A real-world study of treatment sequences and second-line clinical outcomes in patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer in US community practice.

PURPOSE: Standard-of-care for HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (HER2 + mBC) patients consists of trastuzumab ± pertuzumab with chemotherapy in first-line (1L), and ado-trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) or the more recently approved trastuzumab deruxtecan (T-DXd) in second-line (2L). Contemporary data on treatment sequencing and real-world effectiveness is limited. This study aims to report 2L treatments and outcomes among HER2 + mBC patients in the United States (US). METHODS: HER2 + mBC patients initiating 2L treatment (index date) between January 2014 and February 2021 were identified from the Syapse Learning Health Network (LHN) database. Summary statistics for patient characteristics, treatment received, reasons for 2L discontinuation and time to 2L-clinical outcomes are reported. RESULTS: Of the 312 patients initiating 2L treatment, had a median age of 59 years (interquartile range [IQR], 50-66) at the start of 2L. The majority were white (69%) and had de novo mBC (62%). Top three 2L regimens included T-DM1 ± endocrine therapy (29%), trastuzumab/pertuzumab/taxane (10%) and T-DM1/trastuzumab (8%). Around 88% discontinued 2L and 63% received subsequent treatment. Median time-to-next-treatment was 10.6 months (95% CI, 8.8-13.3) and real-world progression-free-survival was 7.9 months (95% CI, 7.0-9.9). Among 274 patients who discontinued 2L, 47% discontinued due to progression and 17% because of intolerance/toxicity, respectively. CONCLUSION: This real-world US study showed that approximately two-thirds of 2L patients received subsequent therapy and disease progression was the most common reason for 2L discontinuation highlighting the need for timely 2L treatment with the most efficacious drug to allow patients to achieve longer treatment duration and delayed progression.

Implementing Real-World RECIST-based Tumor Response Assessment in Patients With Metastatic Non-small Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: To accelerate drug approvals while maintaining scientific rigor in the evaluation of a therapeutic's efficacy and safety, the United States Food and Drug Administration now considers real-world data (RWD) to support New Drug Applications and expanded indications. Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) are the gold standard in clinical trials, but the derivation of RECIST-based treatment response from RWD is unproven. This study investigated the feasibility of implementing RECIST criteria in RWD by comparing lung cancer response assessments from RECIST-based measurement of lesions on archived radiologic films with results from medical oncologist and radiologist narratives recorded in electronic health records (EHR). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Response to index treatment via different assessment approaches was compared among 30 metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (mNSCLC) patients receiving systemic treatment (index) after progression on a platinum or anti-PD(L)-1-containing regimen. Specifically, responses based on assessments documented in the medical oncologists' narratives were compared to a radiologist's assessments of archived images using RECIST v1.1 criteria. Each patient's best overall response was characterized as complete or partial (CR/PR), stable disease (SD), progressive disease (PD), or not evaluable (NE). RESULTS: Similar distributions of best overall response and substantial concordance (77%) between medical oncologist-reported and radiologist re-assessed responses were observed. There were no instances of CR/PR to PD or PD to CR/PR discordance. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that accurate treatment responses, similar to RECIST, may be derived using RWD. Further validation and improvement of real-world response assessment are needed to develop a scalable real-world approach for response assessment.