers must assess the feasibility of both scientific (data quality and linkage methods) and operational (access, data use and transfer, governance, and cost) aspects. CONCLUSIONS: The data linkage feasibility assessment considerations outlined can be used as a guide when designing sustainable linked data resources to generate actionable evidence in healthcare research. These recommendations were constructed for wide applicability and can be adapted depending on the geographic, structural, and data components of the linkage.

Long-Term Patterns of Oral Anticancer Agent Adoption, Duration, and Switching in Patients With CML.

BACKGROUND: Oral tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) have been the standard of care for chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) since 2001. However, few studies have evaluated changes in the treatment landscape of CML over time. This study assessed the long-term treatment patterns of oral anticancer therapies among patients with CML. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included patients newly diagnosed with CML between January 1, 2000, and December 31, 2016, from 10 integrated healthcare systems. The proportion of patients treated with 5 FDA-approved oral TKI agents-bosutinib, dasatinib, imatinib, nilotinib, and ponatinib-in the 12 months after diagnosis were measured, overall and by year, between 2000 and 2017. We assessed the use of each oral agent through the fourth-line setting. Multivariable logistic regression estimated the odds of receiving any oral agent, adjusting for sociodemographic and clinical characteristics. RESULTS: Among 853 patients with CML, 81% received an oral agent between 2000 and 2017. Use of non-oral therapies decreased from 100% in 2000 to 5% in 2005, coinciding with imatinib uptake from 65% in 2001 to 98% in 2005. Approximately 28% of patients switched to a second-line agent, 9% switched to a third-line agent, and 2% switched to a fourth-line agent. Adjusted analysis showed that age at diagnosis, year of diagnosis, and comorbidity burden were statistically significantly associated with odds of receiving an oral agent. CONCLUSIONS: A dramatic shift was seen in CML treatments away from traditional, nonoral chemotherapy toward use of novel oral TKIs between 2000 and 2017. As the costs of oral anticancer agents reach new highs, studies assessing the long-term health and financial outcomes among patients with CML are warranted.

Pediatric exclusivity: evolving legislation and novel complexities within pediatric therapeutic development.

OBJECTIVE: To review the successes and omissions of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) pediatric exclusivity incentive. DATA SOURCES: Pediatric drug development receives less attention and funding than drug development targeting adults resulting in fewer appropriately labeled pediatric drugs. Newly introduced legislation aims to correct this deficit using market exclusivity incentives. Under the Food and Drug Administration Modernization Act (FDAMA, 1997), the FDA established the exclusivity principle. This legislation was renewed and amended in 2007 under Food and Drug Administration Amendments Act (FDAAA) allowing drug companies to receive a 6-month patent extension for initiating clinical investigation in pediatric populations. Fostering improved knowledge in pediatric indications and dosing is the motivating force behind this program. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: We examined drugs granted exclusivity through FDA published database as well as relevant drug labeling and postmarket safety studies. Our examination shows that studies conducted in support of patent protection are often not designed to meet current pediatric needs. CONCLUSION: Amendments to FDAAA are needed to ensure that studies approved for exclusivity strive to meet the following requirements: relevant pediatric clinical indication ; disease addressed should represent a significant disease burden to the appropriate population; important age ranges should be covered; studies should not be allowed when a safety signal is identified prior to initiation of the study; and trials where endpoints are successfully achieved providing considerable contribution to pediatric dosing knowledge or result in labeling changes may gain an additional incentive.

Trends in new and persistent opioid use in older adults with and without cancer.

BACKGROUND: The impact of ongoing efforts to decrease opioid use on patients with cancer remains undefined. Our objective was to determine trends in new and additional opioid use in patients with and without cancer. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used data from Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program-Medicare for opioid-naive patients with solid tumor malignancies diagnosed from 2012 through 2017 and a random sample of patients without cancer. We identified 238 470 eligible patients with cancer and further focused on 4 clinical strata: patients without cancer, patients with metastatic cancer, patients with nonmetastatic cancer treated with surgery alone ("surgery alone"), and patients with nonmetastatic cancer treated with surgery plus chemotherapy or radiation therapy ("surgery+"). We identified new, early additional, and long-term additional opioid use and calculated the change in predicted probability of these outcomes from 2012 to 2017. RESULTS: New opioid use was higher in patients with cancer (46.4%) than in those without (6.9%) (P < .001). From 2012 to 2017, the predicted probability of new opioid use was more stable in the cancer strata (relative declines: 0.1% surgery alone; 2.4% surgery+; 8.8% metastatic cancer), than in the noncancer stratum (20.0%) (P < .001 for each cancer to noncancer comparison). Early additional use declined among surgery patients (‒14.9% and ‒17.5% for surgery alone and surgery+, respectively) but was stable among patients with metastatic disease (‒2.8%, P = .50). CONCLUSIONS: Opioid prescribing declined over time at a slower rate in patients with cancer than in patients without cancer. Our study suggests important but tempered effects of the changing opioid climate on patients with cancer.

FDA Approval Summary: Alpelisib for PIK3CA-Related Overgrowth Spectrum.

On April 5, 2022, FDA granted accelerated approval to alpelisib for the treatment of adult and pediatric patients 2 years of age and older with severe manifestations of PIK3CA-related overgrowth spectrum (PROS) who require systemic therapy. Efficacy was evaluated using real-world data (RWD) from EPIK-P1 (NCT04285723), a single-arm clinical study in patients 2 years of age and older with severe or life-threatening PROS who received alpelisib as part of an expanded access program (EAP) for compassionate use. The primary endpoint was confirmed radiologic response rate at week 24 as determined by blinded independent central review (BICR), using volumetric-based criteria given the atypical growth pattern and irregular shape of PROS lesions. Radiologic response was defined as a ≥20% reduction from baseline in the sum of measurable target lesion volume in up to three lesions. Of the 37 patients in the efficacy population, 27% [95% confidence interval (CI), 14-44] had a radiologic response at week 24. Duration of response (DOR) was an additional efficacy outcome measure, and among responders, 60% had a response lasting ≥12 months. Furthermore, supportive clinical documentation suggested early signals of clinical benefit (i.e., improvement in PROS-related signs and symptoms). The most common (≥10%) adverse reactions were diarrhea, stomatitis, and hyperglycemia.

Evaluation of Real-World Tumor Response Derived From Electronic Health Record Data Sources: A Feasibility Analysis in Patients With Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Treated With Chemotherapy.

PURPOSE: Real-world data (RWD) holds promise for ascribing a real-world (rw) outcome to a drug intervention; however, ascertaining rw-response to treatment from RWD can be challenging. Friends of Cancer Research formed a collaboration to assess available data attributes related to rw-response across RWD sources to inform methods for capturing, defining, and evaluating rw-response. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective noninterventional (observational) study included seven electronic health record data companies (data providers) providing summary-level deidentified data from 200 patients diagnosed with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (mNSCLC) and treated with first-line platinum doublet chemotherapy following a common protocol. Data providers reviewed the availability and frequency of data components to assess rw-response (ie, images, radiology imaging reports, and clinician response assessments). A common protocol was used to assess and report rw-response end points, including rw-response rate (rwRR), rw-duration of response (rwDOR), and the association of rw-response with rw-overall survival (rwOS), rw-time to treatment discontinuation (rwTTD), and rw-time to next treatment (rwTTNT). RESULTS: The availability and timing of clinician assessments was relatively consistent across data sets in contrast to images and image reports. Real-world response was analyzed using clinician response assessments (median proportion of patients evaluable, 77.5%), which had the highest consistency in the timing of assessments. Relative consistency was observed across data sets for rwRR (median 46.5%), as well as the median and directionality of rwOS, rwTTD, and rwTTNT. There was variability in rwDOR across data sets. CONCLUSION: This collaborative effort demonstrated the feasibility of aligning disparate data sources to evaluate rw-response end points using clinician-documented responses in patients with mNSCLC. Heterogeneity exists in the availability of data components to assess response and related rw-end points, and further work is needed to inform drug effectiveness evaluation within RWD sources.

Patient characteristics associated with intended non-guideline chemotherapy in women with stage I-IIIA breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines informing chemotherapy regimen selection are based on clinical trials with participants who do not necessarily represent general populations with breast cancer. Understanding who receives non-guideline regimens is important to understanding real-world chemotherapy administration and how it relates to patient outcomes. METHODS: Using data from the Optimal Breast Cancer Chemotherapy Dosing (OBCD) cohort study, based at Kaiser Permanente Northern California (2006-2019) and Kaiser Permanente Washington (2004-2015), we use logistic regression to examine the associations between patient characteristics and receipt of non-NCCN-guideline chemotherapy among 11,293 women with primary stage I-IIIA breast cancer receiving chemotherapy. RESULTS: Use of non-guideline regimens was strongly associated with several factors, including older age (OR≥80 vs 18-39: 5.25, 95%CI: 3.06-9.00)(p-trend=0.002) and human epidermal growth factor-2 status (ORHER2+ vs HER2-: 3.44; 95%CI: 3.06-3.87) and was less likely in women with larger tumor size (OR>5cm vs 0.1-≤0.5cm: 0.56; 95%CI: 0.36-0.87)(p-trend=0.01) and diagnosed in later years (OR2012-2019 vs 2005-2011: 0.80; 95%CI: 0.71-0.90). Factors associated varied by type of non-guideline regimen. For example, women with comorbidity and older age were more likely to receive non-guideline drug combinations in particular, while women with larger tumor size were less likely to receive non-guideline administration schedules. CONCLUSIONS: Non-guideline chemotherapy regimens are more likely in certain patient populations. IMPACT: These associations highlight that vulnerable patient populations may be less likely to receive guideline care and thus real-world studies are essential to understanding how the use of non-guideline regimens impacts patient outcomes in these groups.

Methodology for Using Real-World Data From Electronic Health Records to Assess Chemotherapy Administration in Women With Breast Cancer.

PURPOSE: Identification of patients' intended chemotherapy regimens is critical to most research questions conducted in the real-world setting of cancer care. Yet, these data are not routinely available in electronic health records (EHRs) at the specificity required to address these questions. We developed a methodology to identify patients' intended regimens from EHR data in the Optimal Breast Cancer Chemotherapy Dosing (OBCD) study. METHODS: In women older than 18 years, diagnosed with primary stage I-IIIA breast cancer at Kaiser Permanente Northern California (2006-2019), we categorized participants into 24 drug combinations described in National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines for breast cancer treatment. Participants were categorized into 50 guideline chemotherapy administration schedules within these combinations using an iterative algorithm process, followed by chart abstraction where necessary. We also identified patients intended to receive nonguideline administration schedules within guideline drug combinations and nonguideline drug combinations. This process was adapted at Kaiser Permanente Washington using abstracted data (2004-2015). RESULTS: In the OBCD cohort, 13,231 women received adjuvant or neoadjuvant chemotherapy, of whom 10,213 (77%) had their intended regimen identified via the algorithm, 2,416 (18%) had their intended regimen identified via abstraction, and 602 (4.5%) could not be identified. Across guideline drug combinations, 111 nonguideline dosing schedules were used, alongside 61 nonguideline drug combinations. A number of factors were associated with requiring abstraction for regimen determination, including: decreasing neighborhood household income, earlier diagnosis year, later stage, nodal status, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)+ status. CONCLUSION: We describe the challenges and approaches to operationalize complex, real-world data to identify intended chemotherapy regimens in large, observational studies. This methodology can improve efficiency of use of large-scale clinical data in real-world populations, helping answer critical questions to improve care delivery and patient outcomes.

A Descriptive Cohort Study of Drug Utilization Patterns Among Patients Hospitalized With Coronavirus Disease 2019 in the United States, January 2021-February 2022.

Background: There is a dearth of drug utilization studies for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) treatments in 2021 and beyond after the introduction of vaccines and updated guidelines; such studies are needed to contextualize ongoing COVID-19 treatment effectiveness studies during these time periods. This study describes utilization patterns for corticosteroids, interleukin-6 (IL-6) inhibitors, Janus kinase inhibitors, and remdesivir among hospitalized adults with COVID-19, over the entire hospitalization, and within hospitalization periods categorized by respiratory support requirements. Methods: This descriptive cohort study included United States adults hospitalized with COVID-19 admitted from 1 January 2021 through 1 February 2022; data included HealthVerity claims and hospital chargemaster. The number and distribution of patients were reported for the first 3 drug regimen lines initiated. Results: The cohort included 51 066 patients; the most common initial drug regimens were corticosteroids (23.4%), corticosteroids plus remdesivir (25.1%), and remdesivir (4.4%). IL-6 inhibitors and Janus kinase inhibitors were included in later drug regimens and were more commonly administered with both corticosteroids and remdesivir than with corticosteroids alone. IL-6 inhibitors were more commonly administered than Janus kinase inhibitors when patients received high-flow oxygen or ventilation. Conclusions: These findings provide important context for comparative studies of COVID-19 treatments with study periods extending into 2021 and later. While prescribing generally aligned with National Institutes of Health COVID-19 treatment guidelines during this period, these findings suggest that prescribing preference, potential confounding by indication, and confounding by prior/concomitant use of other therapeutics should be considered in the design and interpretation of comparative studies.

FDA Approval Summary: Ribociclib Indicated for Male Patients with Hormone Receptor-Positive, HER2-Negative Advanced or Metastatic Breast Cancer.

On December 10, 2021, the FDA expanded the indications for ribociclib to include male patients for the treatment of hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative advanced or metastatic breast cancer. Ribociclib is now indicated in combination with an aromatase inhibitor (AI) as initial endocrine-based therapy in adult patients, or with fulvestrant as initial endocrine-based therapy or following disease progression on endocrine therapy (ET), in postmenopausal women or in men. The efficacy of ribociclib + AI for male patients was primarily based on previous favorable benefit-risk assessments of ribociclib from MONALEESA-2 and MONALEESA-7 trials, and supported by COMPLEEMENT-1, an open-label, single-arm, multicenter clinical trial, in which 39 male patients (n = 3,246 total patients) received ribociclib + letrozole + goserelin/leuprolide. The overall response rate (ORR) based on confirmed responses in male patients with measurable disease at baseline was 46.9% [95% confidence interval (CI), 29.1-65.3], consistent with an ORR of 43.6% (95% CI, 41.5-45.8) in the overall population. Overall, adverse reactions occurring in male patients were similar to those occurring in female patients treated with ribociclib + ET. The efficacy of ribociclib + fulvestrant for male patients was primarily based on the previous findings of a favorable benefit-risk assessment from the MONALEESA-3 trial, supported by FDA review of clinical data of a limited number of male patients treated in clinical practice receiving ribociclib + fulvestrant. The known mechanism of action, biologic rationale, and clinical information available adequately demonstrate that the efficacy and safety of ribociclib + AI/fulvestrant are similar in male and female patients. This article summarizes the FDA's decision-making and data supporting the approval of ribociclib in male patients with breast cancer, and discusses regulatory insights.