Bemarituzumab plus mFOLFOX6 as first-line treatment in East Asian patients with FGFR2b-overexpressing locally advanced or metastatic gastric/gastroesophageal junction cancer: subgroup of FIGHT final analysis.

BACKGROUND: In the FIGHT study (NCT03694522) bemarituzumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody selective for fibroblast growth factor receptor 2b (FGFR2b), plus mFOLFOX6 showed clinically meaningful efficacy in patients with FGFR2b-positive (2+/3+ membranous staining by immunohistochemistry) locally advanced unresectable/metastatic gastric/gastroesophageal cancer (G/GEJC). A meaningful proportion of patients in FIGHT were enrolled in East Asia, reflecting global epidemiology of G/GEJC. METHODS: This subgroup analysis of the global, phase 2, double-blind FIGHT study included all patients enrolled in East Asian sites. Patients were randomized 1:1 to bemarituzumab-mFOLFOX6 (15 mg/kg and one 7.5 mg/kg dose on cycle 1, day 8) or matching placebo-mFOLFOX6. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), objective response rate, and safety. Efficacy was evaluated after a minimum follow-up of 24 months. RESULTS: The East Asian subgroup comprised 89 patients (57% of overall study population); 45 were randomized to bemarituzumab-mFOLFOX6 and 44 to placebo-mFOLFOX6. Median PFS (95% confidence interval [CI]) was 12.9 months (8.8-17.9) with bemarituzumab-mFOLFOX6 and 8.2 months (5.6-10.3) with placebo-mFOLFOX6 (HR 0.50, 95% CI 0.29-0.87); median OS (95% CI) was 24.7 months (13.8-33.1) vs 12.9 months (9.3-21.4), respectively (HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.32-0.96). Treatment benefit was more pronounced in patients with FGFR2b-positive G/GEJC in ≥ 10% of tumor cells. No new safety signals were reported. CONCLUSION: In East Asian patients with FGFR2b-positive advanced/metastatic G/GEJC enrolled in the global FIGHT study, bemarituzumab-mFOLFOX6 showed clinically meaningful outcomes over placebo-mFOLFOX6.

Carfilzomib, dexamethasone, and daratumumab versus carfilzomib and dexamethasone for patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (CANDOR): updated outcomes from a randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: Despite recent advances in therapeutic options, there remains an unmet need for treating patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma, especially in those previously exposed or refractory to lenalidomide. This updated efficacy and safety analysis from the phase 3 CANDOR study compared carfilzomib, daratumumab, and dexamethasone (KdD) with carfilzomib and dexamethasone (Kd) in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. METHODS: In this updated analysis of the randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 3 CANDOR study, patients (aged ≥18 years) with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma, at least a partial response to between one and three previous therapies, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2, were recruited from 102 medical centres globally and randomly assigned (2:1) by interactive voice or web response software to receive KdD or Kd. Participants were stratified by disease stage, previous proteasome inhibitor or anti-CD38 antibody exposure, and number of previous therapies. All patients received intravenous infusions of carfilzomib twice per week at 56 mg/m2 (20 mg/m2 on days 1 and 2 during cycle 1) on days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, and 16 of each 28-day cycle. Daratumumab (8 mg/kg) was administered intravenously on days 1 and 2 of cycle 1 and at 16 mg/kg weekly for the remaining doses of the first two cycles, then every 2 weeks for four cycles (cycles 3-6), and every 4 weeks thereafter. Patients received 40 mg dexamethasone weekly (20 mg for patients >75 years old). This analysis was a preplanned interim analysis for overall survival; however, at the time of data cutoff, overall survival data were not mature. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival. Here, we provide updated progression-free survival data, assessed centrally by Onyx Response Computer Algorithm in the intention-to-treat population, with 11 months additional follow-up. Adverse events were assessed in the safety population, which included all participants who received at least one dose of trial treatment. CANDOR is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03158688, and is active but not recruiting. FINDINGS: Between June 13, 2017, and June 25, 2018, 466 patients were enrolled, of whom 312 received KdD and 154 received Kd. At data cutoff (June 15, 2020), median follow-up was 27·8 months (IQR 25·6-29·5) for KdD and 27·0 months (13·2-28·6) for Kd. Median progression-free survival was 28·6 months (95% CI 22·7-not estimable [NE]) in the KdD group and 15·2 months (11·1-19·9) in the Kd group (hazard ratio 0·59 [95% CI 0·45-0·78], log-rank p<0·0001). Treatment-emergent adverse events in the safety population were consistent with the primary analysis. Grade 3 or worse treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 268 (87%) patients in the KdD group and 116 (76%) in the Kd group; most commonly thrombocytopenia (76 [25%] vs 25 [16%], respectively), hypertension (65 [21%] vs 23 [15%]), pneumonia (54 [18%] vs 14 [9%]), and anaemia (53 [17%] vs 23 [15%]). Serious adverse events occurred in 194 (63%) patients with KdD and 76 (50%) with Kd. Adverse events leading to death occurred in 27 (9%) patients in the KdD group and seven (5%) in the Kd group; most commonly septic shock (five [2%] vs one (1%]) and pneumonia (four [1%] vs none). No new treatment-related deaths have occurred since the primary analysis. INTERPRETATION: A clear, maintained progression-free survival benefit of KdD over Kd with longer follow-up was confirmed, making KdD an emerging standard-of-care for patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. FUNDING: Amgen and Janssen.

Risk of cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events and mortality in patients with migraine receiving prophylactic treatments: An observational cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: This study quantified risks of cardiovascular, cerebrovascular, and mortality events among patients with migraine receiving prophylaxis. METHODS: Patients with migraine aged 18-65 years were identified from 2010 through 2015 within a United States administrative claims database. Topiramate initiators during follow-up were propensity score-matched separately to anticonvulsant, cardiovascular treatment, antidepressant, and other prophylactic treatment initiators. Incident outcomes were identified, and hazard ratios were calculated comparing outcome occurrence among topiramate initiators relative to each comparator. A case-control analysis was nested within the full migraine cohort, and odds ratios quantified the association between outcomes and use or non-use of individual prophylactic treatments (anticonvulsants, serotonin norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, beta blockers, antihypertensives, tricyclic antidepressants, and other prophylactic treatments). RESULTS: The cohort included 119,243 patients with migraine. The matched topiramate initiators had a lower mortality risk versus antidepressant (hazard ratio: 0.44, 95% CI: 0.24, 0.83) and anticonvulsant initiators (hazard ratio: 0.45, 95% CI: 0.25, 0.84). In the case-control analysis, increased risks of several outcomes were observed with all prophylactic treatments relative to non-use of that treatment (odds ratios range from 1.54 to 7.90, and 95% CIs exclude 1.0) except for topiramate and calcium channel blockers. CONCLUSIONS: Although increased risks for several outcomes were observed with certain prophylactic treatments, the treatments other than topiramate likely represent markers for outcome risk factors that developed or progressed after cohort entry, rather than being a direct effect of the treatments. Factors including migraine severity, frequency, and other treatment indications should be considered in future migraine prophylactic treatment safety assessments.

Use of existing electronic health care databases to evaluate medication safety in pregnancy: Triptan exposure in pregnancy as a case study.

PURPOSE: The recent expansion of electronic health and medical record systems may present an opportunity to generate robust post-approval safety data and obviate the limitations of prospective pregnancy exposure registries. We examined and compared, over the same time frame, the outcomes of triptan exposure in pregnancy using (1) a retrospective claims database and (2) a previously completed pregnancy registry. METHODS: Using the Marketscan database, the risk of major birth defects was ascertained in live-born infants whose birth mothers were exposed to sumatriptan, naratriptan, or sumatriptan/naproxen during pregnancy. The frequencies of outcomes observed were compared with the findings of the 16-year sumatriptan, naratripan, and sumatriptan/naproxen prospective pregnancy registry. RESULTS: About 5120 pregnancies were identified in the retrospective claims cohort in contrast to 617 included in the prospective registry during the same time frame. The proportion of major birth defects among first-semester sumatriptan exposures was 4.0%, which is exactly the same as the proportion of major birth defects reported for first-semester sumatriptan exposures in the registry. There were very few non-livebirth outcomes in both the claims analyses and registry. CONCLUSIONS: These results confirm broad agreement between the database analysis and the registry regarding the safety of triptans during pregnancy. Of note, the number of triptan-exposed pregnancies identified in this large US database was about 7-fold that included in the prospective registry over the same time frame. The findings of this study support an approach of using existing health care database (s) in the post-approval assessment of medication exposure in pregnancy.

Serum Potassium Levels and Mortality in Hemodialysis Patients: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Hyperkalemia is common in patients receiving maintenance hemodialysis. However, few studies have examined the association between serum potassium level and mortality. METHODS: This study used annual cohorts of hemodialysis patients during 2007-2010. To determine hyperkalemia prevalence, monthly hyperkalemia was defined as serum potassium level ≥5.5 mEq/l; prevalence was calculated as a ratio of hyperkalemia episodes to follow-up time, reported separately by long and short interdialytic interval. To determine the impact of hyperkalemia on mortality, patients in the 2010 cohort were followed from first potassium measurement until death or a censoring event; hyperkalemia was defined, sequentially, by potassium levels 5.5-6.0 mEq/l at 0.1 mEq/l intervals. Time-dependent Cox proportional hazards modeling was used to estimate the association between hyperkalemia and mortality. RESULTS: The 4 annual cohorts ranged from 28,774 to 36,888 patients. Mean age was approximately 63 years, about 56% were men, 51% were white and 44% had end-stage renal disease caused by diabetes. Hyperkalemia prevalence was consistently estimated at 16.3-16.8 events per 100 patient-months. Prevalence on the day after the long interdialytic interval was 2.0-2.4 times as high as on the day after the short interval. Hyperkalemia, when defined as serum potassium ≥5.7 mEq/l, was associated with all-cause mortality (adjusted hazards ratio (AHR) 1.13, 95% CI 1.01-1.28, p = 0.037, vs. <5.7 mEq/l) after adjustment. AHRs increased progressively as the hyperkalemia threshold increased, reaching 1.37 (95% CI 1.16-1.62, p < 0.0001) for ≥6.0 mEq/l. CONCLUSIONS: The long interdialytic interval was associated with increased likelihood of hyperkalemia. Hyperkalemia was associated with all-cause mortality beginning at serum potassium ≥5.7 mEq/l; mortality risk estimates increased ordinally through ≥6.0 mEq/l, suggesting a threshold at which serum potassium becomes substantially more dangerous.

Facility-level CKD-MBD composite score and risk of adverse clinical outcomes among patients on hemodialysis.

BACKGROUND: Patients receiving hemodialysis with values outside of target levels for parathyroid hormone (PTH: 150-600 pg/mL), calcium (Ca: 8.4-10.2 mg/dL), and phosphate (P: 3.5-5.5 mg/dL) are at elevated morbidity and mortality risk. We examined whether patients receiving care in dialysis facilities where greater proportions of patients have at least two values out of target have a higher risk of adverse clinical outcomes. METHODS: The study cohort consisted of 39,085 prevalent hemodialysis patients in 1298 DaVita dialysis facilities as of September 1, 2009, followed from January 1, 2010, until an outcome, a censoring event, or December 31, 2010. We determined the quintile of the distribution across facilities of the proportion of patients with at least two of three parameters out of, or above, target over a 4-month baseline period. The primary composite outcome was cardiovascular hospitalization or death. Secondary outcomes included death, cardiovascular hospitalization, and parathyroidectomy. Poisson regression models were used to estimate the association of facility quintile with outcomes. RESULTS: Facility quintile was associated with a 7 % increased risk of cardiovascular hospitalization or death (quintile 5 versus 1, RR 1.07, 95 % CI 1.01-1.13) using the out-of-target measure of exposure and a 12 % increased risk (RR 1.12, 95 % CI 1.06-1.19) using the above-target measure. No association was seen for death using either measure. Patients in facility quintiles 3-5 (versus 1) were at increased parathyroidectomy risk (RR ranged from 2.05, 95 % CI 1.10-3.82, for quintile 3 to 2.73, 95 % CI 1.50-4.98, for quintile 5). CONCLUSIONS: Facility level analysis of a large prevalent sample of US patients on hemodialysis demonstrates that patients in facilities with the least control of PTH, Ca, and P had the greatest risk of parathyroidectomy or the combination of cardiovascular hospitalization or death.

Parathyroid hormone change after cinacalcet initiation and one-year clinical outcome risk: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Cinacalcet reduces parathyroid hormone (PTH) levels in patients receiving hemodialysis, but no non-experimental studies have evaluated the association between changes in PTH levels following cinacalcet initiation and clinical outcomes. We assessed whether short-term change in PTH levels after first cinacalcet prescription could serve as a surrogate marker for improvements in longer-term clinical outcomes. METHODS: United States Renal Data System data were linked with data from a large dialysis organization. We created a point prevalent cohort of adult hemodialysis patients with Medicare as primary payer who initiated cinacalcet November 1, 2004-February 1, 2007, and were on cinacalcet for ≥ 40 days. We grouped patients into quartiles of PTH change after first cinacalcet prescription. We used Cox proportional hazard modeling to evaluate associations between short-term PTH change and time to first composite event (hospitalization for cardiovascular events or mortality) within 1 year. Overall models and models stratified by baseline PTH levels were adjusted for several patient-related factors. RESULTS: For 2485 of 3467 included patients (72%), PTH levels decreased after first cinacalcet prescription; for 982 (28%), levels increased or were unchanged. Several characteristics differed between PTH change groups, including age and mineral-and-bone-disorder laboratory values. In adjusted models, we did not identify an association between greater short-term PTH reduction and lower composite event rates within 1 year, overall or in models stratified by baseline PTH levels. CONCLUSIONS: Short-term change in PTH levels after first cinacalcet prescription does not appear to be a useful surrogate for longer-term improvements in cardiovascular or survival risk.

Comparative effectiveness of calcium acetate and sevelamer on clinical outcomes in elderly hemodialysis patients enrolled in Medicare part D.

BACKGROUND: Phosphate binders are an important therapeutic option for managing hyperphosphatemia in hemodialysis patients. Whether sevelamer confers a survival advantage over calcium acetate is unclear. STUDY DESIGN: Observational cohort study using US Renal Data System (USRDS) data linked to Medicare Part D prescription drug data. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: Medicare-enrolled elderly incident hemodialysis patients initiating calcium acetate or sevelamer therapy between July 1, 2006, and March 31, 2011. PREDICTOR: Prescription for sevelamer (hydrochloride or carbonate) or calcium acetate. OUTCOMES & MEASUREMENTS: All-cause and cardiovascular-related mortality, hospital admissions and hospital days assessed from Medicare Parts A, B, and D claims and other USRDS data. RESULTS: The sevelamer and calcium-acetate groups included 16,916 and 18,335 patients, respectively. After multivariable adjustment, all-cause (21.9 vs 21.8 deaths/100 patient-years; adjusted HR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.94-1.03) and cardiovascular (8.7 vs 8.6 deaths/100 patient-years; HR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.93-1.04) mortality did not differ significantly between the sevelamer and calcium-acetate (referent) groups. Mortality results in propensity score-matched cohorts showed significantly lower risk of death in sevelamer- than in calcium-acetate-treated patients (HR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.91-0.98). Mortality results from additional analyses including only patients with low-income subsidy status were consistent with results from analyses including patients with and without low-income subsidy status. There were no significant differences between the sevelamer and calcium-acetate groups for all-cause and cardiovascular-related first hospitalization, multiple hospitalizations, and hospital days. LIMITATIONS: Results may not be applicable to younger patients; information about laboratory data and over-the-counter calcium-containing binders was lacking. CONCLUSIONS: Relative to treatment with calcium acetate, treatment with sevelamer was associated with similar or slightly lower risk of death and similar risk of hospitalization in elderly incident hemodialysis patients.

Utilization and costs of medications associated with CKD mineral and bone disorder in dialysis patients enrolled in Medicare Part D.

BACKGROUND: Information is limited regarding utilization patterns and costs for chronic kidney disease-mineral and bone disorder (CKD-MBD) medications in Medicare Part D-enrolled dialysis patients. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: Annual cohorts of dialysis patients, 2007-2010. PREDICTORS: Cohort year, low-income subsidy status, and dialysis provider. OUTCOMES: Utilization and costs of prescription phosphate binders, oral and intravenous vitamin D analogues, and cinacalcet. MEASUREMENTS: Using logistic regression, we calculated adjusted odds of medication use for low-income subsidy versus non-low-income subsidy patients and for patients from various dialysis organizations, and we report per-member-per-month and average out-of-pocket costs. RESULTS: Phosphate binders (∼83%) and intravenous vitamin D (77.5%-79.3%) were the most commonly used CKD-MBD medications in 2007 through 2010. The adjusted odds of prescription phosphate-binder, intravenous vitamin D, and cinacalcet use were significantly higher for low-income subsidy than for non-low-income subsidy patients. Total Part D versus CKD-MBD Part D medication costs increased 22% versus 36% from 2007 to 2010. For Part D-enrolled dialysis patients, CKD-MBD medications represented ∼50% of overall net Part D costs in 2010. LIMITATIONS: Inability to describe utilization and costs of calcium carbonate, an over-the-counter agent not covered under Medicare Part D; inability to reliably identify prescriptions filled through a non-Part D reimbursement or payment mechanism; findings may not apply to dialysis patients without Medicare Part D benefits or with Medicare Advantage plans, or to pediatric dialysis patients; could identify only prescription drugs dispensed in the outpatient setting; inability to adjust for MBD laboratory values. CONCLUSIONS: Part D net costs for CKD-MBD medications increased at a faster rate than costs for all Part D medications in dialysis patients despite relatively stable use within medication classes. In a bundled environment, there may be incentives to shift to generic phosphate binders and reduce cinacalcet use.

Carfilzomib 56 mg/m2 twice-weekly in combination with dexamethasone and daratumumab (KdD) versus daratumumab in combination with bortezomib and dexamethasone (DVd): a matching-adjusted indirect treatment comparison.

Given the increasing use of frontline lenalidomide-based therapies in multiple myeloma (MM), there is an emerging need for lenalidomide-sparing regimens at relapse. Carfilzomib plus dexamethasone and daratumumab (KdD) and daratumumab plus bortezomib and dexamethasone (DVd) are lenalidomide-sparing triplet regimens that are approved for relapsed and/or refractory MM (R/RMM). In the absence of a head-to-head trial comparing these treatments, a matching-adjusted indirect treatment comparison (MAIC) was conducted to assess the efficacy and safety of KdD versus DVd. Results showed that treatment with KdD decreases the risk of progression or death versus DVd (HR 0.64; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.46-0.90). Time-dependent analysis demonstrated a larger benefit for KdD after the first eight cycles. Unmatched subgroup analysis indicated that KdD may be particularly effective in lenalidomide-exposed and -refractory patients. The present analysis suggests that KdD improves outcomes compared with DVd in patients with R/RMM and may provide a rationale for a preferential treatment.