Checkpoint Inhibitor Monotherapy in Potentially Trial-Eligible or Trial-Ineligible Patients With Metastatic NSCLC in the German Prospective CRISP Registry Real-World Cohort (AIO-TRK-0315).

Introduction: Patients with metastatic NSCLC (mNSCLC) treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors in clinical practice may often not meet the strict inclusion criteria of clinical trials. Our aim was to assess the trial eligibility of patients with mNSCLC treated with pembrolizumab monotherapy in real-world and to compare the outcome of "trial-ineligible" and "potentially trial-eligible" patients. Methods: Data from the prospective, clinical research platform CRISP were used to compare patient characteristics, treatment, and outcome of patients with programmed cell death-ligand 1 tumor proportion score greater than or equal to 50% tumors treated with pembrolizumab monotherapy who are deemed either "potentially trial-eligible" or "trial-ineligible" according to inclusion and exclusion criteria of the registrational studies (KEYNOTE-024 and -042). Results: Of 746 patients included, 343 patients (46.0%) were classified as "trial-ineligible" and had significantly worse outcomes compared with "potentially trial-eligible" patients (n = 403, 54.0%): median progression-free survival: 6.2 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 5.2-8.4) versus 10.3 (95% CI: 8.4-13.8) months, hazard ratio (trial-ineligible versus potentially trial-eligible) of 1.43 (95% CI: 1.19-1.72), p less than 0.001; median overall survival: 15.9 (95% CI: 11.4-20.3) versus 25.3 (95% CI: 19.8-30.4) months, hazard ratio of 1.36 (95% CI: 1.10-1.67), p equals 0.004. Conclusions: Our data reveal that a considerable proportion of patients with mNSCLC are not eligible to participate in a clinical trial and were found to have worse outcomes than potentially trial-eligible patients, whose outcomes were comparable with those obtained from pivotal clinical trials. This is of substantial clinical relevance for physicians discussing outcomes to be expected with their patients and stresses the need for real-world effectiveness analyses.

Patient-reported outcomes in advanced NSCLC before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: Real-world data from the German prospective CRISP Registry (AIO-TRK-0315).

Patients with lung cancer under treatment have been associated with a high risk of COVID-19 infection and potentially worse outcome, but real-world data on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are rare. We assess patients' characteristics and PROs before and during the COVID-19 pandemic in an advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) cohort in Germany. Patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC from the prospective, multicentre, observational CRISP Registry (NCT02622581) were categorised as pre-pandemic (March 2019 to Feb 2020, n = 1621) and pandemic (March 2020 to Feb 2021, n = 1317). From baseline to month 15, patients' health-related quality of life (HRQoL) was assessed by FACT-L, anxiety and depression by PHQ-4. Association of pandemic status with time to deterioration (TTD) in QoL scales adjusted for potential covariates was estimated using Cox modelling. PROs were documented for 1166 patients (72%) in the pre-pandemic, 979 (74%) in the pandemic group. Almost 60% of patients were male, median age was 66 years, comorbidities occurred in 85%. Regarding HRQoL, mean-change-from-baseline plots hardly differed between both samples. Approximately 15%-21% of patients reported anxiety, about 19%-27% signs of depression. For the pandemic group, TTD was slightly, but statistically significantly, worse for the physical well-being-FACT-G subscale (HR 1.15 [95%CI 1.02-1.30]) and the anxiety-GAD-2 subscale (HR 1.14 [95%CI 1.01-1.29]). These prospectively collected real-world data provide valuable insights into PROs before and during the COVID-19 pandemic in advanced NSCLC. For the patients, the pandemic seemed to be less of a burden than the disease itself, as there was a considerable proportion of patients with anxiety and depression in both groups.

Quantifying bias due to missing data in quality of life surveys of advanced-stage cancer patients.

PURPOSE: Many studies on cancer patients investigate the impact of treatment on health-related quality of life (QoL). Typically, QoL is measured longitudinally, at baseline and at predefined timepoints thereafter. The question is whether, at a given timepoint, patients who return their questionnaire (available cases, AC) have a different QoL than those who do not return their questionnaire (non-AC). METHODS: We employed augmented inverse probability weighting (AIPW) to estimate the average QoL of non-AC in two studies on advanced-stage cancer patients. The AIPW estimator assumed data to be missing at random (MAR) and used machine learning (ML)-based methods to estimate answering probabilities of individuals at given timepoints as well as their reported QoL, as a function of auxiliary variables. These auxiliary variables were selected by medical oncologists based on domain expertise. We aggregated results both by timepoint and by time until death and compared AIPW estimates to the AC averages. Additionally, we used a pattern mixture model (PMM) to check sensitivity of our AIPW estimates against violation of the MAR assumption. RESULTS: Our study included 1927 patients with advanced pancreatic and 797 patients with advanced breast cancer. The AIPW estimate for average QoL of non-AC was below the average QoL of AC when aggregated by timepoint. The difference vanished when aggregated by time until death. PMM estimates were below AIPW estimates. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that non-AC have a lower average QoL than AC. However, estimates for QoL of non-AC are subject to unverifiable assumptions about the missingness mechanism.

FOLFIRINOX or gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel in advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma: A novel validated prognostic score to facilitate treatment decision-making in real-world.

There is no prospective, randomised head-to-head trial comparing first-line FOLFIRINOX and gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel in advanced pancreatic cancer. We assess real-world effectiveness and quality of life (QoL) of both regimens using a new prognostic score. This analysis includes 1540 patients with advanced pancreatic cancer from the prospective, clinical cohort study Tumour Registry Pancreatic Cancer separated into learning (n = 1027) and validation sample (n = 513). The Pancreatic Cancer Score (PCS) was developed using multivariate Cox regression. We compared overall survival (OS) and time to deterioration (TTD) for longitudinal QoL between first-line FOLFIRINOX (n = 407) and gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (n = 655) according to patients' prognostic risk, after inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) by propensity score analysis. The PCS includes nine independent prognostic factors for survival: female sex, BMI ≥24/unknown, ECOG performance status ≥1, Charlson comorbidity index ≥1, tumour staging IV/unknown at primary diagnosis, liver metastases, bilirubin >1.5× upper limit of normal (ULN), leukocytes >ULN and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio ≥4. Median OS of the validation sample was 11.4 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 10.4-14.4), 8.5 (95% CI: 6.8-9.6) and 5.9 months (95% CI: 4.0-7.4) for favourable- (0-3 risk factors), intermediate- (4-5 factors) and poor-risk group (6-9 factors), respectively. After IPTW, only poor-risk patients had significantly longer median OS and TTD of overall QoL with FOLFIRINOX (OS: 6.9 months, 95% CI: 3.9-13.3; TTD: 10.6 months, 95% CI: 2.0-14.1) vs gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (OS: 4.0 months, 95% CI: 2.8-4.8; TTD: 4.1 months, 95% CI: 2.4-4.5). Our novel PCS may facilitate treatment decisions in clinical routine of advanced pancreatic cancer, since only poor-risk, but not favourable-risk patients, seem to benefit from intensified treatment with FOLFIRINOX.

Prognostic factors in nonsmall cell lung cancer: insights from the German CRISP registry.

INTRODUCTION: Understanding prognosis, especially long-term outcome, in advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is crucial to inform patients, guide treatment and plan supportive and palliative care. METHODS: Prognostic factors influencing overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in 2082 patients with wild-type (WT)-NSCLC (629 M1a, 249 M1b, 1204 M1c) are reported. Patients were included in the prospective German CRISP registry recruiting in >150 centres. Analysis for pre-therapeutic factors was based on results from Cox proportional hazard models. RESULTS: Current M-descriptors of the Union for International Cancer Control-8 staging system were validated: M1a and M1b patients had significantly longer median time to events compared to M1c (OS/PFS 16.4/7.2 months, 17.8/6.7 months and 10.9/5.4 months, respectively). OS and PFS were influenced by number and location of metastatic organ systems. M1c and four or more metastatic organs involved had shorter OS and PFS than M1c with one to three organs (OS hazard ratio (HR) 1.69, p<0.001; PFS HR 1.81, p<0.001). M1b-liver metastases had shorter OS/PFS than M1b involving other organs (OS HR 2.70, p=0.006; PFS HR 2.48, p=0.007). Based on number of involved organs (orgsys) and liver metastases, two risk groups (low-risk: M1a, M1b-non-liver, M1c-1-3-orgsys-non-liver; high-risk: M1c-liver, M1b-liver, M1c-4+-orgsys) with significantly different prognoses could be amalgamated (median OS/PFS 14.3/6.5 months and 7.7/4.1 months, respectively). Other favourable factors were female gender and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group stage 0, with age showing no impact. Those with T1- or N0-status were associated with longer OS than T2-4 or N2-3. CONCLUSION: In this large observational dataset, we further defined factors for outcome in WT-NSCLC, including increased number of involved metastatic organ systems and liver metastases, as those with overall poorer prognosis and reduced survival chance.

Impact of immune checkpoint inhibitors on the management of locally advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer in real-life practice in patients initiating treatment between 2015 and 2018 in France and Germany.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the impact of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) on treatment patterns and survival outcomes in patients with locally advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (aNSCLC) in France and Germany. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with aNSCLC without known ALK or EGFR mutations receiving first-line (1L) therapy were included from (i) the retrospective Epidemiological-Strategy and Medical Economics Advanced and Metastatic Lung Cancer cohort (ESME-AMLC, France; 2015-2018) and (ii) the prospective Clinical Research platform Into molecular testing, treatment and outcome of non-Small cell lung carcinoma Patients platform (CRISP, Germany; 2016-2018). Analyses were stratified according to histology. Survival outcomes were estimated using Kaplan-Meier methodology and stratified by year of 1L therapy. Data sources were analysed separately. RESULTS: In ESME-AMLC and CRISP, 8,046 and 2,359 patients were included in the study, respectively. In both countries, approximately 20 % of all patients received pembrolizumab monotherapy as 1L treatment in 2018. In ESME-AMLC, the proportion receiving an ICI over the course of treatment (any line) increased from 42.2 % (2015) to 56.1 % (2018) in patients with squamous histology, and 28.9 % to 51.9 % with non-squamous/other; in CRISP, it increased from 50.6 % (2016) to 65.2 % (2018) with squamous histology, and 40.8 % to 62.7 % with non-squamous/other. Two-year overall survival from 1L initiation was 36.8 % and 25.6 % in the squamous cohorts and 36.5 % and 30.8 % in the non-squamous/other cohorts in ESME-AMLC and CRISP, respectively. No significant change in overall survival was observed over time; however, the follow-up time available was limited in the later years of the analysis. CONCLUSION: The results of this joint research from two large clinical databases in France and Germany demonstrate the growing use of ICIs in the management of aNSCLC. Future analyses will allow for the evaluation of the impact of ICIs on long-term survival of patients with aNSCLC.

KRAS G12C-mutated advanced non-small cell lung cancer: A real-world cohort from the German prospective, observational, nation-wide CRISP Registry (AIO-TRK-0315).

OBJECTIVES: After decades of unsuccessful efforts in inhibiting KRAS, promising clinical data targeting the mutation subtype G12C emerge. Since little is known about outcome with standard treatment of patients with G12C mutated non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), we analyzed a large, representative, real-world cohort from Germany. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 1039 patients with advanced KRAS-mutant or -wildtype NSCLC without druggable alterations have been recruited in the prospective, observational registry CRISP from 12/2015 to 06/2019 by 98 centers in Germany. Details on treatment, best response, and outcome were analyzed for patients with KRAS wildtype, G12C, and non-G12C mutations. RESULTS: Within the study population, 160 (15.4 %) patients presented with KRAS G12C, 251 (24.2 %) with non-G12C mutations, 628 (60.4 %) with KRAS wildtype. High PD-L1 expression (Tumor Proportion Score, TPS > 50 %) was documented for 28.0 %, 43.5 %, and 28.9 % (wildtype, G12C, non-G12C) of the tested patients; 68.8 %, 89.3 %, and 87.7 % of the patients received first-line treatment combined with an immune checkpoint-inhibitor in 2019. TPS > 50 % vs. TPS < 1 % was associated with a significantly decreased risk of mortality in a multivariate Cox model (HR 0.39, 95 % CI 0.26-0.60, p=<0.001). There were no differences in clinical outcome between KRAS wildtype, G12C or non-G12C mutations and KRAS mutational status was not prognostic in the model. CONCLUSION: Here we describe the so far largest prospectively recruited cohort of patients with advanced NSCLC and KRAS mutations, with special focus on the G12C mutation. These data constitute an extremely valuable historical control for upcoming clinical studies that employ KRAS inhibitors.

Biomarker testing in non-small cell lung cancer in routine care: Analysis of the first 3,717 patients in the German prospective, observational, nation-wide CRISP Registry (AIO-TRK-0315).

OBJECTIVES: An increasing number of treatment-determining biomarkers has been identified in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and molecular testing is recommended to enable optimal individualized treatment. However, data on implementation of these recommendations in the "real-world" setting are scarce. This study presents comprehensive details on the frequency, methodology and results of biomarker testing of advanced NSCLC in Germany. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This analysis included 3,717 patients with advanced NSCLC (2,921 non-squamous; 796 squamous), recruited into the CRISP registry at start of systemic therapy by 150 German sites between December 2015 and June 2019. Evaluated were the molecular biomarkers EGFR, ALK, ROS1, BRAF, KRAS, MET, TP53, RET, HER2, as well as expression of PD-L1. RESULTS: In total, 90.5 % of the patients were tested for biomarkers. Testing rates were 92.2 % (non-squamous), 70.7 % (squamous) and increased from 83.2 % in 2015/16 to 94.2% in 2019. Overall testing rates for EGFR, ALK, ROS1, and BRAF were 72.5 %, 74.5 %, 66.1 %, and 53.0 %, respectively (non-squamous). Testing rates for PD-L1 expression were 64.5 % (non-squamous), and 58.5 % (squamous). The most common testing methods were immunohistochemistry (68.5 % non-squamous, 58.3 % squamous), and next-generation sequencing (38.7 % non-squamous, 14.4 % squamous). Reasons for not testing were insufficient tumor material or lack of guideline recommendations (squamous). No alteration was found in 37.8 % (non-squamous), and 57.9 % (squamous), respectively. Most common alterations in non-squamous tumors (all patients/all patients tested for the respective biomarker): KRAS (17.3 %/39.2 %), TP53 (14.1 %/51.4 %), and EGFR (11.0 %/15.1 %); in squamous tumors: TP53 (7.0 %/69.1 %), MET (1.5 %/11.1 %), and EGFR (1.1 %/4.4 %). Median PFS (non-squamous) was 8.7 months (95 % CI 7.4-10.4) with druggable EGFR mutation, and 8.0 months (95 % CI 3.9-9.2) with druggable ALK alterations. CONCLUSION: Testing rates in Germany are high nationwide and acceptable in international comparison, but still leave out a significant portion of patients, who could potentially benefit. Thus, specific measures are needed to increase implementation.

Application study of the EQ-5D-5L in oncology: linking self-reported quality of life of patients with advanced or metastatic colorectal cancer to clinical data from a German tumor registry.

BACKGROUND: The EQ-5D-5L questionnaire is used in oncology to generate health-related quality of life (HRQoL) weights and corresponding health states. The purpose was to explore the relationship between demographic and clinical characteristics and HRQoL among advanced or metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) patients by linking clinical data of a German CRC registry to self-reported HRQoL measures from the EQ-5D-5L. METHODS: The study sample included patients with advanced or metastatic CRC currently recruited in the German Tumor Registry Colorectal Cancer. The EQ-5D-5L was administered once to patients who were at the start or at later stages of palliative treatment. Data on comorbidities, disease-specific health states, symptoms, and treatment status were drawn from the registry. Multivariate regression analyses were performed to explore the impact of patient and disease characteristics on HRQoL. RESULTS: In total, n = 433 questionnaires were included in the data analysis. Mean age of patients was 66.3 years and 61.2% were male. The mean EQ-5D-5L utility score was 0.82 and the mean EQ-5D-5L VAS score was 62.05. The regression analyses revealed that none of the demographic characteristics and few of the clinical characteristics, such as fatigue and pain, had a significant impact on the HRQoL. CONCLUSIONS: The study demonstrated a reduced HRQoL of patients with advanced or metastatic CRC when compared to the general population. The symptoms fatigue and pain negatively affected the HRQoL, whereas other characteristics such as age, gender, and comorbidities did not have a significant impact on HRQoL.

Association of Disease Progression With Health-Related Quality of Life Among Adults With Breast, Lung, Pancreatic, and Colorectal Cancer.

Importance: Mortality, morbidity, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) are patient-relevant end points generally considered in the early benefit assessments of new cancer treatments. Progression-related end points, such as time to progression or progression-free survival, are not included, although patients and physicians testify to the detrimental association of disease progression with HRQoL. Objective: To examine the association of disease progression and HRQoL in 4 prevalent solid-cancer entities in routine clinical practice. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study evaluated data from 4 prospective, nonintervention, multicenter registries collected between 2011 and 2018 in 203 centers in Germany. Patients' HRQoL was assessed regularly for up to 5 years. The change in HRQoL scores after disease progression was examined with linear mixed models, adjusting for demographic and clinical covariates. Patients with metastatic breast, pancreatic, lung, and colorectal cancer were recruited at the start of systemic first-line treatment. Data analysis was performed from February 2019 to April 2019. Exposures: All patients received systemic, palliative first-line treatment according to their physician's choice. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was deterioration of HRQoL associated with disease progression, as measured by 4 validated questionnaires: Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General version 4, European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 version 3.0, European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C15-PAL version 1, and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. Results: More than 8000 questionnaires from 2314 patients with 2562 documented disease progressions were analyzed. In total, 464 patients had breast cancer (464 [100.0%] female; median [range] age, 61.6 [26.4-90.1] years), 807 patients had pancreatic cancer (352 [43.6%] female; median [range] age, 70.0 [39.0-93.0] years), 341 patients had lung cancer (118 [34.6%] female; median [range] age, 65.9 [28.4-88.2] years), and 702 patients had colorectal cancer (248 [35.3%] female; median [range] age, 66.9 [26.9-92.1] years). The first disease progression was associated with a statistically significant worsening of 37 of 45 HRQoL scales; for 17 of these scales, the worsening was clinically meaningful. Scale scores for appetite loss (pancreatic cancer, 10.2 points [95% CI, 6.8-13.5 points]; lung cancer, 10.8 points [95% CI, 5.4-16.2 points]; colorectal cancer, 8.8 points [95% CI, 5.5-12.2]; all P < .001), physical functioning (pancreatic cancer, 6.2 points [95% CI, 3.8-8.5 points]; lung cancer, 8.4 points [95% CI, 5.4-11.5 points]; colorectal cancer, 5.0 points [95% CI, 3.0-7.0 points]; all P < .001), and fatigue (pancreatic cancer, 5.5 points [95% CI, 3.0-7.9 points]; lung cancer, 7.7 points [95% CI, 4.3-11.1]; colorectal cancer, 4.5 points [95% CI, 2.1-6.9 points]; all P < .001) were most affected, irrespective of the type of cancer. The association with global HRQoL was most pronounced in lung cancer (6.7 points [95% CI, 3.5-9.9 points]; P < .001) and pancreatic cancer (5.4 points [95% CI, 3.3-7.5 points]; P < .001) and less in colorectal cancer (3.5 points [95% CI, 1.3-5.7 points]; P = .002) and breast cancer (2.4 points [95% CI, 1.0-3.9 points]; P = .001). The second progression was associated with an even larger decrease in HRQoL. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that disease progression is associated with a deterioration in HRQoL among patients with metastatic breast, pancreatic, lung, and colorectal cancer. This evidence highlights the importance of progression-related end points, such as time to progression and progression-free survival, as additional patient-relevant end points when evaluating the benefit of new treatments for patients with metastatic cancer.

[Memorandum Registry for Health Services Research: Update 2019]. / Memorandum Register für die Versorgungsforschung: Update 2019.

Health registries could be used to analyze questions concerning routine practice in healthcare. Therefore, registries are a core method in health services research. The German Network for Health Services Research (Deutsches Netzwerk Versorgungsforschung, DNVF) promotes the quality of registries by scientific exchange, organization of advanced training, and recommendations in the form of a memorandum "Registry for Health Services Research". The current recommendations are an update of the memorandum's first version of 2010. The update describes the capabilities and aims of registries in health services research. Furthermore, it illustrates the state-of-the-art in designing and implementing health registries. The memorandum provides developers the methodological basis to ensure high quality health registries. It further provides users of health registries with insights that enable assessing the quality of data and results of health registries. Finally, funding agencies and health policy actors can use the quality criteria to establish a framework for the financing and legislative requirements for health registries. The memorandum provides first a definition of health registries and presents an overview of their utility in health services research and health care improvement. Second, several areas of methodological importance for the development and operation of health registries are presented. This includes the conceptual and preliminary design, implementation, technical organization of a health registry, statistical analysis, reporting of results, and data protection. From these areas, criteria are deduced to allow the assessment of the quality of a health registry. Finally, a checklist is presented.

Rare patients in routine care: Treatment and outcome in advanced papillary renal cell carcinoma in the prospective German clinical RCC-Registry.

Non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma is a very rare malignancy that includes several histological subtypes. Each subtype may need to be addressed separately regarding prognosis and treatment; however, no Phase III clinical trial data exist. Thus, treatment recommendations for patients with non-clear cell metastatic RCC (mRCC) remain unclear. We present first prospective data on choice of first- and second-line treatment in routine practice and outcome of patients with papillary mRCC. From the prospective German clinical cohort study (RCC-Registry), 99 patients with papillary mRCC treated with systemic first-line therapy between December 2007 and May 2017 were included. Prospectively enrolled patients who had started first-line treatment until May 15, 2016, were included into the outcome analyses (n = 82). Treatment was similar to therapies used for clear cell mRCC and consisted of tyrosine kinase inhibitors, mechanistic target of rapamycin inhibitors and recently checkpoint inhibitors. Median progression-free survival from start of first-line treatment was 5.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.1-9.2) and median overall survival was 12.0 months (95% CI, 8.1-20.0). At data cutoff, 73% of the patients died, 6% were still observed, 12% were lost to follow-up, and 9% were alive at the end of the individual 3-year observation period. Despite the lack of prospective Phase III evidence in patients with papillary mRCC, our real-world data reveal effectiveness of systemic clear cell mRCC therapy in papillary mRCC. The prognosis seems to be inferior for papillary compared to clear cell mRCC. Further studies are needed to identify drivers of effectiveness of systemic therapy for papillary mRCC.

Similar effectiveness of R-CHOP-14 and -21 in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma-data from the prospective German Tumour Registry Lymphatic Neoplasms.

OBJECTIVES: R-CHOP (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisone) is the standard therapy for patients with previously untreated diffuse large B-cell lymphomas (DLBCL). Dose-dense two-weekly 'R-CHOP-14' was not superior over three-weekly 'R-CHOP-21' in randomised clinical trials (RCTs). We present real-world data on effectiveness of R-CHOP-14 and R-CHOP-21 in patients with DLBCL treated in German routine practice. METHODS: We identified 582 patients with DLBCL treated with R-CHOP-14 or R-CHOP-21 in 92 sites from the prospective clinical cohort study Tumour Registry Lymphatic Neoplasms. Patients' schedules were classified by (a) length of the initial first cycle and (b) length of cycles 1-4. RESULTS: About 55% of patients received R-CHOP-21, 45% R-CHOP-14, in median 6 cycles. 51% and 55% of patients, respectively, were able to continue their initial R-CHOP-14 and R-CHOP-21 schedule. While most characteristics between the patient cohorts were similar, patients receiving R-CHOP-21 presented slightly more often with tumour stage I and lower IPI risk. 3-year overall survival of patients with R-CHOP-14 and R-CHOP-21 did not differ: 84% vs 84% (first cycle), 87% vs 89% (cycles 1-4). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with DLBCL in Germany are slightly more likely to receive R-CHOP-21 than R-CHOP-14. Both schedules are similarly effective in routine practice confirming the results from RCTs.

Quality of life in pre- and postmenopausal patients with early breast cancer: a comprehensive analysis from the prospective MaLife project.

PURPOSE: Quality of life (QoL) plays an important role in recovery-especially after an incisive diagnosis such as breast cancer. Here, we present a comprehensive assessment of QoL for pre- and postmenopausal patients, starting from initial systemic treatment of early breast cancer until 3 years later, in patients from a so-called "real-world" setting. METHODS: 251 premenopausal and 478 postmenopausal patients with early breast cancer have been recruited into the longitudinal MaLife project within the prospective, multicentre, German Tumour Registry Breast Cancer between 2011 and 2015. The questionnaires FACT-G, FACT-Taxane, FACT-ES, EORTC QLQ-BR23, BFI and HADS were filled in at start of treatment (T0), 6, 12, 24 and 36 months later. The proportion of patients with clinically meaningful changes at 36 months was determined. RESULTS: This first interim analysis shows that the FACT-G global QoL improved over time regardless of the menopausal status. However, clinically meaningful decrease of social/family well-being (48-51%), arm symptoms (44-49%) and symptoms of neurotoxicity (55-56%) was frequently reported 3 years after start of treatment. Many premenopausal patients also reported a clinically meaningful worsening of endocrine symptoms (64%), emotional well-being (36%) and fatigue intensity (37%). Additionally, 3 years after start of treatment, 15% of the patients were classified as doubtful cases and 18% as definite cases of anxiety. CONCLUSIONS: Despite improvements in global QoL, breast cancer survivors report worsened ailments 3 years after start of therapy. Follow-up care should distinguish between premenopausal patients needing special attention for emotional/menopausal issues, and postmenopausal patients needing particular care regarding physical concerns.

Treatment and outcome of 432 patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer in first, second and third line - Results from the prospective German TLK cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: Despite intensive research, the therapeutic options in extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (SCLC) are still limited. Data from routine clinical practice, so-called "real-world data", are centrally important to assess and improve the standard of care. We present prospectively documented data on systemic first-, second- and third-line treatment, number of treatment lines and outcome parameters of patients treated by medical oncologists in Germany. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a descriptive analysis on 432 patients with extensive-stage SCLC enrolled at start of first-line therapy into the prospective German clinical cohort study TLK (Tumour Registry Lung Cancer). Patients were recruited by 87 sites between February 2010 and December 2013 and followed-up individually for 3 years. RESULTS: The majority of patients (93%) received a first-line platinum-based combination therapy. Carboplatin plus etoposide was documented more frequently than cisplatin plus etoposide (46 vs. 35%); patients receiving carboplatin were older (68 vs. 63 years) and more often presented with poorer performance status (17 vs. 11% ECOG ≥ 2). Both regimens yielded similar response and survival rates. Median first-line overall survival (OS) was 10.2 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 8.6-12.3) for carboplatin plus etoposide and 12.2 months (95% CI 10.1-14.7) for cisplatin plus etoposide. Most patients (77%) would have been eligible for participation in a clinical trial. 50% of the patients received a second and 22% a third line of treatment. Median second-line OS was 5.8 months (95% CI 4.8-7.5), median third-line OS 5.7 months (95% CI 3.8-7.0). CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, this is the first study of prospectively documented patients with extensive-stage SCLC in routine clinical practice. We present treatment algorithms as well as outcome parameters for a large cohort in first-, second- and third-line treatment. The survival times and response rates reported in this routine setting correspond to the respective measures from large prospective trials.

Results from the prospective German TPK clinical cohort study: Treatment algorithms and survival of 1,174 patients with locally advanced, inoperable, or metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

Pancreatic cancer is a highly lethal malignancy. Developments in recent years have broadened our therapeutic armamentarium. Novel drugs such as nab-paclitaxel, liposomal irinotecan and chemotherapy regimens such as FOLFIRINOX have been successfully tested in clinical trials. Data on patients outside of clinical trials are scarce but necessary to assess and improve the standard of care. We present data on treatment and survival of 1,174 patients with locally advanced, inoperable, or metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Between February 2014 and June 2017, patients were recruited by 104 sites at start of first-line therapy into the ongoing, prospective clinical cohort study TPK (Tumour Registry Pancreatic Cancer). As first-line therapy, 89% of patients received one of the three treatment regimens: gemcitabine monotherapy (23%), nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine (42%), or FOLFIRINOX (24%). The corresponding subgroups differed: Patients receiving gemcitabine monotherapy were older and more comorbid (median age 78 years, 73% ECOG ≥ 1) than patients receiving nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine (median age 71, 64% ECOG ≥ 1) or patients receiving FOLFIRINOX (median age 60, 52% ECOG ≥ 1). At least 40% of patients died before receiving second-line treatment. First-line progression-free survival was 4.6 months (95% CI: 3.7-5.2) for gemcitabine, 5.6 months (95% CI: 5.0-6.2) for nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine, and 6.3 months (95% CI: 5.5-6.9) for FOLFIRINOX. Our data represent the treatment reality in a German community setting. Although there are no stringent inclusion criteria for our cohort study, overall survival is comparable to that reported by randomised clinical trials.

Survival of non-transplant patients with multiple myeloma in routine care differs from that in clinical trials-data from the prospective German Tumour Registry Lymphatic Neoplasms.

Despite increasing treatment options, multiple myeloma (MM) remains incurable for most patients. Data on improvement of outcomes are derived from selected patient populations enrolled in clinical trials and might not be conferrable to all patients. Therefore, we assessed the trial eligibility, sequential treatment, and survival of non-transplant patients with MM treated in German routine care. The prospective clinical cohort study TLN (Tumour Registry Lymphatic Neoplasms) recruited 285 non-transplant patients with symptomatic MM at start of first-line treatment in 84 centres from 2009 to 2011. Demographic and clinical data were collected until August 2016. Trial-ineligibility was determined by presence of at least one of the common exclusion criteria: heart/renal failure, liver/renal diseases, polyneuropathy, HIV positivity. All other patients were considered potentially trial-eligible. Thirty percent of the patients in our study were classified as trial-ineligible. Median first-line progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) of trial-ineligible patients were inferior to that of potentially trial-eligible patients: PFS 16.2 months (95% CI (confidence interval) 11.1-20.4) vs. 27.3 months (95% CI 23.3-33.0); OS 34.2 months (95% CI 21.6-48.1) vs. 58.6 months (95% CI 48.6-64.4). A high percentage of non-transplant patients with MM in German routine care would be ineligible for participation in clinical trials. Despite similar treatment algorithms, their first-line PFS and OS were shorter than those of potentially trial-eligible patients; the survival data of the latter were similar to results from clinical trials. Physicians should be aware of the fact that results from clinical trials may not mirror "real world" patient outcomes when discussing outcome expectations with patients. Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT00889798.

Changes in Treatment Reality and Survival of Patients With Advanced Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma - Analyses From the German Clinical RCC-Registry.

INTRODUCTION: Because the treatment landscape for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) has evolved dramatically over the past decade, data on patients' treatment and outcomes in routine practice, so called "real-world data," are important to complement clinical trial data. We present choice of systemic first-/second-line treatments, number and sequences of treatment lines, and survival of patients with clear cell mRCC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 1085 patients with clear cell mRCC who were recruited at the start of first-line treatment into the prospective German clinical cohort study (RCC-Registry) by 122 sites between December 2007 and May 2017 were analyzed. RESULTS: The choice of first-/second-line treatment and changes over time reflect the chronologic approval of different targeted agents: from mainly tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), to TKIs/mechanistic target of rapamycin inhibitors, to now TKIs/mechanistic target of rapamycin inhibitors/checkpoint inhibitor. The median first-line overall survival ranged from 7.2 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.8-10.9 months) in high MSKCC (Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center) risk to 36.7 months (95% CI, 27.9-43.0 months) in low-risk patients. For trial-ineligible routine patients meeting common exclusion criteria of clinical trials, the median overall survival was 14.6 months (95% CI, 11.5-18.0 months) compared with 26.2 months (95% CI, 22.1-31.5 months) for potentially trial-eligible patients. CONCLUSION: This is the first prospective long-term cohort study showing changes in treatment reality and survival of routine patients with clear cell mRCC. Newly approved treatments are quickly applied in routine care. Patients with unfavorable prognosis, including trial-ineligible patients, have inferior outcomes. Survival times of potentially trial-eligible patients are similar to those reported from clinical trials.