Outcomes of patients with advanced epithelial growth factor receptor mutant lung cancer treated with first-line osimertinib who would not have met the eligibility criteria for the FLAURA clinical trial.

OBJECTIVES: Osimertinib is largely used as first-line therapy for metastatic epithelial growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutant lung cancers based on the FLAURA clinical trial. Real-world patient outcomes often differ from clinical trial outcomes. This study evaluated the efficacy of first-line osimertinib in patients treated in British Columbia (BC), Canada. Furthermore, we compared the outcomes of patients who would and would not have been eligible for the original FLAURA trial. METHODS: Consecutive patients receiving first-line osimertinib for metastatic EGFR exon19 or L858R lung cancer were identified using the BC Cancer Pharmacy Database. Patient eligibility for the FLAURA clinical trial were retrospectively reviewed based on the following criteria: ECOG ≥ 2, symptomatic brain metastases or on steroids, hemoglobin < 90 g/L, platelets < 100x109/L, or a creatinine clearance < 50 mL/min. mOS was assessed for the entire population and compared between patients who would have been eligible and ineligible for FLAURA. RESULTS: From January 2020 to October 2021, 311 patients received first-line osimertinib; 44 % (137/311) were deemed FLAURA ineligible, predominantly due to low ECOG (n = 120). After a median follow-up of 26.5 months, the mOS for the entire cohort was 27.4 months (95 %CI 23.8-30.1). The mOS for ineligible patients was 18 months shorter than eligible patients (15.8 vs 34.2, p < 0.001). Ineligible patients had higher rates of de novo stage IV disease, higher rates of stage IVB disease, and more sites of disease than eligible patients. CONCLUSION: In this real-world population, nearly half of patients would have been ineligible for FLAURA. The mOS was one year shorter than reported in FLAURA. However, patients who would have been eligible for the FLAURA clinical trial had similar OS to patients enrolled in FLAURA. Trial ineligible patients had a higher burden of disease at baseline which may have led to inferior outcomes. Further research is needed to improve outcomes in these patients.

Upfront Cytoreductive Nephrectomy for Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Treated with Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors or Targeted Therapy: An Observational Study from the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium.

BACKGROUND: The role of upfront cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN) for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) in the era of immune checkpoint inhibitors is unclear. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the relationship between upfront CN and clinical outcomes in the setting of mRCC treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors or targeted therapy. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Using the International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium, we retrospectively identified patients diagnosed with de novo mRCC treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors or targeted therapy. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Overall survival (OS) was compared between the two groups using the Kaplan-Meier method and multivariable Cox regressions adjusting for known prognostic factors. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: We identified a total of 4639 eligible patients with mRCC. Among the 4202 patients treated with targeted therapy and 437 patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors, 2326 (55%) and 234 (54%) patients received upfront CN prior to treatment start. In multivariable analyses, CN was associated with significantly better OS in both the immune checkpoint inhibitor-treated (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.61; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.41-0.90, p = 0.013) and the targeted therapy treatment (HR: 0.72; 95% CI, 0.67-0.78, p < 0.001) group. There was no difference in OS benefit of CN between the immune checkpoint inhibitor and targeted therapy treatment groups (interaction p = 0.6). Limitations include selection of patients from large academic centers and the retrospective nature of the study. CONCLUSIONS: Upfront CN is associated with a significant OS benefit in selected patients treated by either immune checkpoint inhibitors or targeted therapy, and still has a role in selected patients in the era of immune checkpoint inhibitors. PATIENT SUMMARY: Before effective systemic therapies were available for metastatic kidney cancer, surgical removal of the primary (kidney) tumor was the mainstay of treatment. The role of removing the primary tumor has recently been called into question given that more effective systemic therapies have become available. In this study, we find that removal of the primary kidney tumor still has a benefit for selected patients treated with highly effective modern systemic therapies, including targeted therapies and immune checkpoint inhibitors.