Cost-effectiveness of alternative NTRK testing strategies in cancer patients followed by histology-independent therapy with entrectinib: an analysis of three European countries.

Aim: To explore variations in the cost-effectiveness of entrectinib across different testing strategies and settings. Methods: Four testing strategies where adult cancer patients received entrectinib if they tested positive for NTRK gene fusions compared with 'no testing' and standard of care (SoC) for all patients were evaluated. Results: Immunohistochemistry for all patients followed by RNA-based next-generation sequencing after a positive result was the optimal strategy in all included countries. However, the incremental net monetary benefit compared with SoC was negative in all countries, ranging between international euros (int€) -206 and -404. In a subgroup analysis with only NTRK-positive patients, the incremental net monetary benefit was int€ 8405 in England, int€ -53,088 in Hungary and int€ 54,372 in The Netherlands. Conclusion: Using the cost-effectiveness thresholds recommended by national guidelines, none of the testing strategies were cost-effective compared with no testing. The implementation of entrectinib is unlikely to become cost-effective in Hungary, due to the large cost difference between the entrectinib and SoC arms, while there might be more potential in England and The Netherlands.

Histology-independent pharmaceuticals are a new phenomenon in cancer care. Most chemotherapies are prescribed based on the tumor's (primary) location, while histology-independent therapies are prescribed based on genetic markers in the tumor DNA. In this study, the added value of the histology-independent treatment entrectinib, which is aimed at cancer patients with so-called NTRK gene fusions, was investigated. Because these patients must be identified before they can be given entrectinib, various strategies for diagnostic testing were considered. An economic model was programmed to gain insight into the costs and health outcomes associated with the different testing strategies. The same analysis was done for three different countries (England, Hungary and The Netherlands) using local data. In all three countries, the health gains from receiving entrectinib may be large for patients with NTRK gene fusions. However, treatment with entrectinib was also much more expensive than standard-care treatment, especially in Hungary. In each of the three countries, all evaluated testing strategies were found to offer a negative net benefit to society (i.e., a net loss). This may be partially explained by the fact that NTRK gene fusions are rare, meaning that a large group of cancer patients has to receive (costly) testing while, subsequently, only a few patients enjoy the benefit of switching to a treatment that is more effective for them (i.e., entrectinib). Nonetheless, in England and Hungary, even if the most accurate test was provided for free, the net benefit to society of implementing entrectinib remained negative. Further changes, such as a reduction in the price of entrectinib, may therefore be needed.

Discovery of Novel GR Ligands toward Druggable GR Antagonist Conformations Identified by MD Simulations and Markov State Model Analysis.

Binding of different ligands to glucocorticoid receptor (GR) may induce different conformational changes and even trigger completely opposite biological functions. To understand the allosteric communication within the GR ligand binding domain, the folding pathway of helix 12 (H12) induced by the binding of the agonist dexamethasone (DEX), antagonist RU486, and modulator AZD9567 are explored by molecular dynamics simulations and Markov state model analysis. The ligands can regulate the volume of the activation function-2 through the residues Phe737 and Gln738. Without ligand or with agonist binding, H12 swings from inward to outward to visit different folding positions. However, the binding of RU486 or AZD9567 perturbs the structural state, and the passive antagonist state appears more stable. Structure-based virtual screening and in vitro bioassays are used to discover novel GR ligands that bias the conformation equilibria toward the passive antagonist state. HP-19 exhibits the best anti-inflammatory activity (IC50 = 0.041 ± 0.011 µm) in nuclear factor-kappa B signaling pathway, which is comparable to that of DEX. HP-19 also does not induce adverse effect-related transactivation functions of GR. The novel ligands discovered here may serve as promising starting points for the development of GR modulators.

Oral metronomic chemotherapy is a cost effective alternative to pazopanib in advanced soft tissue sarcoma.

INTRODUCTION: Soft tissue sarcoma(STS) is a rare and heterogeneous group of disorders with dismal outcomes in metastatic setting. Pazopanib and oral metronomic chemotherapy (OMT) have been evaluated as therapeutic options in this cohort. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, single center study evaluating 45 patients with unresectable and/or metastatic STS, who received pazopanib or oral metronomic regimen as per instituitonal protocol between January 2013 and December 2019. An informal cost minimisation analysis was conducted for both OMT and pazopanib arms, considering equivalent outcomes for both (PFS and OS). RESULTS: Median PFS in OMT and Pazopanib groups was 4.13 months and 3.53 months,respectively (HR1.31, 95% CI:0.68-2.51, p = 0.41) Only one patient in the OMT group achieved an objective response (partial response) and no objective response was noted in the pazopanib group. The incidence of grade III/IVtoxicities was higher with pazopanib than with OMT (p = 0.08). There were no toxicity related deaths noted in either arm. CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrates that OMT have a similar progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in metastatic STS. This study raises the possibility that OMT might be an equally efficacious and less toxic alternative to pazopanib, without compromising survival outcome especially in LMIC.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of olaparib and niraparib as maintenance therapy for women with recurrent platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer.

OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of olaparib and niraparib as maintenance therapy for patients with platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer.Methods: A decision analysis model compared the costs and effectiveness of olaparib and niraparib versus placebo for patients with or without germline BRCA mutations. Resource use and associated costs were estimated from the 2020 National Health Insurance Administration reimbursement price list. Clinical effectiveness was measured in progression-free survival per life-years (PFS-LY) based on the results of clinical trials SOLO2/ENHOT-Ov21 and ENGOT-OV16/NOVA. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was estimated from a single-payer perspective. RESULTS: In the base case, olaparib was the more cost-effective treatment regimen. The ICERs for olaparib and niraparib compared to placebo were NT$1,804,785 and NT$2,340,265 per PFS-LY, respectively. Tornado analysis showed that PFS and the total resource use cost of niraparib regimen for patients without gBRCA were the most sensitive parameters impacting the ICER. The ICERs for both drugs in patients with a gBRCA mutation were lower than in patients without a gBRCA mutation. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicated that olaparib was more cost-effective than niraparib at the willingness-to-pay threshold of NT$2,602,404 per PFS life-year gained. CONCLUSION: Olaparib was estimated to be less cost and more effective compared to niraparib as maintenance therapy for patients with recurrent platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer.

Budget impact analysis of niraparib for first-line maintenance therapy in advanced ovarian cancer from a US payer perspective.

BACKGROUND: Ovarian cancer (OC) is the fifth leading cause of cancer death in women and has the highest mortality rate of gynecological cancers. Niraparib was recently approved by the FDA for the maintenance treatment of adult patients with advanced epithelial OC in complete or partial response to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy (PBC) regardless of biomarker status. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the direct economic impact on US payers of adding niraparib as a first-line maintenance therapy for patients with advanced OC. METHODS: The model considered 2 scenarios: a current scenario in which niraparib does not have regulatory approval for first-line maintenance therapy and a future scenario in which niraparib has regulatory approval for first-line maintenance therapy. The budget impact was calculated as the difference in cost between the 2 scenarios. The budget impact model (BIM) considered 2 different US health care payer perspectives: a commercial health plan and a Medicare plan. Both payer perspectives were assumed to have a hypothetical 1 million affiliates that were covered. Epidemiological data was used to estimate the eligible incident population of patients with OC. Active surveillance, bevacizumab (as a monotherapy), and olaparib (as a monotherapy restricted to patients with the breast cancer gene [BRCA] mutation) were included in the model as alternative maintenance treatment options (maintenance treatment options required 1% market share for inclusion). Cost categories considered in the BIM included diagnostic testing, treatment acquisition and administration, treatment-emergent adverse events, and subsequent therapy. Results were presented as an incremental budget impact to payers over 3 years. RESULTS: For a commercial health plan of 1 million affiliates, the estimated impact of adding niraparib as a first-line maintenance treatment option for advanced epithelial OC was calculated as $87,906, $93,106, and $87,037 for years 1, 2, and 3, respectively. The average budget impact per member per month was $0.007. For a Medicare health plan of 1 million affiliates, the estimated impact was calculated as $206,785, $219,017, and $204,739 for years 1, 2, and 3, respectively. The average budget impact per member per month was $0.018. One-way sensitivity analyses suggested that budget impact was most sensitive to the treatment duration and market share of niraparib, the non-treatment-specific data on overall survival rates, and the treatment duration of bevacizumab. Treatment of drug-specific adverse events had little impact on the budget model. CONCLUSIONS: The model estimated a minimal budget impact to both a commercial or Medicare health plan following the introduction of niraparib as a first-line maintenance therapy for patients with advanced epithelial OC who are in complete or partial response to first-line PBC regardless of biomarker status. DISCLOSURES: This study was financially supported by GlaxoSmithKline. Liu, Hawkes, Maiese, and Hurteau are employees of GlaxoSmithKline. Travers was employed by GlaxoSmithKline at the time of this study. Spalding and Walder are employees of FIECON Ltd., which was contracted by GlaxoSmithKline to develop the budget impact model used in this study.

Sensitive quantification of free pazopanib using ultra-high performance liquid chromatography coupled to tandem mass spectrometry and assessment of clinical application.

Pazopanib is widely used to treat renal cell carcinomas and soft tissue tumors in Japan. Although several reports demonstrated the usefulness of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of pazopanib, those studies measured only total pazopanib concentration. For drugs with high protein binding rates such as pazopanib, measuring free concentrations may be clinically more useful than measuring total concentrations. In this study, we aimed to develop a high-throughput method for quantification of free pazopanib in human plasma using ultra-high performance liquid chromatography coupled to tandem mass spectrometry (UHPLC-MS/MS). Free pazopanib was separated by ultrafiltration. After a simple solid-phase extraction step using a 96-well plate, pazopanib was analyzed by UHPLC-MS/MS in positive electrospray ionization mode. The novel method fulfilled the requirements of the US Food and Drug Administration guidelines for assay validation, and the lower limit of quantification was 0.05 ng/mL. The calibration curve was linear over the concentration range of 0.05-50 ng/mL. The average recovery rate was 66.9 ± 2.1% (mean ± SD). The precision was below 7.02%, and accuracy was within 10.60% across all quality control levels. Matrix effect varied between 44.4% and 60.4%. This assay was successfully applied to measure trough free pazopanib concentrations in three patients treated with pazopanib for soft tissue tumors. We succeeded to develop a novel high-throughput UHPLC-MS/MS method for quantification of free pazopanib in human plasma. This method can be applied to TDM for patients receiving pazopanib in the clinical setting.

Systematic evaluation of a panel of 30 synthetic cannabinoid receptor agonists structurally related to MMB-4en-PICA, MDMB-4en-PINACA, ADB-4en-PINACA, and MMB-4CN-BUTINACA using a combination of binding and different CB1 receptor activation assays-Part II: Structure activity relationship assessment via a ß-arrestin recruitment assay.

Synthetic cannabinoid receptor agonists (SCRAs) are the second largest class of new psychoactive substances (NPS) and are associated with serious adverse effects and even death. Despite this, little pharmacological data are available for many of the most recent SCRAs. This study consists of three different parts, aiming to systematically evaluate a panel of 30 SCRAs using binding and different in vitro human cannabinoid 1 receptor (CB1 ) activation assays. The present Part II investigated the SCRA analogs for their CB1 activation via a ß-arrestin recruitment assay. The panel was systematically designed to include key structural sub-features of recent SCRAs. Thus, the 4-pentenyl tail of MMB-4en-PICA and MDMB-4en-PINACA was retained while incorporating varying head groups from other prevalent SCRAs, including amides and esters of L-valine, L-tert-leucine, and L-phenylalanine, and adamantyl and cumyl moieties. All 30 SCRAs activated CB1 , with indazoles generally showing the greatest potency (EC50 = 1.88-281 nM), followed by indoles (EC50 = 11.5-2293 nM), and the corresponding 7-azaindoles (EC50 = 62.4-9251 nM). Several subunit-linked structure-activity relationships were identified: (i) tert-leucine-functionalized SCRAs were more potent than the corresponding valine derivatives; (ii) no major difference in potency or efficacy was observed between tert-leucine/valine-derived amides and the corresponding methyl esters; however, phenylalanine analogs were affected by this change; and (iii) minor structural changes to the 4-pentenyl substituent had little influence on activity. These findings elucidate structural features that modulate the CB1 activation potential of currently prevalent SCRAs and a systematic panel of analogs, some of which may appear in NPS markets in future.

Evaluation of Synthetic Cannabinoid Metabolites in Human Blood in the Absence of Parent Compounds: A Stability Assessment.

Synthetic cannabinoids represent a chemically diverse class of novel psychoactive substances (NPS) responsible for large analytical and interpretative challenges for forensic toxicologists. Between 2016 and 2019, the three most prevalent synthetic cannabinoids in the United States were MMB-FUBINACA (FUB-AMB), 5F-MDMB-PINACA (5F-ADB) and 5F-MDMB-PICA, based on results from seized drug and toxicology testing. In 2018, accurate determination of synthetic cannabinoid positivity was brought into question as it was determined that the metabolites of these drug species were present in the absence of parent compounds in forensically relevant blood samples. During this study, the stability of MMB-FUBINACA, 5F-MDMB-PINACA and 5F-MDMB-PICA was evaluated, as well as the characterization of breakdown products. A liquid-liquid extraction method was assessed for recovery of basic parent compounds and acidic metabolites and deemed fit for use in this study. Analysis was performed by liquid chromatography-quadrupole time-of-flight mass spectrometry (LC-QTOF-MS) using a SCIEX TripleTOF® 5600+. All three synthetic cannabinoids were found to be unstable when stored in blood at either room temperature or refrigerated; all analytes were considerably more stable when stored in the freezer. All three synthetic cannabinoids degraded to their respective butanoic acid metabolites: MMB-FUBINACA 3-methylbutanoic acid, 5F-MDMB-PINACA 3,3-dimethylbutanoic acid and 5F-MDMB-PICA 3,3-dimethylbutanoic acid. All three of these metabolites were studied and determined to be stable in blood at all storage conditions. Considering these results, our laboratory continued testing for synthetic cannabinoid metabolites in blood samples and found 83 positives (21%) for only a synthetic cannabinoid metabolite. A case report is presented herein where 5F-MDMB-PINACA 3,3-dimethylbutanoic acid was identified in the absence of 5F-MDMB-PINACA. Forensic toxicologists should be aware of the results of this study as they directly impact analytical consideration for test development and implementation, as well as interpretation of findings.

Comprehensive geriatric assessment is an independent prognostic factor in older patients with metastatic renal cell cancer treated with first-line Sunitinib or Pazopanib: a single center experience.

BACKGROUND: There is poor data on the prognostic role of Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (CGA) in older patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) treated with first line Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors (TKIs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the clinical charts of mRCC patients older than 70 years treated at our Institute with first-line Sunitinib or Pazopanib for at least 6 months. Every patient received a CGA at baseline and was identified as fit, vulnerable or frail according to Balducci's Criteria. We then assessed the impact of CGA category on survival, disease control and tolerability of TKIs. RESULTS: We identified 86 eligible patients. Median age: 74.5 years, 56% males; 45.4% were fit, 37.2% vulnerable and 17.4% frail at CGA. There were no significant differences in the rate of Grade (G)1-2 and G3-4 toxicities, dose reduction rates, PFS and OS between Sunitinib and Pazopanib. Fit, vulnerable and frail patients achieved significantly different median PFS (18.9 vs 11.2 vs 5.1 months; p < 0.001) and OS (35.5 vs 14.6 vs 10.9 months; p < 0.001). Patients categorized as fit had higher chance of receiving a second-line treatment (66.6% vs 28.9% in vulnerable/frail; p = 0.002). The incidence of G3/4 events was significantly lower in the fit subgroup (19% vs 45% in vulnerable/frail; p = 0.0025). CONCLUSIONS: In our retrospective single-center experience, CGA could accurately discriminate patients with higher risk of experiencing G3/4 toxicities, shorter PFS, and lower chance of receiving a second line treatment. CGA strongly impacted on OS, independently from International mRCC Database Consortium (IMDC) classification.

Cost-effectiveness of Maintenance Therapy Based on Molecular Classification Following Treatment of Primary Epithelial Ovarian Cancer in the United States.

Importance: There are large randomized clinical trials-SOLO-1 (Olaparib Maintenance Monotherapy in Patients With BRCA Mutated Ovarian Cancer Following First Line Platinum Based Chemotherapy [December 2018]), PRIMA (A Study of Niraparib Maintenance Treatment in Patients With Advanced Ovarian Cancer Following Response on Front-Line Platinum-Based Chemotherapy [September 2019]), and PAOLA-1 (Platine, Avastin and Olaparib in 1st Line [December 2019])-reporting positive efficacy results for maintenance regimens for women with primary, advanced epithelial ovarian cancer. The findings resulted in approval by the US Food and Drug Administration of the treatments studied as of May 2020. However, there are pressing economic considerations given the many eligible patients and substantial associated costs. Objective: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of maintenance strategies for patients with (1) a BRCA variant, (2) homologous recombination deficiency without a BRCA variant, or (3) homologous recombination proficiency. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this economic evaluation of the US health care sector using simulated patients with primary epithelial ovarian cancer, 3 decision trees were developed, one for each molecular signature. The maintenance strategies evaluated were olaparib (SOLO-1), olaparib-bevacizumab (PAOLA-1), bevacizumab (PAOLA-1), and niraparib (PRIMA). Base case 1 assessed olaparib, olaparib-bevacizumab, bevacizumab, and niraparib vs observation of a patient with a BRCA variant. Base case 2 assessed olaparib-bevacizumab, bevacizumab, and niraparib vs observation in a patient with homologous recombination deficiency without a BRCA variant. Base case 3 assessed olaparib-bevacizumab, bevacizumab, and niraparib vs observation in a patient with homologous recombination proficiency. The time horizon was 24 months. Costs were estimated from Medicare claims, wholesale acquisition prices, and published sources. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses with microsimulation were then conducted to account for uncertainty and assess model stability. One-way sensitivity analyses were also performed. The study was performed from January through June 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) in US dollars per progression-free life-year saved (PF-LYS). Results: Assuming a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100 000/PF-LYS, none of the drugs could be considered cost-effective compared with observation. In the case of a patient with a BRCA variant, olaparib was the most cost-effective (ICER, $186 777/PF-LYS). The third-party payer price per month of olaparib would need to be reduced from approximately $17 000 to $9000 to be considered cost-effective. Olaparib-bevacizumab was the most cost-effective in the case of a patient with homologous recombination deficiency without a BRCA variant (ICER, $629 347/PF-LYS), and bevacizumab was the most cost-effective in the case of patient with homologous recombination proficiency (ICER, $557 865/PF-LYS). Even at a price of $0 per month, niraparib could not be considered cost-effective as a maintenance strategy for patients with homologous recombination proficiency. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this study suggest that, at current costs, maintenance therapy for primary ovarian cancer is not cost-effective, regardless of molecular signature. For certain therapies, lowering the drug price alone may not make them cost-effective.

Financial Implications of Avapritinib for Treatment of Unresectable Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors in Patients With a PDGFRA Exon 18 Variant or After 3 Previous Therapies in a Hypothetical US Health Plan.

Importance: With the approval of avapritinib for adults with unresectable or metastatic gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) harboring a platelet-derived growth factor receptor alpha (PDGFRA) exon 18 variant, including PDGFRA D842V variants, and National Comprehensive Cancer Network guideline recommendations as an option for patients with GIST after third-line treatment, it is important to estimate the potential financial implications of avapritinib on a payer's budget. Objective: To estimate the budget impact associated with the introduction of avapritinib to a formulary for metastatic or unresectable GISTs in patients with a PDGFRA exon 18 variant or after 3 or more previous treatments from the perspective of a US health plan. Design, Setting, and Participants: For this economic evaluation, a 3-year budget impact model was developed in March 2020, incorporating costs for drug acquisition, testing, monitoring, adverse events, and postprogression treatment. The model assumed that avapritinib introduction would be associated with increased PDGFRA testing rates from the current 49% to 69%. The health plan population was assumed to be mixed 69% commercial, 22% Medicare, and 9% Medicaid. Base case assumptions included a GIST incidence rate of 9.6 diagnoses per million people, a metastatic PDGFRA exon 18 mutation rate of 1.9%, and progression rate from first-line to fourth-line treatment of 17%. Exposures: The model compared scenarios with and without avapritinib in a formulary. Main Outcomes and Measures: Annual, total, and per member per month (PMPM) budget impact. Results: In a hypothetical 1-million member plan, fewer than 0.1 new patients with a PDGFRA exon 18 variant per year and 1.2 patients receiving fourth-line therapy per year were eligible for treatment. With avapritinib available, the total increase in costs in year 3 for all eligible adult patients with a PDGFRA exon 18 variant was $46 875, or $0.004 PMPM. For patients undergoing fourth-line treatment, the total increase in costs in year 3 was $69 182, or $0.006 PMPM. The combined total budget impact in year 3 was $115 604, or $0.010 PMPM, including an offset of $3607 in postprogression costs avoided or delayed. The higher rates of molecular testing resulted in a minimal incremental testing cost of $453 in year 3. Conclusions and Relevance: These results suggest that adoption of avapritinib as a treatment option would have a minimal budget impact to a hypothetical US health plan. This would be primarily attributable to the small eligible patient population and cost offsets from reduced or delayed postprogression costs.

An updated cost-effectiveness analysis of pazopanib versus sunitinib as first-line treatment for locally advanced or metastatic renal cell carcinoma in Italy.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the cost-effectiveness of pazopanib versus sunitinib as a first-line treatment for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) from an Italian National Health Service perspective, considering the evolving Italian landscape in terms of new reimbursement agreements trend. METHODS: This analysis is an update of the previously published cost-effectiveness analysis to incorporate recent 2019 costs and additional changes regarding drug discounting. A partitioned-survival analysis model with three different health states (progression-free survival, post-progression survival, and dead) was utilized. Outcomes included progression-free life years, post-progression life years, overall life years, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and costs calculated for both treatments. Cost-effectiveness was assessed in terms of incremental costs per QALY gained and the net monetary benefit (NMB) of pazopanib versus sunitinib. In the base case analysis, a time horizon of 5 years was used and future costs and QALYs were discounted at a 3% annual discount rate. An impact of methodological and parameter uncertainly on base case results was evaluated using probabilistic and deterministic sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: In the base case, pazopanib had higher QALYs (+0.060) at lower costs (-€5,857) versus sunitinib, hence it dominated sunitinib. At willingness-to-pay thresholds of €30,000 and €50,000 per QALY, the NMB with pazopanib were €7,647 and €8,841 per patient, respectively, versus sunitinib. The probability that pazopanib is cost-effective versus sunitinib was estimated to be 97.5% at a cost-effectiveness threshold of €20,000, 95.4% at a threshold of €30,000, and 90.2% at a threshold of €50,000 per QALY. Cost-effectiveness results were robust to changes in key parameter values and assumptions as demonstrated by deterministic sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Pazopanib is likely to represent a cost-effective treatment option compared with sunitinib as a first-line treatment for patients with metastatic RCC in Italy.

Assessment of acute kidney injury related to small-molecule protein kinase inhibitors using the FDA adverse event reporting system.

PURPOSE: Small-molecule protein kinase inhibitors (PKIs) have substantially improved clinical outcomes of various diseases. However, some studies suggested these agents might induce acute kidney injury (AKI). This study was designed to comprehensively assess the adverse events of AKI in real-world patients receiving small-molecule PKIs using the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS). METHODS: The FAERS data between 2004 and 2019 were extracted to describe the characteristics of AKI cases after the use of small-molecule PKIs approved by the FDA. The reporting odds ratio (ROR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) for AKI was calculated for each small-molecule PKI agent. A disproportionality signal was defined when the lower limit of 95% CI > 1. RESULTS: Among the 462,020 adverse event reports for small-molecule PKIs, 9970 (2.16%) were identified as AKI cases. The median AKI onset time was 32 (interquartile range 11-124) days after the initiation of small-molecule PKI treatment. A total of 61.38% and 26.04% of AKI cases resulted in hospitalization and death, respectively. Based on RORs, 14 of 52 small-molecule PKIs yielded disproportionality signals for AKI, including six VEGFR inhibitors, three mTOR inhibitors and five small-molecule PKIs with other targets. The agents with the highest AKI RORs were entrectinib (ROR 6.40, 95% CI 2.23, 18.34), sirolimus (ROR 3.76, 95% CI 3.45, 4.09), and cobimetinib (ROR 3.40, 95% CI 2.69, 4.28). CONCLUSION: Analysis of the FAERS data helped identify the small-molecule PKIs that were most frequently reported for AKI. Further investigations are needed to confirm these potential risks.

Movement of Poly-ADP Ribose (PARP) Inhibition into Frontline Treatment of Ovarian Cancer.

The use of poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors in the front-line management of advanced ovarian cancer has recently emerged as an exciting strategy with the potential to improve outcomes for patients with advanced ovarian cancer. In this article, we review the results of four recently published Phase III randomised controlled trials evaluating the use of PARP inhibitors in the primary treatment of ovarian cancer (SOLO1, PRIMA, PAOLA-1, and VELIA). Collectively, the studies suggest that PARP maintenance in the upfront setting is most beneficial among patients with BRCA-associated ovarian cancers (hazard ratios range from 0.31 to 0.44), followed by patients with tumours that harbour homologous recombination deficiencies (hazard ratios range from 0.33 to 0.57). All three studies that included an all-comer population were able to demonstrate benefit of PARP inhibitors, regardless of biomarker status. The FDA has approved olaparib for front-line maintenance therapy among patients with BRCA-associated ovarian cancers, and niraparib for all patients, regardless of biomarker status. In determining which patients should be offered front-line maintenance PARP inhibitors, and which agent to use, there are multiple factors to consider, including FDA indication, dosing preference, toxicity, risks versus benefits for each patient population, and cost. There are ongoing studies further exploring the front-line use of PARP inhibitors, including the potential downstream effects of PARP-inhibitor resistance in the recurrent setting, combining PARP-inhibitors with other anti-angiogenic drugs, immunotherapeutic agents, and inhibitors of pathways implicated in PARP inhibitor resistance.

Real world experience of poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor use in a community oncology practice.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to describe the real-world experience, including the clinical and financial burden, associated with PARP inhibitors in a large community oncology practice. METHODS: Retrospective chart review identified patients prescribed olaparib, niraparib or rucaparib for maintenance therapy or treatment of recurrent ovarian, primary peritoneal or fallopian tube cancer across twelve gynecologic oncologists between December 2016 and November 2018. Demographic, financial and clinical data were extracted. One PARP cycle was defined as a single 28-day period. For patients treated with more than one PARPi, each course was described separately. RESULTS: A total of 47 patients and 506 PARP cycles were identified (122 olaparib, 24%; 89 rucaparib, 18%; 294 niraparib, 58%). Incidence of grade ≥ 3 adverse events were similar to previously reported. Toxicity resulted in dose interruption, reduction and discontinuation in 69%, 63% and 29% respectively. Dose interruptions were most frequent for niraparib but resulted in fewer discontinuations (p-value 0.01). Mean duration of use was 7.46 cycles (olaparib 10.52, rucaparib 4.68, niraparib 7.34). Average cost of PARPi therapy was $8018 per cycle. A total of 711 phone calls were documented (call rate 1.4 calls/cycle) with the highest call volume required for care coordination, lab results and toxicity management. CONCLUSIONS: Although the toxicity profile was similar to randomized clinical trials, this real-world experience demonstrated more dose modifications and discontinuations for toxicity management than previously reported. Furthermore, the clinical and financial burden of PARP inhibitors may be significant and future studies should assess the impact on patient outcomes.

Niraparib maintenance in frontline management of ovarian cancer: a cost effectiveness analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Niraparib maintenance after frontline chemotherapy for advanced ovarian cancer extends progression free survival. The objective of this study was to determine the cost effectiveness of niraparib maintenance therapy in patients with newly diagnosed ovarian cancer. METHODS: Decision analysis models compared the cost of observation versus niraparib maintenance following chemotherapy for five groups: all newly diagnosed ovarian cancer patients (overall), those with homologous recombination deficiency, those harboring BRCA mutations (BRCA), homologous recombination deficiency patients without BRCA mutations (homologous recombination deficiency non-BRCA), and non-homologous recombination deficiency patients. Drug costs were estimated using average wholesale prices. Progression free survival was estimated from published data and used to estimate projected overall survival. Incremental cost effectiveness ratios per quality adjusted life year were calculated. Sensitivity analyses varying the cost of niraparib were performed. The willingness-to-pay threshold was set at US$100 000 per quality adjusted life year saved. RESULTS: For the overall group, the cost of observation was US$5.8 billion versus $20.5 billion for niraparib maintenance, with an incremental cost effectiveness ratio of $72 829. For the homologous recombination deficiency group, the observation cost was $3.0 billion versus $14.8 billion for niraparib maintenance (incremental cost effectiveness ratio $56 329). Incremental cost effectiveness ratios for the BRCA, homologous recombination deficiency non-BRCA, and non-homologous recombination deficiency groups were $58 348, $50 914, and $88 741, respectively. For the overall and homologous recombination deficiency groups, niraparib remained cost effective if projected overall survival was 2.2 and 1.5 times progression free survival, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: For patients with newly diagnosed ovarian cancer, maintenance therapy with niraparib was cost effective. Cost effectiveness was improved when analyzing those patients with homologous recombination deficiency and BRCA mutations. Efforts should continue to optimize poly-ADP-ribose polymerase utilization strategies.

Assessment of Predictive Biomarkers of the Response to Pazopanib Based on an Integrative Analysis of High-grade Soft-tissue Sarcomas: Analysis of a Tumor Sample from a Responder and Patients with Other Soft-tissue Sarcomas.

BACKGROUND: Soft-tissue sarcomas are a rare group of malignant tumors that usually are treated with surgical excision and radiation therapy, but recently, pazopanib, an oral tyrosine kinase inhibitor, has been used in patients with metastases who do not respond to standard chemotherapy regimens. Based on patients with advanced soft-tissue sarcomas who had received prior chemotherapy, several clinical studies have reported the survival and sensitivity (approximately 5% to 10% sensitive) of patients with soft-tissue sarcomas treated with pazopanib. Recently, next-generation sequencing (NGS) technologies have been used to provide a wide genetic information and to develop personalized medicine in cancer treatment. However, there are few reports and no genetic analyses of patients with soft-tissue sarcomas who had a complete response (CR) to pazopanib. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We described the clinicopathologic features of a patient with a rare, advanced soft-tissue sarcoma who achieved a CR to pazopanib treatment. Furthermore, integrative analyses using NGS and arrays were performed to elucidate characteristic alterations, including gene mutations, copy number changes, and protein expression that were associated with response to pazopanib. Additionally, functional analyses consisting of in vitro and in vivo assays were also performed to elucidate whether the identified alterations were associated with oncogenic abilities and drug responses. METHODS: In a sample from a 70-year-old woman with an advanced soft-tissue sarcoma treated for 1 month with 800 mg of oral pazopanib daily, CT scans demonstrated a CR to treatment. To our knowledge, there have been no patients with soft-tissue sarcomas among several clinical trials of pazopanib that have achieved a CR and therefore, our patient is considered to be extremely rare. We performed an integrative analysis including whole-exome sequencing, transcriptome sequencing, and phosphorylation profiling of receptor tyrosine kinases (RTK) using tumor samples from a patient with a CR matched to normal samples. From here on we will refer to this patient as having a CR, although a short term high-grade partial response may be more accurate. These analyses were performed using NGS and the phosphoreceptor tyrosine kinase (phospho-RTK) array. As a validation study, we also performed target sequencing using three samples from patients with long-term stable disease and two samples from patients with progressive disease who responded to pazopanib treatment. In addition, characteristic gene alterations that were identified according to the response to pazopanib in one patient with a CR, in three patients with long-term stable disease, and in 27 patients with high-grade soft-tissue sarcomas with different histologic subtypes and different responses to pazopanib were verified by quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction. We conducted a focus formation assay to evaluate the transforming activities of these genomic alterations. RESULTS: In the patient with a CR to pazopanib, we identified several somatic mutations including Fms related receptor tyrosine kinase 1 (FLT1) p.G38S, platelet-derived growth factor receptor alpha (PDGFRA) p.T83S, and platelet-derived growth factor receptor beta (PDGFRB) exon 13 skipping. Amplification at chromosome 12q13-14 encompassing GLI family zinc finger 1 (GLI1) and cyclin-dependent kinase-4 (CDK4) was also detected. Furthermore, an elevated PDGFRB phosphorylation level was observed in the tumor. In target sequencing analyses in five patients, one of three patients with long-term stable disease had 12q13-14 amplification. The mRNA expression of GLI1, CDK4, and pazopanib targets including PDGFRA, PDGFRB, vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR)1-3, and stem cell factor receptor (KIT) in samples from the patient with a CR, and 27 patients with high-grade soft-tissue sarcomas was verified. The expression of GLI1 was characteristically increased in the patient with a CR and in those with long-term stable disease relative to other patients with soft-tissue sarcomas. Overexpression of GLI1 showed strong transforming potential in 3T3 cells. Moreover, the overexpression of GLI1 upregulated the expression of the PDGFRB protein and promoted phosphorylation, which was dose-dependently inhibited by pazopanib. However, inhibition of GLI1-induced transformation by pazopanib was limited in the focus formation assay; therefore, mechanisms other than PDGFRB activation may contribute to transformation. CONCLUSIONS: We identified several gene alterations that might be associated with a CR and long-term stable disease in patients who received pazopanib for advanced soft-tissue sarcomas. We therefore believe that this distinct molecular profile warrants further investigation to identify predictive biomarkers of the response to pazopanib. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Our findings identify molecular mechanisms that possibly explain the high sensitivity of soft-tissue sarcomas to pazopanib and may lead to the development of predictive biomarkers and novel therapies in patients with this and other types of soft-tissue sarcomas.

Assessment of synthetic cannabinoid FUB-AMB and its ester hydrolysis metabolite in human liver microsomes and human blood samples using UHPLC-MS/MS.

FUB-AMB, an indazole carboxamide synthetic cannabinoid recreational drug, was one of the compounds most frequently reported to governmental agencies worldwide between 2016 and 2019. It has been implicated in intoxications and fatalities, posing a risk to public health. In the current study, FUB-AMB was incubated with human liver microsomes (HLM) to assess its metabolic fate and stability and to determine if its major ester hydrolysis metabolite (M1) was present in 12 authentic forensic human blood samples from driving under the influence of drug cases and postmortem investigations using UHPLC-MS/MS. FUB-AMB was rapidly metabolized in HLM, generating M1 that was stable through a 120-min incubation period, a finding that indicates a potential long detection window in human biological samples. M1 was identified in all blood samples, and no parent drug was detected. The authors propose that M1 is a reliable marker for inclusion in laboratory blood screens for FUB-AMB; this metabolite may be pharmacologically active like its precursor FUB-AMB. M1 frequently appears in samples in which the parent drug is undetectable and can point to the causative agent. The results suggest that it is imperative that synthetic cannabinoid laboratory assay panels include metabolites, especially known or potential pharmacologically active metabolites, particularly for compounds with short half-lives.

Cost-effectiveness of niraparib, rucaparib, and olaparib for treatment of platinum-resistant, recurrent ovarian carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Olaparib was approved on December 19, 2014 by the US FDA as 4th-line therapy (and beyond) for patients with germline BRCA1/2 mutations; rucaparib was approved on December 19, 2016 as 3rd-line therapy (and beyond) for germline or somatic BRCA1/2-mutated recurrent disease. On October 23, 2019, niraparib was approved for treatment of women with damaging mutations in BRCA1/2 or other homologous recombination repair genes who had been treated with three or more prior regimens. We compared the cost-effectiveness of PARPi(s) with intravenous regimens for platinum-resistant disease. METHODS: Median progression-free survival (PFS) and toxicity data from regulatory trials were incorporated in a model which transitioned patients through response, hematologic complications, non-hematologic complications, progression, and death. Using TreeAge Pro 2017, each PARPi(s) was compared separately to non­platinum-based and bevacizumab-containing regimens. Costs of IV drugs, managing toxicities, infusions, and supportive care were estimated using 2017 Medicare data. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated and PFS was reported in quality adjusted life months for platinum-resistant populations. RESULTS: Non­platinum-based intravenous chemotherapy was most cost effective ($6,412/PFS-month) compared with bevacizumab-containing regimens ($12,187/PFS-month), niraparib ($18,970/PFS-month), olaparib ($16,327/PFS-month), and rucaparib ($16,637/PFS-month). ICERs for PARPi(s) were 3-3.5× times greater than intravenous non­platinum-based regimens. CONCLUSION: High costs of orally administered PARPi(s) were not mitigated or balanced by costs of infusion and managing toxicities of intravenous regimens typically associated with lower response and shorter median PFS. Balancing modest clinical benefit with costs of novel therapies remains problematic and could widen disparities among those with limited access to care.