Real-World Survival, Healthcare Resource Utilization, and Costs Among U.S. Elderly Patients With Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma (DLBCL) Treated With R-GemOx in the Relapsed/Refractory Setting.

BACKGROUND: Little recent real-world evidence exists on overall survival, healthcare resource utilization (HCRU), and costs among R/R DLBCL patients treated with the combination of rituximab, gemcitabine, and oxaliplatin (R-GemOx), a widely-used regimen for patients ineligible for stem cell transplant due to age or comorbidities. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This retrospective analysis used 2014 to 2019 U.S. Medicare claims. Individuals aged ≥66 years with a new DLBCL diagnosis between October 1, 2015 and December 31, 2018 and continuous fee-for-service Medicare Part A, B, and D coverage in the 12 months pre- and postindex were followed to identify the sample of patients with evidence of R-GemOx treatment in the second-line (2L) or third-line (3L) setting. Outcomes included overall survival, all-cause and DLBCL-related HCRU, and costs after R-GemOx initiation. RESULTS: The final sample included 157 patients who received treatment with R-GemOx in the R/R settings (mean (SD) age 77.5 (6.0) years, 39.5% age>80 years; 66.9% male; 91.1% White). Of these, 126 received R-GemOx in the 2L setting and 31 received R-GemOx in the 3L setting. Median overall survival from R-GemOx initiation was 6.9 months and 6.8 months in the 2L and 3L setting, respectively. Rates of all-cause hospitalization (68.1% [2L] and >90% [3L]) and hospice use (42.9% [2L] and 51.7% [3L]) were high in the 12 months after R-GemOx initiation. All-cause total costs were substantial ($144,653 [2L] and $142,812 [3L]) and approximately 80% of costs were DLBCL-related within 12 months of R-GemOx initiation. CONCLUSION: Elderly U.S. Medicare beneficiaries diagnosed with DLBCL who initiated R-GemOx treatment in the R/R setting have poor overall survival, high rates of HCRU, and substantial costs.

Cetuximab as first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC): a model-based economic evaluation in Indonesia setting.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the cost-effectiveness of cetuximab in combination with chemotherapy fluorouracil, oxaliplatin, and leucovorin (FOLFOX) or fluorouracil, irinotecan and leucovorin (FOLFIRI) compared to standard chemotherapy alone as a first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) with positive KRAS wild type patients in Indonesia. METHODS: A cost-utility analysis applying Markov model was constructed, with a societal perspective. Clinical evidence was derived from published clinical trials. Direct medical costs were gathered from hospital billings. Meanwhile, direct non-medical costs, indirect costs, and utility data were collected by directly interviewing patients. We applied 3% discount rate for both costs and outcomes. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed to explore the model's uncertainty. Additionally, using payer perspective, budget impact analysis was estimated to project the financial impact of treatment coverage. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in life years gained (LYG) between cetuximab plus FOLFOX/FOLFIRI and chemotherapy alone. The incremental QALY was only one month, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was approximately IDR 3 billion/QALY for cetuximab plus chemotherapy. Using 1-3 GDP per capita (IDR 215 million or USD 14,350) as the current threshold, the cetuximab plus chemotherapy was not cost-effective. The budget impact analysis resulted that if cetuximab plus chemotherapy remain included in the benefits package under the Indonesian national health insurance (NHI) system, the payer would need more than IDR 1 trillion for five years. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of cetuximab and chemotherapy for mCRC is unlikely cost-effective and has a substantial financial impact on the system.

Cost-effectiveness of adjuvant chemotherapy for high-risk stage II and stage III colon cancer in South Africa.

BACKGROUND: Colon cancer incidence is rising in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), where resource limitations and cost often dictate treatment decisions. In this study, we evaluate the cost-effectiveness of adjuvant chemotherapy for high-risk stage II and stage III colon cancer treatment in South Africa (ZA) and illustrate how such analyses can inform cancer treatment recommendations in a LMIC. METHODS: We created a decision-analytic Markov model to compare lifetime costs and outcomes for patients with high-risk stage II and stage III colon cancer treated with three adjuvant chemotherapy regimens in a public hospital in ZA: capecitabine and oxaliplatin (CAPOX) for 3 and 6 months, and capecitabine for 6 months, compared to no adjuvant treatment. The primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) in international dollars (I$) per disability-adjusted life-year (DALY) averted, at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold equal to the 2021 ZA gross domestic product per capita (I$13,764/DALY averted). RESULTS: CAPOX for 3 months was cost-effective for both patients with high-risk stage II and patients with stage III colon cancer (ICER = I$250/DALY averted and I$1042/DALY averted, respectively), compared to no adjuvant chemotherapy. In subgroup analyses of patients by tumor stage and number of positive lymph nodes, for patients with high-risk stage II colon cancer and T4 tumors, and patients with stage III colon cancer with T4 or N2 disease. CAPOX for 6 months was cost-effective and the optimal strategy. The optimal strategy in other settings will vary by local WTP thresholds. Decision analytic tools can be used to identify cost-effective cancer treatment strategies in resource-constrained settings. CONCLUSION: Colon cancer incidence is increasing in low- and middle-income countries, including South Africa, where resource constraints can impact treatment decisions. This cost-effectiveness study evaluates three systemic adjuvant chemotherapy options, compared to surgery alone, for patients in South African public hospitals after surgical resection for high-risk stage II and stage III colon cancer. Doublet adjuvant chemotherapy (capecitabine and oxaliplatin) for 3 months is the cost-effective strategy and should be recommended in South Africa.

Adjuvant 5-Fluorouracil/leucovorin, capecitabine, and oxaliplatin-related regimens for stage II/III colon cancer patients 66 years or older.

Adjuvant chemotherapy of leucovorin-modulated 5-fluorouracil (5-FU/LV), capecitabine, and adding oxaliplatin to 5-FU/LV or capecitabine (FLOX/OX) have been standard regimens for high-risk stage II or III colon cancer (CC). We aimed to evaluate their patterns of use, association with survival, and rate of emergency room visit (ER) or hospitalization during the treatment period. High-risk stage II or III patients aged >65 years diagnosed between 2007 and 2015, underwent colectomy, and received any of these three regimens were selected from SEER and Texas Cancer Registry (TC) linked with Medicare data. Chi-square test, Kaplan-Meier survival curves, Cox regression, and logistic regression were used in data analysis. A total of 5621 (1080 stage II and 4541 stage III) patients with median age of 72 years were included in this study. For stage II, 24.4% used 5-FU/LV, 31.2% used capecitabine, and 44.4% used FLOX/OX; the respective numbers for stage III were 13.8%, 17.9%, and 68.3%. Patients aged <70 years, not in the West region, not in Medicare state-buy-in program, and with no comorbidity were more likely to use FLOX/OX. FLOX/OX was associated with improved overall survival (OS) in stage II and III patients and improved cancer-specific survival in stage III patients compared with 5-FU/LV. The survival benefit of FLOX/OX was sustained in stage III patients aged ≥70 years. Capecitabine had the lowest ER/hospitalization rate with 19.2% in stage II and 28.9% in III. The use of FLOX/OX was associated with improved survival compared with 5-FU/LV among CC patients. Capecitabine was associated with the lowest ER/hospitalization rate.

Economic evaluation of FLOT and ECF/ECX perioperative chemotherapy in patients with resectable gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma.

OBJECTIVE: The perioperative chemotherapy with fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin plus docetaxel (FLOT) was recommended by the Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology Guidelines for gastric cancer (2018 edition) for patients with resectable gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (class IIA). However, the economic impact of FLOT chemotherapy in China remains unclear. The analysis aimed to compare the cost-effectiveness of FLOT versus epirubicin, cisplatin plus fluorouracil or capecitabine (ECF/ECX) in patients with locally advanced resectable tumours. DESIGN: We developed a Markov model to compare the healthcare and economic outcomes of FLOT and ECF/ECX in patients with resectable gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma. Costs were estimated from the perspective of Chinese healthcare system. Clinical and utility inputs were derived from the FLOT4 phase II/III clinical trial and published literature. Sensitivity analyses were employed to assess the robustness of our result. The annual discount rate for costs and health outcomes was set at 5%. OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome of incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) was calculated as the cost per quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). RESULTS: The base-case analysis found that compared with ECF/ECX, the use of FLOT chemotherapy was associated with an additional 1.08 QALYs, resulting in an ICER of US$851/QALY. One-way sensitivity analysis results suggested that the HR of overall survival and progression-free survival had the greatest impact on the ICER. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis demonstrated that FLOT was more likely to be cost-effective compared with ECF/ECX at a willingness-to-pay threshold of US$31 513/QALY. CONCLUSIONS: For patients with locally advanced resectable tumours, the FLOT chemotherapy is a cost-effective treatment option compared with ECF/ECX in China. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01216644.

Real-World Cost-Effectiveness of First-Line Gemcitabine Plus Nab-Paclitaxel vs FOLFIRINOX in Patients With Advanced Pancreatic Cancer.

BACKGROUND: There are no randomized control trials (RCTs) comparing gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel (Gem-Nab) and fluorouracil, folinic acid, irinotecan, oxaliplatin (FOLFIRINOX) for advanced pancreatic cancer (APC). Although it is well known that RCT-based efficacy often does not translate to real-world effectiveness, there is limited literature investigating comparative cost-effectiveness of Gem-Nab vs FOLFIRINOX for APC. We aimed to examine the real-world cost-effectiveness of Gem-Nab vs FOLFIRINOX for APC in Ontario, Canada. METHODS: This study compared patients treated with first-line Gem-Nab or FOLFIRINOX for APC in Ontario from April 2015 to March 2019. Patients were linked to administrative databases. Using propensity scores and a stabilizing weights method, an inverse probability of treatment weighted cohort was developed. Mean survival and total costs were calculated over a 5-year time horizon, adjusted for censoring, and discounted at 1.5%. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio and net monetary benefit were computed to estimate cost-effectiveness from the public health-care payer's perspective. Sensitivity analysis was conducted using the propensity score matching method. RESULTS: A total of 1988 patients were identified (Gem-Nab: n = 928; FOLFIRINOX: n = 1060). Mean survival was lower for patients in the Gem-Nab than the FOLFIRINOX group (0.98 vs 1.26 life-years; incremental effectiveness = -0.28 life-years [95% confidence interval = -0.47 to -0.13]). Patients in the Gem-Nab group incurred greater mean 5-year total costs (Gem-Nab: $103 884; FOLFIRINOX: $101 518). Key cost contributors include ambulatory cancer care, acute inpatient hospitalization, and systemic therapy drug acquisition. Gem-Nab was dominated by FOLFIRINOX, as it was less effective and more costly. Results from the sensitivity analysis were similar. CONCLUSIONS: Gem-Nab is likely more costly and less effective than FOLFIRINOX and therefore not considered cost-effective at commonly accepted willingness-to-pay thresholds.

The Clinical Desire for Pressurized Intraperitoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy in South Korea: An Electronic Survey-based Study.

BACKGROUND/AIM: To evaluate the clinical desire for pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) in South Korea. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We performed an online survey on surgical oncologists between November and December 2019 using a questionnaire consisting of 20 questions. RESULTS: A total of 164 respondents answered the questionnaire. Among those specialized in ovarian cancer, pseudomyxoma peritonei, and malignant mesothelioma 41.7-50% preferred PIPAC for the curative treatment of primary diseases, whereas 32.7-33.3% majoring in colorectal and hepatobiliary cancers chose it for the palliative treatment of recurrent diseases. Furthermore, 66.7-95.2% considered PIPAC appropriate for the cancers they specialized in, and 76-78.7% expected a treatment response of more than 50% and considered grade 1 or 2 complications acceptable. Most respondents answered the reasonable costs to purchase and implement PIPAC once at between 1,000,000-5,000,000 South Korean Won (KRW). CONCLUSION: Most Korean surgical oncologists expected relatively high tumor response rates with minor toxicities through the repeated implementation of PIPAC.

Modeling the Cost-Effectiveness of Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Stage III Colon Cancer in South African Public Hospitals.

PURPOSE: Cancer incidence is rising in low- and middle-income countries, where resource constraints often complicate therapeutic decisions. Here, we perform a cost-effectiveness analysis to identify the optimal adjuvant chemotherapy strategy for patients with stage III colon cancer treated in South African (ZA) public hospitals. METHODS: A decision-analytic Markov model was developed to compare lifetime costs and outcomes for patients with stage III colon cancer treated with six adjuvant chemotherapy regimens in ZA public hospitals: fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin for 3 and 6 months; capecitabine and oxaliplatin (CAPOX) for 3 and 6 months; capecitabine for 6 months; and fluorouracil/leucovorin for 6 months. Transition probabilities were derived from clinical trials to estimate risks of toxicity, disease recurrence, and survival. Societal costs and utilities were obtained from literature. The primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio in international dollars (I$) per disability-adjusted life-year (DALY) averted, compared with no therapy, at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of I$13,006.56. RESULTS: CAPOX for 3 months was cost-effective (I$5,381.17 and 5.74 DALYs averted) compared with no adjuvant chemotherapy. Fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin for 6 months was on the efficiency frontier with 5.91 DALYs averted but, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of I$99,021.36/DALY averted, exceeded the WTP threshold. CONCLUSION: In ZA public hospitals, CAPOX for 3 months is the cost-effective adjuvant treatment for stage III colon cancer. The optimal strategy in other settings may change according to local WTP thresholds. Decision analytic tools can play a vital role in selecting cost-effective cancer therapeutics in resource-constrained settings.

The Association of Drug-Funding Reimbursement With Survival Outcomes and Use of New Systemic Therapies Among Patients With Advanced Pancreatic Cancer.

Importance: Gemcitabine-nab-paclitaxel (GEMNAB) and fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin (FOLFIRINOX) both improve survival of patients with advanced pancreatic cancer when compared with single-agent gemcitabine in clinical trials. Objective: To describe changes in the survival of patients with advanced pancreatic cancer associated with sequential drug-funding approvals and to determine if there exist distinct patient populations for whom GEMNAB and FOLFIRINOX are associated with survival benefit. Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based, retrospective cohort study examined all incident cases of advanced pancreatic cancer treated with first-line chemotherapy in Ontario, Canada (2008-2018) that were identified from the Cancer Care Ontario (Ontario Health) New Drug Funding Program database. Statistical analysis was performed from October 2020 to January 2021. Exposures: First-line chemotherapy for advanced pancreatic cancer. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were the proportion of patients treated with each chemotherapy regimen over time and overall survival for each regimen. Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to compare overall survival between treatment regimens after adjustment for confounding variables, inverse probability of treatment weighting, and matching. Results: From 2008 to 2018, 5465 patients with advanced pancreatic cancer were treated with first-line chemotherapy in Ontario, Canada. The median (range) age of patients was 66.9 (27.8-93.4) years; 2447 (45%) were female; 878 (16%) had prior pancreatic resection, and 328 (6%) had prior adjuvant gemcitabine. During the time period when only gemcitabine and FOLFIRINOX were funded (2011-2015), 49% (929 of 1887) received FOLFIRINOX. When GEMNAB was subsequently funded (2015-2018), 9% (206 of 2347) received gemcitabine, 44% (1034 of 2347) received FOLFIRINOX, and 47% (1107 of 2347) received GEMNAB. The median overall survival increased from 5.6 months (95% CI, 5.1-6.0 months) in 2008 to 2011 to 6.9 months (95% CI, 6.5-7.4 months) in 2011 to 2015 to 7.6 months (95% CI, 7.1-8.0 months) in 2015 to 2018. Patients receiving FOLFIRINOX were younger and healthier than patients receiving GEMNAB. After adjustment and weighting, FOLFIRINOX was associated with better overall survival than GEMNAB (hazard ratio [HR], 0.75 [95% CI, 0.69-0.81]). In analyses comparing patients treated with GEMNAB and gemcitabine, GEMNAB was associated with better overall survival (HR, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.78-0.94]). Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study of patients with advanced pancreatic cancer receiving first-line palliative chemotherapy within a universal health care system found that drug funding decisions were associated with increased uptake of new treatment options over time and improved survival. Both FOLFIRINOX and GEMNAB were associated with survival benefits in distinct patient populations.

Conversion to biosimilar pegfilgrastim-cbqv enables budget-neutral access to FOLFIRINOX treatment for metastatic pancreatic cancer.

Aim: To estimate the cost-savings from conversion to biosimilar pegfilgrastim-cbqv that can be reallocated to provide budget-neutral expanded access to FOLFIRINOX in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer. Methods: Simulation modeling in a panel of 2500 FOLFIRINOX-treated patients, using varying treatment duration (1-12 cycles) and conversion rates (10-100%), to estimate cost-savings and additional FOLFIRINOX treatment that could be budget neutral. Results: In a 2500-patient panel at 100% conversion, savings of US$6,907.41 per converted patient over 12 cycles of prophylaxis translate to US$17.3 million and could provide 72,273 additional FOLFIRINOX doses or 6023 full 6-month regimens. Conclusion: Conversion to biosimilar CIN/FN prophylaxis can generate significant cost-savings and provide budget-neutral expanded access to FOLFIRINOX treatment for patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer.

Lay abstract Pegfilgrastim is used to prevent low white blood cell count in patients receiving chemotherapy. Comparable to a generic version of a drug, a biosimilar is a follow-on version of a biologic treatment. The authors calculated the savings from using biosimilar pegfilgrastim in a hypothetical group of 2500 patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer and then computed the number of additional doses of FOLFIRINOX chemotherapy that could be purchased with those savings. Using biosimilar pegfilgrastim for 12 cycles could save US$6,907.41 per patient. If all 2500 patients were treated with biosimilar pegfilgrastim, US$17.3 million could be saved. This could provide 72,273 additional FOLFIRINOX doses. Biosimilar pegfilgrastim can generate significant savings to purchase chemotherapy for additional patients cost-free.

Suboptimal Completion Rates, Adverse Events, Costs, Resource Utilization, and Cost Impact of Noncompletion in Oral Adjuvant Capecitabine-Based Chemotherapy in Patients With Early-Stage Colon Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Suboptimal completion of chemotherapy, which may involve reduced patient adherence, remains a serious issue and leads to reduced treatment efficacy. This study assessed the completion rates, risk factors for noncompletion, and cost impact for noncompletion in patients on capecitabine monotherapy (Cape) or capecitabine with oxaliplatin (CAPOX) for the adjuvant treatment of early-stage colon cancer. METHODS: Patients with a diagnosis of early-stage colon cancer between April 2013 and March 2017 were retrospectively identified. Treatment completion was evaluated. Multivariate logistic regressions analyses were used to assess the baseline factors associated with noncompletion. Adverse events, costs, healthcare resource utilization, and cost impact for noncompletion were investigated. RESULTS: A total of 673 patients met the eligibility criteria, of which 382 (57%) were treated with Cape and 291 (43%) with CAPOX. The overall completion rate for adjuvant therapy was 40% (Cape 46%; CAPOX 33%). Noncompletion was associated with CAPOX treatment and higher healthcare costs within 6 months prior to chemotherapy. The 6-month unadjusted total healthcare costs were $44,444 for Cape and $71,247 for CAPOX. The nonchemotherapy costs were 41% higher for noncompleters than completers in both treatment groups (P = .002). CONCLUSIONS: The real-world completion rates for adjuvant capecitabine-based chemotherapy in early-stage colon cancer patients are low. Noncompletion of therapy is associated with higher baseline healthcare costs. The nonchemotherapy costs are significantly higher in noncompleters than completers, highlighting the financial burden of managing adverse events and preexisting comorbidities, which may lead to early discontinuation of therapy. Effective strategies to optimize completion of oral chemotherapy may consider adherence monitoring.

Three Versus Six Months of Adjuvant Doublet Chemotherapy for Patients With Colorectal Cancer: A Multi-Country Cost-Effectiveness and Budget Impact Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The Short Course Oncology Treatment (SCOT) trial demonstrated non-inferiority, less toxicity, and cost-effectiveness from a UK perspective of 3 versus 6 months of oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy for patients with colorectal cancer. This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of shorter treatment and the budget impact of implementing trial findings from the perspectives of all countries recruited to SCOT: Australia, Denmark, New Zealand, Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Individual cost-utility analyses were performed from the perspective of each country. Resource, quality of life, and survival estimates from the SCOT trial (N = 6065) were used. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis and subgroup analyses were undertaken. Using undiscounted costs from these cost-utility analyses, the impact on country-specific healthcare budgets of implementing the SCOT trial findings was calculated over a 5-year period. The currency used was US dollars (US$), and 2019 was the base year. One-way and scenario sensitivity analysis addressed uncertainty within the budget impact analysis. RESULTS: Three months of treatment were cost saving and cost-effective compared to 6 months from the perspective of all countries. The incremental net monetary benefit per patient ranged from US$8972 (Spain) to US$13,884 (Denmark). The healthcare budget impact over 5 years for the base-case scenario ranged from US$3.6 million (New Zealand) to US$61.4 million (UK) and totaled over US$150 million across all countries. CONCLUSION: This study has widened the transferability of results from the SCOT trial, showing that shorter treatment is cost-effective from a multi-country perspective. The vast savings from implementation could fully justify the investment in conducting the SCOT trial.

Avoidable Acute Care Use Associated with Nausea and Vomiting Among Patients Receiving Highly Emetogenic Chemotherapy or Oxaliplatin.

PURPOSE: Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) contributes to avoidable acute care, a metric now tracked in Medicare's oncology outcome measure. CINV is preventable, yet guidelines are often not followed. We sought to quantify acute care involving CINV and other avoidable toxicities after highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) to identify excess risk and assess clinician adherence to antiemesis guidelines for HEC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated U.S. electronic health records (2012-2018) using Medicare's OP-35 outcome measure to identify avoidable acute care involving any of 10 toxicities, including CINV, after HEC regimens relative to non-HEC. Antiemetic guideline adherence was defined as use ofneurokinin-1 (NKl) receptor antagonists Q5 (RAs) plus 5-hydroxytryptamine type 3 RA+ dexamethasone at HEC initiation. RESULTS: Among 17,609 patients receiving HEC, acute care rates associated with HEC chemotherapy included 32% cisplatin, 31% carboplatin, and 21% anthracycline/cyclosphospharnide (AC), with 76% meeting the criteria as avoidable events. Oxaliplatin rates were 29%. Avoidable acute care occurred 1.83 times (95% confidence interval, 1.76-1.91, p < .0001) as often after HEC versus non-HEC excluding oxaliplatin; CINV-related acute care occurred 2.29 times as often. Nonadherence to antiemesis guidelines occurred in 34% and 24% of cisplatin and AC courses, respectively, because of omission of a NKl RA. CONCLUSIONS: Patients treated with HEC regimens experienced high avoidable acute care use, 1.8 times the risk seen for other chemotherapy. Nonadherence to guideline-directed antiemetic prophylaxis highlights the need to ensure adherence to antiemetic guidelines, including the use of NKl RA in HEC. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: After survival, perhaps the most important goal in oncology is limiting avoidable acute care, a goal now used by Medicare to impact cancer reimbursement. This study found that patients treated with highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) regimens had high rates of avoidable acute care use, 1.8 times the risk seen for other chemotherapy. A substantial proportion of the avoidable acute care involved chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. Results showed that incomplete adherence to national antiemetic guidelines for HEC regimens primarily driven by omission of upfront neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist use, suggesting that improved adherence can meaningfully resolve this gap in quality and cost of care.

Improved Assessment of Response Status in Patients with Pancreatic Cancer Treated with Neoadjuvant Therapy using Somatic Mutations and Liquid Biopsy Analysis.

PURPOSE: To evaluate somatic mutations, circulating tumor cells (CTCs) and circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) in patients with Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) with pathologic complete response (pCR) to neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) and find their associations with outcome. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Thirty-six patients with PDAC with pCR were identified from 2009 to 2017. Macrodissection was performed on resected specimens to isolate DNA from 332 regions of interest including fibrosis, normal duct, normal parenchyma, and undefined ductal cells (UDCs). Cell-free DNA and CTCs were also extracted. Next-generation sequencing was used to detect mutations of KRAS, CDKN2A, SMAD4, TP53, GNAS, and BRAF. RESULTS: KRAS mutation was detected in UDCs and fibrosis while SMAD4, TP53, and GNAS were only seen in UDCs. Patients with TP53 mutation showed relatively worse overall survival (HR, 3.596, 95% CI, 0.855-15.130; P = 0.081). Five patients available for CTCs data were all positive for CTCs and seven of 16 patients with pCR were detected with ctDNA at surgery. We proposed a new concept of regression assessment combining genomic analysis of resected specimens and liquid biopsy data for PDAC, namely, molecular complete response (mCR). Three of six patients with mCR recurred as compared with six in 15 non-mCR patients. Seven of 15 non-mCR patients died during follow-up, while there was only one in six patients with mCR. CONCLUSIONS: This study first reports that somatic mutations, CTCs, and ctDNA existed even in patients with PDAC with pCR to NAT, which could possibly predict early recurrence and reduced survival. The current regression evaluation system of PDAC needs to be reassessed at a molecular level.

The economic burden of metastatic pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: Objectives: Pancreatic cancer (PC) is a costly disease with a limited life-expectancy as it generally presents as an advanced, metastatic disease. Though current literature suggests cost varies by first line treatment, there is limited real-world knowledge about the economic burden of pancreatic cancer. This study describes the economic burden of pancreatic cancer patients overall and by observed first line treatments. METHODS: The IBM MarketScan databases were used to identify adult metastatic PC patients from January 1, 2010 through 3/31/2017. Those without other primary cancers, pregnancy, or prior PC treatment, and with 6 months of continuous enrollment prior to PC were included. Treatment patterns and healthcare utilization and expenditures were measured during the variable-length follow-up period. Continuous measures were presented as per patient per month (PPPM). RESULTS: A total of 6,360 patients met all inclusion criteria. Almost half (46.8%) of patients were untreated. Gemcitabine alone (15.6%) and FOLFIRINOX (11.4%) were the most commonly observed first line regimens. Treated patients incurred $17,513 PPPM (Gemcitabine alone) to $27,889 PPPM (FOLFIRINOX) during follow-up. Untreated patients incurred the highest unadjusted ($30,777 PPPM) and adjusted ($20,392 PPPM) cost. CONCLUSIONS: Metastatic PC patients incur a high economic burden driven by high utilization of healthcare resources, which varies by first line treatment. Also, the high proportion of untreated patients is alarming as these patients may be the most expensive of all patients. There is an unmet need in these patients for effective treatments that also reduce their economic burden.

Treatment patterns and outcomes in pancreatic cancer: Retrospective claims analysis.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic cancer represents the third leading cause of US cancer deaths, with median survival <1 year. The goal of this study was to describe systemic treatments, healthcare utilization and costs, and overall survival among patients with unresectable/metastatic disease. METHODS: This study used healthcare claims for commercial and Medicare Advantage enrollees diagnosed with pancreatic adenocarcinoma (at index date) during January 01 2010 to 31 May 2017. Included patients were aged ≥18 years, with continuous 6-month preindex enrollment. Patients were excluded by resectable disease, another primary cancer, or pregnancy. Cohorts were based on first-line (LOT1) chemotherapy regimen. RESULTS: Overall, 12 978 patients (mean age 70 years, 51% male) were included, among which 5610 (43%) received chemotherapy. Of those, 23% received gemcitabine monotherapy, 22% gemcitabine-nab paclitaxel, 22% FOLFIRINOX, 3% FOLFOX, and 29% received other regimens. Mean LOT1 duration was 112 days; 60% did not undergo subsequent lines of therapy. Moreover, 50% of patients had an emergency room visit and 45% were hospitalized during LOT1. Among treated and untreated patients, mean total 6-month costs were $52 101. We found that patients receiving FOLFIRINOX had the highest costs, whereas those who received gemcitabine monotherapy had the lowest. Median overall survival (mOS) was 335 days with any first-line treatment. FOLFIRINOX-treated patients had the highest mOS (492 days), whereas gemcitabine monotherapy-treated patients had the lowest (223 days). CONCLUSIONS: A large proportion (57%) of patients with unresectable/metastatic pancreatic cancer did not receive chemotherapy. Healthcare costs were higher for fluorouracil-based regimens, while lower for gemcitabine-based regimens. Survival rates were within expectations for advanced pancreatic cancer.

Outcomes and Utilization of Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Stage II Colon Cancer in the Oxaliplatin Period: A SEER-Medicare Analysis.

PURPOSE: Previous SEER (Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results)-Medicare analyses have shown no definitive survival benefit for adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) with fluoropyrimidines. Impact of oxaliplatin-containing regimens for elderly stage II patients in real-world setting is unknown. We explored the utilization and outcome of AC after the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval of oxaliplatin. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with stage II colon cancer (2004-2011) who underwent resection were selected for this analysis. Medicare claims data were used to ascertain the administration of AC within 120 days after surgery. The primary endpoint of the analysis was overall survival. We used the Cox proportional hazards model to estimate the effect of AC while adjusting for clinical and sociodemographic variables available in SEER. To adjust for referral pattern, a source of selection bias, we conducted an instrumental variable analysis using the surgeon of record and health service area. RESULTS: A total of 16,468 patients were identified and 12.1% received AC. AC recipients were significantly younger, more likely to be male, nonwhite, married, and had lower comorbidity index. Their tumors had a more advanced stage, more likely to be left sided, and were less differentiated. The hazard ratio (HR) from the Cox model showed a statistically significant survival advantage for AC (HR=0.847, 95% confidence interval: 0.782-0.916). However, results from the instrumental variable analysis indicated that there was no definitive benefit of survival in AC recipients (HR=1.779, 95% confidence interval: 0.927-3.415). AC use decreased over time. CONCLUSIONS: After controlling for referral patterns, administration of AC provided no definitive survival benefit. Future studies may elucidate the elderly population who may benefit from AC.

Assessment of Hepatic Arterial Infusion of Floxuridine in Combination With Systemic Gemcitabine and Oxaliplatin in Patients With Unresectable Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma: A Phase 2 Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: Unresectable intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (IHC) carries a poor prognosis, with a median overall survival (OS) of 11 months. Hepatic arterial infusion (HAI) of high-dose chemotherapy may have potential benefit in these patients. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate clinical outcomes when HAI chemotherapy is combined with systemic chemotherapy in patients with unresectable IHC. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A single-institution, phase 2 clinical trial including 38 patients was conducted with HAI floxuridine plus systemic gemcitabine and oxaliplatin in patients with unresectable IHC at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center between May 20, 2013, and June 27, 2019. A confirmatory phase 1/2 study using the same therapy was conducted during the same time period at Washington University in St Louis. Patients with histologically confirmed, unresectable IHC were eligible. Resectable metastatic disease to regional lymph nodes and prior systemic therapy were permitted. Patients with distant metastatic disease were excluded. INTERVENTIONS: Hepatic arterial infusion of floxuridine and systemic administration of gemcitabine and oxaliplatin. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was progression-free survival (PFS) of 80% at 6 months. RESULTS: For the phase 2 clinical trial at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 42 patients with unresectable IHC were included and, of these, 38 patients were treated (13 [34%] men; median [range] age at diagnosis, 64 [39-81] years). The median follow-up was 30.5 months. Twenty-two patients (58%) achieved a partial radiographic response, and 32 patients (84%) achieved disease control at 6 months. Four patients had sufficient response to undergo resection, and 1 patient had a complete pathologic response. The median PFS was 11.8 months (1-sided 90% CI, 11.1) with a 6-month PFS rate of 84.1% (90% CI, 74.8%-infinity), thereby meeting the primary end point (6-month PFS rate, 80%). The median OS was 25.0 months (95% CI, 20.6-not reached), and the 1-year OS rate was 89.5% (95% CI, 80.2%-99.8%). Patients with resectable regional lymph nodes (18 [47%]) showed no difference in OS compared with patients with node-negative disease (24-month OS: lymph node negative: 60%; 95% CI, 40%-91% vs lymph node positive: 50%; 95% CI, 30%-83%; P = .66). Four patients (11%) had grade 4 toxic effects requiring removal from the study (1 portal hypertension, 2 gastroduodenal artery aneurysms, 1 infection in the pump pocket). Subgroup analysis showed significant improvement in survival in patients with IDH1/2 mutated tumors (2-year OS, 90%; 95% CI, 73%-99%) vs wild-type (2-year OS, 33%; 95% CI, 18%-63%) (P = .01). In the Washington University in St Louis confirmatory cohort, 9 patients (90%) achieved disease control at 6 months; the most common grade 3 toxic effect was elevated results of liver function tests, and median PFS was 12.8 months (1-sided 90% CI, 6.4). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Hepatic arterial infusion plus systemic chemotherapy appears to be highly active and tolerable in patients with unresectable IHC; further evaluation is warranted.

3-month versus 6-month adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with high-risk stage II and III colorectal cancer: 3-year follow-up of the SCOT non-inferiority RCT.

BACKGROUND: Oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy administered over 6 months is the standard adjuvant regimen for patients with high-risk stage II or III colorectal cancer. However, the regimen is associated with cumulative toxicity, characterised by chronic and often irreversible neuropathy. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy of 3-month versus 6-month adjuvant chemotherapy for colorectal cancer and to compare the toxicity, health-related quality of life and cost-effectiveness of the durations. DESIGN: An international, randomised, open-label, non-inferiority, Phase III, parallel-group trial. SETTING: A total of 244 oncology clinics from six countries: UK (England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland), Denmark, Spain, Sweden, Australia and New Zealand. PARTICIPANTS: Adults aged ≥ 18 years who had undergone curative resection for high-risk stage II or III adenocarcinoma of the colon or rectum. INTERVENTIONS: The adjuvant treatment regimen was either oxaliplatin and 5-fluorouracil or oxaliplatin and capecitabine, randomised to be administered over 3 or 6 months. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was disease-free survival. Overall survival, adverse events, neuropathy and health-related quality of life were also assessed. The main cost categories were chemotherapy treatment and hospitalisation. Cost-effectiveness was assessed through incremental cost comparisons and quality-adjusted life-year gains between the options and was reported as net monetary benefit using a willingness-to-pay threshold of £30,000 per quality-adjusted life-year per patient. RESULTS: Recruitment is closed. In total, 6088 patients were randomised (3044 per group) between 27 March 2008 and 29 November 2013, with 6065 included in the intention-to-treat analyses (3-month analysis, n = 3035; 6-month analysis, n = 3030). Follow-up for the primary analysis is complete. The 3-year disease-free survival rate in the 3-month treatment group was 76.7% (standard error 0.8%) and in the 6-month treatment group was 77.1% (standard error 0.8%), equating to a hazard ratio of 1.006 (95% confidence interval 0.909 to 1.114; p-value for non-inferiority = 0.012), confirming non-inferiority for 3-month adjuvant chemotherapy. Frequent adverse events (alopecia, anaemia, anorexia, diarrhoea, fatigue, hand-foot syndrome, mucositis, sensory neuropathy, neutropenia, pain, rash, altered taste, thrombocytopenia and watery eye) showed a significant increase in grade with 6-month duration; the greatest difference was for sensory neuropathy (grade ≥ 3 was 4% for 3-month vs.16% for 6-month duration), for which a higher rate of neuropathy was seen for the 6-month treatment group from month 4 to ≥ 5 years (p < 0.001). Quality-of-life scores were better in the 3-month treatment group over months 4-6. A cost-effectiveness analysis showed 3-month treatment to cost £4881 less over the 8-year analysis period, with an incremental net monetary benefit of £7246 per patient. CONCLUSIONS: The study achieved its primary end point, showing that 3-month oxaliplatin-containing adjuvant chemotherapy is non-inferior to 6 months of the same regimen; 3-month treatment showed a better safety profile and cost less. For future work, further follow-up will refine long-term estimates of the duration effect on disease-free survival and overall survival. The health economic analysis will be updated to include long-term extrapolation for subgroups. We expect these analyses to be available in 2019-20. The Short Course Oncology Therapy (SCOT) study translational samples may allow the identification of patients who would benefit from longer treatment based on the molecular characteristics of their disease. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN59757862 and EudraCT 2007-003957-10. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 23, No. 64. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information. This research was supported by the Medical Research Council (transferred to NIHR Evaluation, Trials and Studies Coordinating Centre - Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation; grant reference G0601705), the Swedish Cancer Society and Cancer Research UK Core Clinical Trials Unit Funding (funding reference C6716/A9894).

Patients diagnosed with bowel cancer are likely to have surgery to remove the tumour. Patients diagnosed with a more advanced stage of the disease are then likely to be offered what is known as adjuvant chemotherapy ­ chemotherapy to kill any cancer cells that have already spread but cannot be seen. Adjuvant chemotherapy is usually given over 6 months using two medicines known as oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimidine. This chemotherapy has side effects of diarrhoea, nausea and vomiting, and it reduces the numbers of cells in the blood. It can also damage nerves, which causes discomfort, numbness and tingling; in some cases, this can go on for years. These side effects are more likely to develop with longer treatment. This study looked at whether or not shortening the time over which patients were given oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy reduced its effectiveness. In this large study of over 6000 patients, half of the patients were allocated by chance to be treated for 3 months and the other half to be treated for 6 months. Reducing the time that patients had chemotherapy from 6 months to 3 months did not make the treatment less effective. When patients treated with chemotherapy over 3 months were compared with those treated over 6 months, 77% of patients in both groups were well with no detectable disease 3 years after surgery. Patients were less likely to get side effects with 3-month chemotherapy. In particular, the chance of persistent long-term nerve damage was lower, resulting in patients with 3-month chemotherapy having better health-related quality of life. Overall, the study showed that 3-month adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with bowel cancer is as effective as 6-month adjuvant chemotherapy and causes fewer side effects.

Sarcopenia supersedes subjective global assessment as a predictor of survival in colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Sarcopenia, the presence of skeletal muscle mass depletion, can be objectively quantified, whereas subjective global assessment (SGA) is a widely utilized subjective instrument to assess nutritional status. Both the presence of sarcopenia and SGA-assessed malnutrition, in isolation, have been shown to be associated with worse overall survival in a wide range of cancers. However, there is no research evaluating the independent prognostic significance of both the presence of sarcopenia and malnutrition as part of the same analysis. We investigated the impact of sarcopenia on overall survival in colorectal cancer specifically controlling for malnutrition. METHODS: We examined a consecutive case series of 112 patients with colorectal cancer first seen at our institution between August 2012 and October 2017. Using computed tomography (CT) imaging, the cross-sectional area of muscles at the L3 vertebral level was measured and then divided by height squared to calculate skeletal muscle index (SMI). Sarcopenia was defined as SMI ≤38.5 cm2/m2 for women and ≤52.4 cm2/m2 for men. SGA assessments were completed within 2 weeks of CT imaging. The association of sarcopenia and malnutrition with overall survival was assessed using univariate and multivariate Cox regression analysis. RESULTS: Median age at presentation was 53.3 years. Sixty-six (58.9%) patients had metastatic disease at diagnosis. Using SMI, 46 (41.1%) patients were sarcopenic, while 66 (58.9%) were non-sarcopenic. Using SGA, 69 (61.6%) patients were assessed as well-nourished, while 43 (38.4%) were malnourished. Of 69 patients classified as well-nourished by SGA, 22 (31.9%) were sarcopenic. Similarly, of 43 patients categorized as malnourished by SGA, 19 (44.2%) were non-sarcopenic. On multivariate analysis, after adjusting for age, gender, tumor stage, BMI, treatment history and SGA, patients with sarcopenia had 3 times greater risk of mortality compared to those without sarcopenia (p = 0.001). The median survival of patients with both sarcopenia and malnutrition (n = 24) was 14.6 months (95% CI: 10.5 to 18.6) compared to the median survival of 25.9 months (95% CI: 7.8 to 44.0) in patients who were either sarcopenic or malnourished but not both (n = 41; p = 0.001). The median survival of patients who were non-sarcopenic and well nourished (n = 48; p = 0.001) was 38.6 months (95% CI: 25.6 to 51.6). CONCLUSIONS: The exploratory study suggests that presence of sarcopenia supersedes the presence of malnutrition as a predictor of survival in colorectal cancer. Co-existence of sarcopenia and malnutrition is associated with worse survival in colorectal cancer compared to just one of those conditions being present. Prospective studies with large sample sizes are needed to confirm these findings.