Clinical benefit of anti-PD-(L)1 immunotherapies in advanced cancer in France: a population-based estimate from 2014 to 2021.

BACKGROUND: In France, the potential benefit of new treatments is initially evaluated by the Haute Autorité de Santé to determine reimbursement and pricing, but rarely afterwards. Although immunotherapies (ITs) have considerably improved the survival of patients, few data are available on their long-term benefit at a population-treated level. The present retrospective study aimed to assess the clinical benefit of ITs compared to the previous standards of care (SoCs) in France from 2014 to 2021. MATERIALS AND METHODS: To do this, we analyzed all ITs from the anti-programmed cell death protein 1/programmed death-ligand 1 [anti-PD-(L)1] class used in monotherapy or in association with another treatment available in early access or reimbursed in France between 2014 and 2021, regardless of indication. The number of patients initiating an IT was retrieved by year, drug and indication. Using extrapolated Kaplan-Meier curves, utility scores and the population treated, the clinical benefit was expressed as the number of deaths prevented (DP), life-years (LYs) and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained compared to previous SoC. RESULTS: Across the period, five ITs were marketed in 21 indications related to eight primary tumor sites. Between 2014 and 2021, 132 924 patients initiated an IT. By December 2021, 16 173 (13 804-17 141) deaths were delayed compared to previous SoC, mainly in lung cancer. Compared to their SoC, ITs provided a gain of 37 316 (33 581-41 048) additional LYs and 27 709 (23 784-30 450) additional QALYs. Lung cancer was the driver indication with 70.6% of LYs and 68.4% of QALYs gained followed by melanoma with 18.7% and 20.4% of the gain, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Significant gains in DP, LYs and QALYs have been observed in France following the introduction of ITs.

Time to next treatment or death as a candidate surrogate endpoint for overall survival in advanced melanoma patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors: an insight from the phase III CheckMate 067 trial.

BACKGROUND: Time to next treatment or death (TNT-D) may be a patient-relevant endpoint in patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors. This study investigated TNT-D as a surrogate endpoint (SE) for overall survival (OS) in previously untreated advanced melanoma patients. METHODS: Patient-level data from the 60-month results of the CheckMate 067 randomised, controlled trial were used. Analyses were carried out for nivolumab monotherapy or nivolumab with ipilimumab versus ipilimumab monotherapy. The SE 1-step validation method based on a joint frailty-copula model was used where the country of enrolment was applied to define clusters. Kendall's τ and the coefficient of determination (R2trial) were estimated for respective measurements of association at the individual and cluster levels. The surrogate threshold effect, the maximum threshold hazard ratio for TNT-D that would translate into OS benefit, was estimated. A leave-one-out cross-validation analysis was carried out to evaluate model robustness. RESULTS: Fifteen clusters of data were generated from 945 patients. For both nivolumab-containing arms, the association between TNT-D and OS was deemed acceptable at the individual level (Kendall's τ > 0.60) and strong at the cluster level, with R2trial fairly close to 1, with narrow confidence intervals. The estimated surrogate threshold effects were 0.61 for nivolumab versus ipilimumab and 0.49 for nivolimub + ipilimumab versus ipilimumab. Cross-validation results showed minimum variation of the correlation measures and satisfactory predictive accuracy for the model. CONCLUSION: Results suggest that TNT-D may be a valuable SE in previously untreated advanced melanoma patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors. Surrogacy analyses considering multiple randomised controlled trials are warranted for confirming these findings.

Management of lung cancer patients' quality of life in clinical practice: a Delphi study.

BACKGROUND: The assessment of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) has seen exponential growth in oncology clinical trials. However, the measurement of HRQoL has yet to be optimised in routine clinical practice. This study aimed at exploring the operationalisation of HRQoL in clinical practice with the goal of reaching a consensus from a panel of physicians. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Physicians involved in the management of lung cancer patients in France were recruited to participate in a Delphi study. The study involved three rounds of iterated queries to gain consensus on management aspects of HRQoL, including timing of discussion on HRQoL, which specific domains of HRQoL should be discussed, and what was the most appropriate method of assessment. The threshold adopted for consensus was at least 70% agreement among physicians. A scientific committee reviewed results following each round of the Delphi study. RESULTS: A representative panel of 60 physicians participated in this study. Consensus was obtained for HRQoL management at all time points in the patient care pathway. Panellists agreed that HRQoL discussions should occur during routine visits and hospitalisation. The involvement of patients' relatives was also recognised as important, except when discussing side-effects and involvement of a multidisciplinary team. There was a lack of consensus on a systematic assessment for all patients at each visit and no consensus on how HRQoL should be measured in clinical practice. CONCLUSIONS: HRQoL discussions are considered an integral part in the management of lung cancer patients, and are deemed key to success in patient-physician interaction. Further research is required to harmonise how best to implement HRQoL assessment.

[Management of patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia by urologists: the DUO study]. / Prise en charge, par les urologues, des patients présentant une hypertrophie bénigne de prostate: l'etude DUO.

UNLABELLED: The DUO study intended to define the factors determining diagnostic and treatment strategies for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) management. METHODS: This longitudinal, observational study was conducted in France (June 2004 to March 2005), with a representative sample of private and hospital urologists. RESULTS: 1027 BPH patients were included by 202 urologists and 856 were followed-up 6 months later. Mean I-PSS was 14.9 (+/- 6.7) at inclusion and 10.5 (+/- 6.7) at the follow up visit. At inclusion, pharmacologic treatment was prescribed to 84% of the patients, surgery to 13% and no treatment to 3%. Factors in favour of surgery (versus drugs) were BPH severity (OR = 2.5 if IPSS = 20), patients' choice (OR = 2.5), quality of life improvement (OR = 2.2), post-void residual (OR = 2.1) and dribbling (OR = 1.6). Patients' age and prostatic volume have no impact on this choice. Factors in favour of a combination of an alpha-blocker plus an 5alpha-reductase inhibitor (versus an alpha-blocker) were prostate volume (OR = 7.8), patient's age (OR-3.0 if age = 74) and post-void residual (OR = 2.3) and those in favour of a 5alpha reductase inhibitor (versus an alpha-blocker) were prostate volume (OR = 7.6), PSA results (OR = 5.8), patients' age (OR = 5.4 if > 74 years, OR = 2.1 if > 68 years). CONCLUSION: Medical or surgical treatment of BPH results in IPSS improvement at 6 months. Patients' age and prostatic volume favour 5alpha-reductase inhibitor initiation and have no impact on surgical treatment decision. Surgery is performed in severe BPH or when patients expecting a quality of life improvement do that choice.