A Retrospective, Longitudinal Registry Study on the Long-Term Durability of Ivacaftor Treatment in People with Cystic Fibrosis.

INTRODUCTION: Ivacaftor (IVA) has been shown to change the trajectory of cystic fibrosis (CF) disease progression by slowing the rate of lung function decline in clinical studies. Long-term real-world data help to confirm the durability of this response. METHODS: This non-interventional, longitudinal study used data from the US CF Foundation Patient Registry to describe the annualized rate of change in lung function in people with CF receiving IVA. The IVA-treated cohort included people with CF aged ≥ 6 years who had ≥ 1 CF transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR)-gating mutation and initiated IVA between 31 January 2012 and 31 December 2018. An age-matched comparator cohort included people with CF heterozygous for the F508del-CFTR mutation and a minimal function mutation (R117H excluded) and had not received CFTR modulator therapy. Baseline characteristics were balanced using standardized mortality ratio (SMR) weights computed from estimated propensity scores. The annualized rate of change in percent predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 s (ppFEV1) was estimated over 5 years and used to calculate the relative annualized rate of change in lung function in the IVA-treated versus comparator cohorts. RESULTS: In the 5-year follow-up period, 548 people were in the IVA-treated and 541 in the comparator cohorts after SMR weighting. The annualized rate of change in ppFEV1 over 5 years was -1.23 (95% CI -1.45, -1.03) and -2.03 (-2.16, -1.90) percentage points in the IVA-treated and comparator cohorts, respectively. There was a 39% reduction (95% CI: 28, 50) in the rate of lung function decline in the IVA-treated versus comparator cohort over 5 years. Findings were generally consistent with those of shorter follow-up periods. CONCLUSION: IVA showed a durable clinical benefit by slowing the rate of lung function decline over 5 years. Results support a sustained and consistent impact of IVA on lung function trajectory in people with CF. Word count: 300 (limit: 300 words).

Long-term impact of ivacaftor on mortality rate and health outcomes in people with cystic fibrosis.

BACKGROUND: Ivacaftor (IVA) has been shown to improve lung function and other clinical outcomes in people with cystic fibrosis (CF). A decade of real-world IVA availability has enabled the examination of long-term outcomes with this treatment. This retrospective, longitudinal cohort study investigated the impact of IVA on mortality rate and health outcomes among people with CF in the US. METHODS: Data from the US CF Foundation Patient Registry from January 2010 to December 2019 were analysed. The IVA-treated cohort included people with a CF transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) gating mutation (excluding R117H); age-matched comparator cohort included people with a F508del and a minimal function CFTR mutation who had no prior CFTR modulator treatment. Baseline characteristics were balanced between cohorts using standardised mortality ratio weighting generated from propensity scores. Outcomes of interest were overall survival, lung transplant, percent predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 s (ppFEV1), body mass index (BMI), pulmonary exacerbations (PEx), outpatient visits and hospitalisations. FINDINGS: Over a maximum follow-up of 7.9 years, the IVA-treated cohort (N=736) had lower rates of mortality (hazard ratio [HR] (95% CI): 0.22 (0.09 to 0.45)), lung transplant (HR: 0.11 (95% CI 0.02 to 0.28)), PEx (rate ratio: 0.49 (95% CI 0.42 to 0.55)) and all-cause hospitalisations (rate ratio: 0.50 (95% CI 0.43 to 0.56)) as well as better lung function (mean difference in ppFEV1: 8.46 (95% CI 7.34 to 9.75)) and higher BMI/BMI z-scores (mean difference 1.20 (95% CI 0.92 to 1.71) kg/m2 and 0.27 (95% CI 0.25 to 0.40), respectively) than the comparator cohort (N=733). INTERPRETATION: Our analysis suggests that IVA provides sustained clinical benefits in people with CF over a follow-up period of approximately 8 years. These findings reinforce the existing real-world evidence that IVA can slow disease progression and decrease the healthcare burden of CF over the long term.

Impact of age at ivacaftor initiation on pulmonary outcomes among people with cystic fibrosis.

BACKGROUND: Ivacaftor (IVA) improves lung function and other extrapulmonary outcomes in people with cystic fibrosis (CF). However, the effect of initiating IVA at earlier versus later ages has not been studied. METHODS: We conducted an observational cohort study of people in the US CF Foundation Patient Registry aged ≥6 years with ≥1 CF transmembrane conductance regulator-gating mutation to compare the effects of initiating IVA at earlier ages on per cent predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 s (ppFEV1) and pulmonary exacerbation (PEx) outcomes. People with CF were grouped by age at IVA initiation (ages 6-10, 11-15, 16-20 and 21-25 years) to perform three analyses of younger versus older IVA initiation (6-10 vs 11-15, 11-15 vs 16-20 and 16-20 vs 21-25 years). For each analysis, baseline characteristics assessed over 1-year periods at the same age prior to IVA initiation were balanced by standardised mortality/morbidity ratio (SMR) weighting. For each analysis, outcomes were compared over a 5-year outcome assessment period when both groups were in the same age range and receiving IVA. FINDINGS: Baseline characteristics were well balanced between younger and older IVA initiator groups after SMR weighting. In the outcome assessment period, younger IVA initiators had significantly higher mean ppFEV1 than older initiators across all comparisons, and those initiating IVA between ages 6-10 and 11-15 years had significantly lower PEx rates. INTERPRETATION: Study findings showed the importance of early IVA initiation in people with CF.

Treatment Patterns and Clinical Outcomes Among Patients With Metastatic Prostate Cancer Harboring Homologous Recombination Repair Mutations.

BACKGROUND: There is currently limited literature assessing the real-world treatment patterns and clinical outcomes of patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) and homologous recombination repair (HRR) mutations. METHODS: Medical charts were abstracted for mCRPC patients with ≥ 1 of 12 HRR somatic gene alterations treated at US oncology centers participating in the American Association for Cancer Research Project Genomics Evidence Neoplasia Information Exchange. Treatment patterns and clinical outcomes were assessed from the initiation of first-line or later (1L+) mCRPC therapy received on or after July 1, 2014. RESULTS: Among 138 patients included in the study, the most common somatic HRR mutations were CDK12 (47.8%), BRCA2 (22.5%), and ATM (21.0%). Novel hormonal therapy and taxane chemotherapy were most commonly used in 1L; taxane use increased in later lines. Median overall survival (95% confidence interval [CI]) was 36.3 (30.7-47.8) months from initiation of 1L therapy and decreased for subsequent lines. Similarly, there was a trend of decreasing progression-free survival and prostate-specific antigen response from 1L to 4L+ therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment patterns identified in this study were similar to those among patients with mCRPC regardless of tumor HRR mutation status in the literature.

Comparative effectiveness of lenalidomide/dexamethasone-based triplet regimens for treatment of relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma in the United States: An analysis of real-world electronic health records data.

BACKGROUND: This retrospective longitudinal study compared the effectiveness of dexamethasone+lenalidomide (Rd)-based triplet regimens containing proteasome inhibitors (PIs) ixazomib (IRd), carfilzomib (KRd), and bortezomib (VRd) or monoclonal antibodies (MABs) elotuzumab (ERd) and daratumumab (DRd) in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM)-including those with high cytogenetic risk-primarily treated at community oncology clinics in the United States. METHODS: Electronic health records of adult RRMM patients in a deidentified real-world database (01/01/2014-09/30/2020) who initiated IRd, KRd, VRd, ERd, or DRd in the second or later line of therapy (LOT) were analyzed. The index date was the date of initiation of each LOT and baseline was the 6-month pre-index period. Duration of therapy (DOT), time to next therapy (TTNT), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were compared across regimens with multivariable Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: Of the 1,185 patients contributing 1,332 LOTs, 985 had standard cytogenetic risk (median age, 71 years) and 180 had high risk (median age, 69 years). Compared with other regimens, DRd was associated with longer DOT overall (adjusted hazard ratio [95 % confidence interval]: 1.84 [1.42, 2.38] vs. KRd, 1.65 [1.20, 2.28] vs. ERd, 1.58 [1.23, 2.04] vs. IRd, and 1.54 [1.18, 2.00] vs. VRd), and longer TTNT and PFS. KRd was associated with shorter OS compared with DRd (1.45 [1.01, 2.08]) and VRd (1.32 [1.01, 1.73]). High-risk patients had similar outcomes with all triplet regimens. CONCLUSION: Although DRd improved clinical outcomes overall, Rd-based triplet regimens containing a PI or MAB are similarly effective in high-risk RRMM.

Real-World Treatment Patterns and Clinical Outcomes With Brentuximab Vedotin or Other Standard Therapies in Patients With Previously Treated Cutaneous T-Cell Lymphoma in the United States.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND: Primary cutaneous anaplastic large-cell lymphomas (pcALCLs) are a type of cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (CTCL) in which CD30 is uniformly expressed. In mycosis fungoides (MF), another CTCL, CD30 is heterogeneously expressed. In ALCANZA, patients with pcALCLs or CD30-positive MF randomized to brentuximab vedotin (BV) vs. physician's choice of methotrexate or bexarotene had significantly improved outcomes, including higher objective response rates (ORR) lasting ≥4 months (ORR4), as well as longer median progression-free survival (PFS) and time to next treatment (TTNT). In this study, we sought to assess the real-world impact of treatment with BV in second or later lines of therapy for CTCL. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective chart review describes patient characteristics, treatment patterns, clinical outcomes, and healthcare resource use (HRU) in patients with pcALCLs or MF previously treated with ≥1 systemic therapy and subsequently treated with BV (n = 139) or other standard therapy (OST; n = 164). RESULTS: Most patients in the BV cohort (96.4%) received BV as second-line (2L) systemic therapy. The most common OSTs were methotrexate (11.6%), mogamulizumab (9.1%), and bendamustine (9.1%) monotherapies. For 2L BV and OST, median duration of therapy was 8.4 and 5.2 months, real-world ORR was 82.1% and 66.5%, and real-world ORR4 was 42.5% and 25.0%. Real-world 1- and 2-year PFS, TTNT, and OS were significantly longer (all P < .01) and HRU was lower for BV vs. OST. CONCLUSION: These real-world outcomes are consistent with ALCANZA results, demonstrating favorable outcomes with BV vs. OST in patients with CTCL previously treated with ≥1 systemic therapy.

Economic burden of early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer: an assessment of healthcare resource utilization and medical costs.

Aim: To quantify the economic burden of early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) among patients with and without adjuvant therapy. Methods: All-cause and NSCLC-related healthcare resource utilization and medical costs were assessed among patients with resected stage IB-IIIA NSCLC in the SEER-Medicare database (1 January 2011-31 December 2019), from NSCLC diagnosis to death, end of continuous enrollment, or end of data availability (whichever occurred first). Results: Patients receiving adjuvant therapy had the lowest mean NSCLC-related medical costs (adjuvant [n = 1776]: $3738; neoadjuvant [n = 56]: $5793; both [n = 47]: $4818; surgery alone [n = 3478]: $4892, per-person-per-month), driven by lower NSCLC-related hospitalization rates. Conclusion: Post-surgical management of early-stage NSCLC was associated with high economic burden. Adjuvant therapy was associated with numerically lower medical costs over surgical resection alone.

Comparison of health care costs and resource utilization for commonly used proteasome inhibitor-immunomodulatory drug-based triplet regimens for the management of patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Economic differences among currently available proteasome inhibitors (PI)-based lenalidomide-dexamethasone (Rd)-backbone triplet regimens-ixazomib (I), bortezomib (V), and carfilzomib (K) plus Rd-remain poorly understood. OBJECTIVE: To assess health care resource utilization (HCRU) and health care costs of patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) in the United States treated with IRd, VRd, and KRd. METHODS: This retrospective longitudinal cohort study using IQVIA PharMetrics Plus adjudicated claims US data (January 1, 2015, to September 30, 2020) included adult patients with all available data who initiated IRd, VRd, or KRd in second line of therapy or later (LOT2+) on or after September 1, 2015. The index date was the treatment initiation date for each LOT (multiple LOTs per patient were included) and the baseline was 6 months pre-index. MM-related and all-cause HCRU/costs were assessed during follow-up and reported per patient per month (PPPM; 2020 US Dollars). For MM-related costs only, treatment administration costs were excluded from outpatient (OP) costs and instead summed with pharmacy costs. HCRU/costs were compared between treatment groups using generalized linear models (GLMs). Cost variables were compared using 2-part models and GLM with log transformation and γ distribution. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) adjusted for imbalance of baseline confounders across treatment groups. RESULTS: The study included 511 patients contributing 542 LOTs (IRd: n = 153; VRd: n = 262; KRd: n = 127). Before IPTW, mean observed time spent on therapy was 8.5, 9.3, and 7.3 months for the IRd, VRd, and KRd cohorts, respectively. During follow-up and after IPTW, IRd and VRd were associated with significantly fewer OP visits vs KRd. Post-IPTW comparisons of MM-related costs for IRd vs KRd yielded lower OP costs for IRd (mean diff. PPPM: -$3,428; P < 0.001), contributing to lower total medical costs (-$3,813; P < 0.001) and total health care cost savings with IRd vs KRd (-$5,813; P = 0.001). MM-related OP costs were lower for VRd (mean diff. PPPM: -$3,543; P < 0.001) than KRd, reducing its total MM-related medical costs (-$3,997; P = 0.002), leading to total MM-related health care cost savings with VRd vs KRd (-$12,357; P < 0.001). All-cause cost comparisons yielded similar results (total health care cost savings for IRd and VRd vs KRd: -$6,371 and -$13,629, respectively; all P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: From the US insurance-payer perspective, patients treated with IRd and VRd had significant medical cost savings vs KRd due to lower OP costs when excluding treatment administration costs. The differential economic impacts of PI-Rd regimens in this study may help to inform treatment decisions for patients with MM. DISCLOSURES: This study and article were supported by Takeda Development Center Americas, Inc. Dr Sanchez has no conflicts to declare. Dr Chari has the following relationships: Research Support/Principal Investigator: Amgen, Array Biopharma, Celgene, Glaxo Smith Klein, Janssen, Millenium/Takeda, Novartis Pharmaceuticals, Oncoceutics, Pharmacyclics, Seattle Genetics; Consultant: Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Millenium/Takeda, Janssen, Karyopharm; Scientific Advisory Board: Amgen, Celgene, Millenium/Takeda, Janssen, Karyopharm, Sanofi, Seattle Genetics. Drs Cherepanov, Huang, Dabora, and Noga are current employees of Takeda, while Drs Stull and Young are ex-employees of Takeda; Drs Cherepanov and Huang also own stocks in Takeda. Dr DerSarkissian, Ms Cheng, Ms Zhang, Mr Banatwala, and Dr Duh are employees of Analysis Group, Inc. (AG), a consulting firm that received funding from Takeda to conduct this study. Ms Pi was an employee of AG at the time of the study. Dr Ailawadhi has the following relationships to declare: Research Support and Consulting for BMS, GSK, and Janssen; Research Support from AbbVie, Arch Oncology, Cellectar, Medimmune, Pharmacyclics, and Xencor; Consulting for Beigene, Oncopeptides, Regeneron, Sanofi, and Takeda.

Real-world comparative effectiveness of acalabrutinib and ibrutinib in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia.

Novel agents, including Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitors (BTKis), have become the standard of care for patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). We conducted a real-world retrospective analysis of patients with CLL treated with acalabrutinib vs ibrutinib using the Flatiron Health database. Patients with CLL were included if they initiated acalabrutinib or ibrutinib between 1 January 2018 and 28 February 2021. The primary outcome of interest was time to treatment discontinuation (TTD). Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to estimate unweighted and weighted median TTD. A weighted Cox proportional hazards model was used to compare the TTD between cohorts. Of the 2509 patients included in the analysis, 89.6% received ibrutinib, and 14.1% received acalabrutinib. TTD was not significantly different between cohorts in the unweighted analysis. After weighting, the cohorts were balanced on all baseline characteristics except cardiovascular risk factors and baseline medications use. The median (95% confidence interval [CI]) TTD was not reached (NR; 95% CI, 25.1 to NR) for the acalabrutinib cohort and was 23.4 months (95% CI, 18.1-28.7) for the ibrutinib cohort. The discontinuation rate at 12 months was 22% for the weighted acalabrutinib cohort vs 31% for the weighted ibrutinib cohort (P = .005). After additional adjustment for prior BTKi use, the acalabrutinib cohort had a 41% lower risk of discontinuation vs ibrutinib (hazard ratio, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.43-0.81; P = .001). In the largest available study comparing BTKis, patients with CLL receiving acalabrutinib demonstrated lower rates of discontinuation and a prolonged time to discontinuation vs those receiving ibrutinib.

Time and personnel costs associated with adverse event (AE) management among patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL).

OBJECTIVES: Novel therapies improve clinical outcomes in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), although adverse event (AE) profiles differ. This study evaluated time and personnel costs of AE management among healthcare professionals (HCPs) treating patients with CLL with novel therapies. METHODS: A non-interventional prospective survey was conducted over 2 months. Eligible HCPs reported the time per day spent performing AE management activities for CLL patients treated with acalabrutinib, ibrutinib, or venetoclax. Mean time and personnel costs (USD) per activity were summarized and used to estimate the total annual costs of AE management for an average-sized oncology practice. RESULTS: For an average-sized practice (28 HCPs with an average of 56 CLL patients), the mean annual personnel cost of AE management for CLL patients on novel agents was estimated at $115,733. The personnel cost associated with acalabrutinib ($20,912) was less than half that of ibrutinib ($53,801) and venetoclax ($41,884), potentially due to fewer severe AEs and less time spent by oncologists managing AEs compared to other HCP types. CONCLUSION: The substantial burden of AE management for patients with CLL may vary by treatment used. Acalabrutinib was associated with lower annual costs of AE management at an oncology practice level compared to ibrutinib and venetoclax.

Prolonged oral corticosteroid treatment in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus: An evaluation of 12-month economic and clinical burden.

BACKGROUND: Prolonged, high-dose corticosteroid treatment for systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is associated with substantial health care costs, health care resource utilization (HCRU), and adverse events (AEs). OBJECTIVE: To compare all-cause health care costs, HCRU, and oral corticosteroid (OCS)-related AEs among patients with prevalent OCS use and patients without OCS use. METHODS: This retrospective, longitudinal cohort study (GSK study 214100) used claims data from the IQVIA Real-World Data Adjudicated Claims - US, IQVIA, Inc, database between January 1, 2006, and July 31, 2019, to identify patients with SLE. Patients with at least 1 OCS pharmacy claim during the study period and continuous OCS use during the 6-month pre-index (baseline) period (index date is the date of the first OCS claim following 6 months' continuous use) formed the "prevalent OCS use cohort." This cohort was subdivided based on the level of OCS exposure during the 12-month observation period, ie, the number of 6-month periods of greater than 5 mg/day OCS use (0, 1, or 2). Patients without OCS claims formed the "no OCS use cohort." All patients had continuous enrollment during the baseline and observation periods, had at least 1 inpatient or at least 2 outpatient SLE diagnosis codes during baseline, and were aged at least 5 years at index. A 2-part model, a generalized linear regression model with a negative binomial distribution, and a multivariate logistic regression model were used to compare health care costs, HCRU, and the odds of developing an OCS-related AE between cohorts, respectively. RESULTS: The no OCS use and prevalent OCS use cohorts included 21,517 and 16,209 patients, respectively. Adjusted health care cost differences (95% CI) were significantly lower for the no OCS use cohort vs all prevalent OCS use exposure categories ($5,439 [$4,537-$6,371] vs $17,856 [$16,368-$19,498]), driven by inpatient stays and outpatient visits; HCRU was also significantly lower (adjusted incidence rate ratios vs no OCS use cohort [95% CI]: 1.20 [1.16-1.23] vs 1.47 [1.41-1.52]). Health care costs and HCRU increased with increasing length of OCS exposure. OCS-related AEs occurred more frequently for all prevalent OCS use exposure categories vs the no OCS use cohort (odds ratio [95% CI]: 1.39 [1.25-1.55] vs 2.32 [2.02-2.68]), driven by hematologic/oncologic and immune system-related AEs. The mean (SD) average daily dose of OCS increased with increasing periods of prevalent OCS use (2.5 [1.3], 6.9 [31.1], and 34.6 [1,717.3] mg/day, respectively, for patients with 0, 1, and 2 periods of OCS use). CONCLUSIONS: Prevalent OCS use incurs a substantial clinical and economic burden, highlighting the need for restricted OCS doses and durations. DISCLOSURES: This study (GSK Study 214100) was funded by GSK. GSK was involved in designing the study, contributing to the collection, analysis, and interpretation of the data, supporting the authors in the development of the manuscript, and funding the medical writing assistance. All authors, including those employed by GSK, approved the content of the submitted manuscript and were involved in the decision to submit the manuscript for publication. Dr DerSarkissian, Dr Duh, and Mr Benson are employees of Analysis Group, which received research funding from GSK to conduct this study. Dr Wang, Ms Gu, and Mr Vu are former employees of Analysis Group. Mr Bell is an employee of GSK and holds stocks and shares in the company. Ms Averell and Dr Huang are former employees of GSK and held stocks and shares in the company at the time of the study.

Network meta-analysis of efficacy of ixazomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma.

OBJECTIVES: In the absence of head-to-head comparisons across relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) treatments following the approval of the oral proteasome inhibitor ixazomib, in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone (IRd), we conducted an indirect comparison of the efficacy of IRd relative to several RRMM therapies using Bayesian fixed-effects network meta-analysis (NMA) models. METHODS: Data for the NMA were obtained through a systematic literature review (conducted in June 2020), which identified randomized controlled trials (base case) and observational studies (extended network analysis) reporting overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall response rate (ORR). RESULTS: In the base case, IRd was associated with a significantly longer PFS than lenalidomide and dexamethasone (Rd), bortezomib monotherapy (V), dexamethasone (Dex), and pomalidomide and dexamethasone (Pom-dex), a significantly shorter PFS than daratumumab, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (DRd), and a PFS comparable to elotuzumab, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (ERd) and carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (KRd). IRd was associated with a significantly longer OS than V, Dex, and Pom-dex, and an OS comparable to Rd, ERd, KRd, and DRd. The ORR of IRd was significantly higher than Rd, V, and Dex, significantly lower than KRd and DRd, and comparable to Pom-dex and ERd. The extended network analyses and sensitivity analyses were consistent with the base case. DISCUSSION: This NMA shows that IRd is relatively efficacious among RRMM treatments. Being an oral regimen, IRd is also convenient to manage. CONCLUSION: IRd could be a preferable treatment option for many patients with RRMM, particularly those seeking an efficacious and convenient therapeutic option.

Treatment patterns and overall survival of patients with double-class and triple-class refractory multiple myeloma: a US electronic health record database study.

Patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) resistant to multiple drug classes remain a high unmet need population. This longitudinal retrospective cohort study assessed real-world treatment patterns and outcomes in adults with RRMM. Patients who had three or more prior lines of therapy including a proteasome inhibitor (PI) and an immunomodulatory agent (double-exposed) were further categorized as refractory to a PI and an immunomodulatory agent (double-class refractory, n = 381) or additionally to an anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody (triple-class refractory, n = 173). Treatment options are limited for patients with double-class or triple-class refractory disease. Retreatment is a part of standard of care. Bortezomib and lenalidomide had the highest retreatment rates among double-class and triple-class refractory patients. Survival outcomes remain poor among RRMM patients with median overall survival (OS) of 22.3 and 11.6 months for double-class refractory and triple-class refractory patients, respectively. This study highlights the need for novel efficacious therapies in this heavily pretreated RRMM population.

Impact of switching to infliximab biosimilars on treatment patterns among US veterans receiving innovator infliximab.

OBJECTIVE: To compare treatment patterns of United States (US) veterans stable on innovator infliximab (IFX) who switched to an IFX biosimilar (switchers) or remained on innovator IFX (continuers). METHODS: US Veterans Healthcare Administration data (01/2012-12/2019) were used to identify adults with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), plaque psoriasis (PsO), ankylosing spondylitis (AS), or Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis (i.e. inflammatory bowel disease [IBD]), treated with innovator or biosimilar IFX. Index date was the first IFX biosimilar administration for switchers or a random innovator IFX administration for continuers. Patients were required to have ≥5 innovator IFX administrations during the 12 months pre-index (prevalent population). Patients with ≥12 months of observation prior to the first innovator IFX administration were analyzed as the primary population (incident population), and data were assessed from start of innovator IFX. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to balance baseline characteristics between cohorts. Treatment patterns were evaluated post-index; continuers were censored before switching to IFX biosimilar. Discontinuation was defined as switching to another biologic (including innovator IFX) or having ≥120 days between 2 consecutive index treatment records. RESULTS: In the incident population, mean [median] duration of follow-up was 737 [796] days among switchers (N = 838) and 479 [337] days among continuers (N = 849). Compared to continuers, switchers were 2.88-times more likely to discontinue index therapy (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.88, p < .001) and 4.99-times more likely to switch to another innovator biologic (HR = 4.99, p < .001). Of 653 switchers switching to another innovator biologic, 594 (91.0%) switched back to innovator IFX. Results were similar among the prevalent population and RA and IBD subgroups. CONCLUSION: Patients switching from innovator to biosimilar IFX were more likely to discontinue treatment and switch to another innovator biologic (notably back to innovator IFX) than those remaining on innovator IFX; however, reasons for discontinuation and switching are unknown.

Real-World Evidence in Support of Oncology Product Registration: A Systematic Review of New Drug Application and Biologics License Application Approvals from 2015-2020.

Real-world evidence (RWE) has garnered great interest to support registration of new therapies and label expansions by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Currently, practical insights on the design and analysis of regulatory-grade RWE are lacking. This study aimed to analyze attributes of real-world studies in FDA's decision-making and characteristics of full versus accelerated approvals through a systematic review of oncology product approvals. Oncology approvals from 2015 to 2020 were reviewed from FDA.gov. Applications were screened for inclusion of RWE, and variables related to regulatory designations of the application, pivotal clinical trial, and real-world studies were extracted. FDA feedback was reviewed to identify takeaways and best practices for adequate RWE. Among 133 original and 573 supplemental approvals for oncology, 11 and 2, respectively, included RWE; none predated 2017. All real-world studies were retrospective in nature; the most common data source was chart review, and the most common primary endpoint was overall response rate, as in the pivotal trial. The FDA critiqued the lack of the following: a prespecified study protocol, inclusion/exclusion criteria matching to the trial, comparability of endpoint definitions, methods to minimize confounding and address unmeasured confounding, and plans to handle missing data. All full (versus accelerated) approvals shared the following characteristics: high magnitude of efficacy in the pivotal trial; designations of orphan disease, breakthrough therapy, and priority review; and no advisory committee meeting held. This study found that findings from external control real-world studies complemented efficacy data from single-arm trials in successful oncology product approvals.

Clinical Outcomes Among Patients With Metastatic Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma Treated With Liposomal Irinotecan.

BACKGROUND: The NAPOLI-1 trial demonstrated that liposomal irinotecan in combination with fluorouracil (5-FU) and leucovorin (LV) prolonged survival with a manageable safety profile in patients with metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (mPDAC) previously treated with gemcitabine-based therapy. Real-world data on clinical outcomes associated with liposomal irinotecan in NAPOLI-1-based regimens is needed to further substantiate this. METHODS: This real-world, retrospective chart review study included patients with mPDAC who received NAPOLI-1-based regimens from six academic centers in the United States. Liposomal irinotecan initiation defined the index date. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were assessed with Kaplan-Meier methodology. RESULTS: There were 374 patients evaluated; median age was 68 years, and 51% were female. Among 326 patients with baseline ECOG information, approximately 74% had ECOG score <2. Liposomal irinotecan was administered as a doublet with 5-FU in a NAPOLI-1-based regimen in the first line (1L; 16%), 2L (42%), and 3L+ (42%) of the metastatic setting. For patients treated in 1L, 2L, and 3L+, median [95% confidence interval (CI)] OS was 8.0 [5.1, 11.2], 7.3 [5.3, 8.8], and 4.6 [4.0, 5.7] months, and median [95% CI] PFS was 4.2 [2.2, 6.6], 3.0 [2.6, 3.7], and 2.0 [1.7, 2.2] months, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Patients in a real-world setting treated with NAPOLI-1-based liposomal irinotecan doublet regimens at academic centers were older with poorer performance status compared to trial patients yet had similar outcomes and efficacy. Furthermore, liposomal irinotecan was frequently used in the 3L+ setting where no treatment has been approved and provided clinical benefit.

Veterans Affairs Prostate Cancer Treatment Sequencing (VAPCaTS): A Real-World Evidence Study of Men with Metastatic Prostate Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Limited real-world data are available on treatment sequences for patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer treated with androgen deprivation therapy plus docetaxel or abiraterone who progress to castrate resistance. METHODS: Veterans Health Affairs electronic medical records were used to analyze 240 men treated for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer with androgen deprivation therapy plus either docetaxel ("docetaxel cohort," 208 patients, selected to be overrepresented, July 2014 to August 2018) or abiraterone ("abiraterone cohort," 32 patients, December 2016 to September 2018) who received at least 1 treatment after progressing to castrate resistance. RESULTS: For docetaxel and abiraterone cohorts, respectively, mean age at androgen deprivation therapy initiation was 65 and 72 years, and median followup was 2.2 and 1.4 years. Overall, the maximum number of metastatic castrate resistant prostate cancer treatment lines was 6; 106 patients (44%) had 1, 71 (30%) had 2, and 63 (26%) had 3 or more lines. Most patients received an androgen receptor targeted agent for initial metastatic castrate resistant prostate cancer treatment (94% vs 78% in docetaxel vs abiraterone cohort). Androgen receptor targeted agents were given consecutively to 62% of the docetaxel cohort receiving second line therapy, and to 78% of the abiraterone cohort. Across all metastatic castrate resistant prostate cancer treatment lines 72 (30%) received a taxane (47 docetaxel and 41 cabazitaxel). CONCLUSIONS: Most patients received androgen receptor targeted agents as first metastatic castrate resistant prostate cancer treatment regardless of initial metastatic hormone-sensitive treatment. Moreover, a large proportion were treated with consecutive androgen receptor targeted agents. Given recent evidence suggesting poorer outcomes with this treatment in some patients, longer followup is needed to assess the association between treatment sequence and optimal outcomes.

Adherence to National Comprehensive Cancer Network Guidelines for BRCA testing among high risk breast Cancer patients: a retrospective chart review study.

BACKGROUND: Testing for BRCA variants can impact treatment decisions for breast cancer patients and affect surveillance and prevention strategies for both patients and their relatives. National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines recommend testing for patients at heightened risk of BRCA pathogenic variant. We examined the BRCA testing rate among high risk breast cancer patients treated in community oncology practices. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective medical chart review among community-based US oncologists using a physician panel approach. High risk breast cancer patients with a known family history of cancer and diagnosis with breast cancer at age ≥ 18 years between January 2013-October 2017 were included. We assessed the proportions of patients tested for BRCA variants in accordance with NCCN guidelines. RESULTS: Charts from 63 physicians, averaging 16 years of practice, were included; 97% were medical oncologists and 66.7% had a genetic counselor in their practice. We analyzed data for 410 randomly-selected patients with mean age of 52 years; 95% were female, 74% were White, and 19% had Ashkenazi Jewish ancestry. Among all patients, 94% were tested for BRCA variants. The testing rate ranged from 78 to 100% in various high risk groups; lower rates were observed among Black patients (91%), men (92%), and patients meeting NCCN criteria based on family history of male breast cancer (78%) and prostate cancer (87%). We observed a higher testing rate in patients treated by physicians with a genetic counselor in their practice (95% versus 91%). CONCLUSIONS: Adherence to NCCN BRCA testing guidelines is high in this group of predominantly medical oncologists with extensive experience, with a high proportion having a genetic counselor in practice. Testing rates can be improved in patients with risk factors related to male relatives. High level of compliance to guidelines in a community setting is possible with a delivery model for genetic counseling and testing.

Predictors of chemoradiotherapy versus single modality therapy and overall survival among patients with unresectable, stage III non-small cell lung cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Concurrent chemoradiotherapy (cCRT) was the standard of care for patients with unresectable stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) prior to the PACIFIC trial, however, patients also received single modality therapy. This study identified predictors of therapy and differences in overall survival (OS). METHODS: This retrospective study included stage III NSCLC patients aged ≥65 years, with ≥1 claim for systemic therapy (ST) or radiotherapy (RT) within 90 days of diagnosis, identified in SEER-Medicare data (2009-2014). Patients who had overlapping claims for chemotherapy and RT ≤90 days from start of therapy were classified as having received cCRT. Patients who received sequential CRT or surgical resection of tumor were excluded. Predictors of cCRT were analyzed using logistic regression. OS was compared between therapies using adjusted Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: Of 3,799 patients identified, 21.7% received ST; 26.3% received RT; and 52.0% received cCRT. cCRT patients tended to be younger (p <0.001), White (p = 0.002), and have a good predicted performance status (p<0.001). Patients who saw all three specialist types (medical oncologist, radiation oncologist, and surgeon) had increased odds of receiving cCRT (p<0.001). ST and RT patients had higher mortality risk versus cCRT patients (hazard ratio [95% CI]: ST: 1.38 [1.26-1.51]; RT: 1.75 [1.61, 1.91]); p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Several factors contributed to treatment selection, including patient age and health status, and whether the patient received multidisciplinary care. Given the survival benefit of receiving cCRT over single-modality therapy, physicians should discuss treatment within a multidisciplinary team, and be encouraged to pursue cCRT for patients with unresectable stage III NSCLC.

Retrospective analysis of comorbidities and treatment burden among patients with HIV infection in a US Medicaid population.

Objective: Comorbidities and comedications are important factors influencing optimal therapy because people are living longer with HIV infection. This study describes the long-term comorbidity profile and treatment burden among people with HIV-1 infection.Methods: This retrospective study included Medicaid claims data from patients with ≥1 antiretroviral (ARV) claim between 2016 and 2017 (most recent claim defined the index date), ≥1 HIV diagnosis within 1 year before index, age ≥18 years at first HIV diagnosis and <65 years at index, ≥12 months of continuous eligibility before index, and no history of HIV-2 infection. Comorbidities, concomitant medication use, and pill burden were assessed in the 4 years before index. Analyses were stratified by patient age and treatment experience.Results: Among 3456 patients, the mean (standard deviation [SD]) age was 47.1 (10.4) years; the majority were black (55%) and men (63%). In general, the prevalence of comorbidities increased from the fourth year to the first year before index and included cardiovascular disease (28-40%), hypertension (24-37%), hyperlipidemia (12-17%), and asthma/chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (13-19%). Concomitant medication use corresponding to these comorbidities slightly increased over time. In the year before index, mean (SD) daily pill burden was 2.1 (1.4) for ARVs and 5.9 (5.9) for non-ARVs. Older age and prior treatment experience were associated with higher rates of comorbidities and greater pill burden.Conclusions: In people with HIV infection, comorbidities and concomitant medication use increased with age, supporting considerations for streamlined ARV regimens highlighted in treatment guidelines.