Osimertinib Plasma Trough Concentration in Relation to Brain Metastases Development in Patients With Advanced EGFR-Mutated NSCLC.

Introduction: Brain metastases (BM) are common in patients with advanced EGFR-mutated (EGFRm+) NSCLC. Despite good BM-related outcomes of osimertinib, several patients still experience intracranial progression. A possible explanation is pharmacologic failure due to low plasma trough levels (Cmin,SS) and consequently limited intracranial osimertinib exposure. We investigated the relation between osimertinib Cmin,SS and BM development or progression. Methods: A prospective multicenter cohort study, including patients receiving osimertinib for advanced EGFRm+ NSCLC. At osimertinib start, patients were allocated to the BM or no or unknown BM cohort and were further divided into subgroups based on osimertinib Cmin,SS (low, middle, and high exposure). Cumulative incidence of BM progression or development and overall survival were determined for each group. Results: A total of 173 patients were included, with 49 (28.3%) had baseline BM. Of these patients, 36.7% experienced BM progression, of which 16.7% in the low (<159.3 ng/mL), 40.0% in the middle, and 47.1% in the high (>270.7 ng/mL) Cmin,SS subgroups. After 12 months, the cumulative incidence of BM progression for the BM cohort was 20% (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.6-49.0), 31% (95% CI:10.6-53.9), and 31% (95% CI:10.8-54.5) per Cmin,SS subgroup, respectively. After 20 months, this was 20% (95% CI:2.6-49.0), 52% (95% CI:23.8-74.2), and 57% (95% CI:24.9-79.7), respectively. For the no or unknown BM cohort, 4.0% developed BM without differences within Cmin,SS subgroups. Conclusions: No relation was found between osimertinib Cmin,SS and BM development or progression in patients with advanced EGFRm+ NSCLC. This suggests that systemic osimertinib exposure is not a surrogate marker for BM development or progression.

Exploring the impact of patient-specific clinical features on osimertinib effectiveness in a real-world cohort of patients with EGFR mutated non-small cell lung cancer.

Osimertinib is prescribed to patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and a sensitizing EGFR mutation. Limited data exists on the impact of patient characteristics or osimertinib exposure on effectiveness outcomes. This was a Dutch, multicenter cohort study. Eligible patients were ≥18 years, with metastatic EGFRm+ NSCLC, receiving osimertinib. Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS) and safety. Kaplan-Meier analyses and multivariate Cox proportional hazard models were performed. In total, 294 patients were included. Primary EGFR-mutations were mainly exon 19 deletions (54%) and p.L858R point mutations (30%). Osimertinib was given in first-line (40%), second-line (46%) or beyond (14%), with median PFS 14.4 (95% CI: 9.4-19.3), 13.9 (95% CI: 11.3-16.1) and 8.7 months (95% CI: 4.6-12.7), respectively. Patients with low BMI (<20.0 kg/m2 ) had significantly shorter PFS/OS compared to all other subgroups. Patients with a high plasma trough concentration in steady state (Cmin,SS ; >271 ng/mL) had shorter PFS compared to a low Cmin,SS (<163 ng/mL; aHR 2.29; 95% CI: 1.13-4.63). A significant longer PFS was seen in females (aHR = 0.61, 95% CI: 0.45-0.82) and patients with the exon 19 deletion (aHR = 0.58, 95% CI: 0.36-0.92). A trend towards longer PFS was seen for TP53 wild-type patients, while age did not impact PFS. Patients with a primary EGFR exon 19 deletion had longer PFS, while a low BMI, male sex and a high Cmin,SS were indicative for shorter PFS and/or OS. Age was not associated with effectiveness outcomes of osimertinib.

The incidence of fractures at various sites in newly treated patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Purpose: In this descriptive study, we examined the incidence of fractures in patients with newly treated type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D) compared to matched reference population. Methods: Participants from the UK Clinical Practice research datalink (CPRD) GOLD (1987-2017), aged ≥30 years, with a T2D diagnosis code and a first prescription for a non-insulin anti-diabetic drug (n = 124,328) were included. Cases with T2D were matched by year of birth, sex and practice to a reference population (n = 124,328), the mean follow-up was 7.7 years. Crude fracture incidence rates (IRs) and incidence rate ratios (IRRs) were calculated. Analyses were stratified by fracture site and sex and additionally adjusted for BMI, smoking status, alcohol use and history of any fracture at index date. Results: The IR of all fractures and major osteoporotic fractures was lower in T2D compared to the reference population (IRR 0.97; 95%CI 0.94-0.99). The IRs were lower for clavicle (IRR 0.67; 0.56-0.80), radius/ulna (IRR 0.81; 0.75-0.86) and vertebral fractures (0.83; 0.75-0.92) and higher for ankle (IRR 1.16; 95%CI 1.06-1.28), foot (1.11; 1.01-1.22), tibia/fibula (1.17; 1.03-1.32) and humerus fractures (1.11; 1.03-1.20). Differences in IRs at various fracture sites between T2D and the reference population were more pronounced in women than in men. In contrast, BMI adjusted IRs for all fractures (IRR 1.07; 1.04-1.10) and most individual fracture sites were significantly higher in T2D, especially in women. Conclusion: The crude incidence of all fractures was marginally lower in patients with newly treated T2D compared to the matched reference population but differed according to fracture site, especially in women. BMI adjusted analyses resulted in higher incidence rates in T2D at almost all fracture sites compared to crude incidence rates and this was more pronounced in women than in men. This implies that BMI may have a protective impact on the crude incidence of fractures, especially in women with newly treated T2D.

Characteristics of patients with lung cancer in clinical practice and their potential eligibility for clinical trials evaluating tyrosine kinase inhibitors or immune checkpoint inhibitors.

INTRODUCTION: In- and exclusion criteria of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) aim to include a homogeneous study-population. This study compared characteristics of lung cancer patients from phase III RCTs evaluating tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) or immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) with characteristics of lung cancer patients in a real world setting in the United Kingdom. METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink GOLD. Patients (N = 9239) with a first ever lung cancer registration between 2014 and 2018 were identified. Eligibility for inclusion was assessed for twelve RCTs (evaluating TKIs or ICIs). Reasons for potential exclusion and the number of unmet criteria were assessed for each RCT independently. OS was assessed using Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards analyses. RESULTS: The proportion of potentially eligible patients was 74.3% and 51.9% for TKI and ICI RCTs, respectively. History of another malignancy, renal insufficiency or concomitant drug-use were main reasons for exclusion. OS was considerably longer for potentially eligible patients. Hazards ratios varied from 1.17 (95% confidence interval, 1.11-1.24) to 1.35 (1.20-1.42) across the RCTs. CONCLUSION: This study showed that a considerable proportion of lung cancer patients in a real-world setting would have been ineligible for participation in phase III RCTs and that potentially ineligible patients experienced a shorter OS.

The use of oral glucocorticoids and the risk of major osteoporotic fracture in patients with myasthenia gravis.

Oral glucocorticoids may increase major osteoporotic fracture risk (MOF) in myasthenia gravis patients. To assess this risk, we performed a case-control study including all Danish patients with a MOF between 1995 and 2011. We also pooled our data with data from another study. We found no increased risk. Osteoporosis prevention remains advisable. PURPOSE/INTRODUCTION: The prolonged use of high doses of oral glucocorticoids (GCs), a common treatment in patients with myasthenia gravis (MG), may increase major osteoporotic fracture (MOF) risk. Previous epidemiological studies did not exclusively focus on patients with MG or had relatively few GC-exposed MG patients. Aims were to evaluate the risk of MOF in MG patients using oral GCs in a large study population and to perform a pooled analysis with data from previous work. METHODS: A population-based case-control study (1995-2011) was conducted using the Danish National Health Service. Cases had sustained a MOF, and controls had not. All were aged ≥ 18 years. Multivariate conditional logistic regression estimated odds ratios (ORs) among MG patients using oral GCs versus non-users. Adjustments were made for comorbidities and comedications. In the pooled analysis, results were pooled by the use of generic inverse variance methods, assuming a random-effects model. RESULTS: We identified 376,858 cases and 376,858 controls. MOF risk was not elevated in MG patients currently using oral GCs compared to MG patients not on oral GCs (ORadj.: 1.26 (95% CI 0.68-2.33)). The use of the highest cumulative dose of oral GCs (≥ 7 g) did not show an increased risk of MOF among MG patients (ORadj.: 2.00 (95% CI 0.90-4.44)). Our pooled analysis also showed no association between oral GC use and MOF risk. CONCLUSION: This study showed that oral GC use in patients with MG was not associated with increased risk of MOF in our case-control study and pooled analysis. Osteoporosis prevention in MG patients based on clinical guidelines remains advisable.

Thiazolidinediones and Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists and the Risk of Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease: A Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Thiazolidinediones (TZDs) and glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists are potential pharmacological treatment options for patients at risk of NAFLD. Therefore, we examined the association between the risk of NAFLD and the use of TZDs and GLP-1 receptor agonists compared with the use of sulfonylureas (SUs) and insulins. Additionally, we calculated the incidence of HCC in users of TZDs and GLP-1 receptor agonists. APPROACH AND RESULTS: We conducted a population-based cohort study using primary care data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink database (2007-2018). All patients aged ≥18 with a prescription of an oral glucose-lowering agent or GLP-1 receptor agonist were included. The first prescription defined the start of follow-up. The primary outcome was a new diagnosis of NAFLD. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to estimate HRs and 95% CIs of the primary outcome. Incidence rates of HCC were determined per 1,000 person-years for all exposures. The study identified 207,367 adults with a prescription for a glucose-lowering agent. The risk of NAFLD was lower in patients prescribed a TZD than in those prescribed an SU (adjusted HR [aHR], 0.32; 95% CI, 0.20-0.51). No difference in risk of NAFLD was observed comparing GLP-1 receptor agonist use with insulin use (aHR, 1.22; 95% CI, 0.91-1.63). CONCLUSIONS: Results of our study endorse the use of TZDs for selected patients at risk of NAFLD but do not support previous findings regarding the beneficial effect of GLP-1 receptor agonists. The low number of events in several subgroups may affect the generalizability of the current findings.

No decrease in fracture risk despite 15 years of treatment evolution for multiple myeloma patients: A Danish nationwide case-control study.

RATIONALE: While treatment strategies for multiple myeloma have evolved radically over the last decades, little is known about the risk of fractures for symptomatic multiple myeloma patients over time. OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of different treatment periods (1996-2000, 2001-2006 and 2007-2011) on the risk of fractures in patients with multiple myeloma. METHODS: This retrospective case-control study included patients with multiple myeloma in Denmark, using the Danish National Health Service. Cases were defined as patients who had sustained a fracture between 1996 and 2011, and controls were those without a fracture. Exposure was defined as an ICD code for multiple myeloma. Vertebral fractures, gender, and age were considered in secondary analyses. Conditional logistic regression was used to estimate odd ratios (ORs) of fracture risk, and the analyses were adjusted for comorbidities and recent drug use. RESULTS: The study population consisted of 925,341 cases, and the same number of matched controls, of whom 1334 patients with multiple myeloma. Among cases, the risk of any fracture was higher in multiple myeloma patients compared to patients without multiple myeloma (any fracture: ORadj[95% CI] 1996-2000: 1.7[1.3-2.3]; 2001-2006: 1.3[1.1-1.6]; 2007-2011: 1.7[1.4-2.2]). Although fractures were mainly non-vertebral, the risk of vertebral fractures in particular was higher in multiple myeloma patients (vertebral fracture: ORadj[95% CI] 1996-2000: 3.5[1.4-8.6]; 2001-2006: 4.0[1.9-8.2]; 2007-2011: 3.0[1.6-5.7]). CONCLUSIONS: Despite new treatment strategies and improved supportive care, this study showed no decreased fracture risk for multiple myeloma patients over time. New treatment strategies, even if they have a positive impact on overall survival, offer no guarantee for a corresponding reduction in bone lesions.

The Impact of Dose and Simultaneous Use of Acid-Reducing Agents on the Effectiveness of Vemurafenib in Metastatic BRAF V600 Mutated Melanoma: a Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: The impact of dose and simultaneous use of acid-reducing agents (ARAs) on the effectiveness of vemurafenib is unknown. OBJECTIVES: To determine the association between progression of metastatic BRAF V600 mutated melanoma and (1) dose reductions of vemurafenib and (2) simultaneous use of vemurafenib and ARAs. PATIENT AND METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of 112 first-line vemurafenib users for melanoma was conducted (March 2012-March 2016), using electronic patient records and pharmacy dispensing records of a Dutch academic hospital. Cox regression analysis was used to estimate the risk of progression with full-dose (n = 64) versus reduced-dose vemurafenib (n = 48) and with simultaneous use of vemurafenib and ARAs (n = 35) versus vemurafenib alone (n = 77). Analyses were adjusted for age and sex. RESULTS: In total, disease progression occurred in 55% of treated patients on vemurafenib, with a median progression-free survival of 6.0 (95% confidence interval [CI] 5.0-6.9) months. Compared to patients on vemurafenib alone, there was no increased risk of progression among patients requiring vemurafenib at a reduced dose or among patients receiving simultaneous therapy with vemurafenib and ARAs. In addition, there was no increased risk of progression among patients who used reduced-dose vemurafenib and ARAs versus those receiving full-dose vemurafenib as sole therapy. However, a tendency for progression was observed among patients who used full-dose vemurafenib and ARAs versus full-dose vemurafenib alone (adjusted hazard ratio [HRa] 2.37; 95% CI 0.97-5.76), which became statistically significant in a sensitivity analysis (HRa 4.56; 95% CI 1.51-13.75). CONCLUSIONS: There was no association between the use of vemurafenib in a reduced dose or the simultaneous use of vemurafenib and ARAs and the risk of progression. In addition, there was no association between the simultaneous use of vemurafenib in a reduced dose and ARAs and the risk of progression. However, patients tolerating  full-dose vemurafenib simultaneously with ARAs might have an increased risk of progression. This finding requires prospective validation.