Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 5 de 5
Filter
1.
Cancer Sci ; 114(6): 2524-2533, 2023 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36751989

ABSTRACT

Our previous real-world studies raised concerns that sequential biomarker testing may lead to increased time to treatment when compared with simultaneous single biomarker testing. The Oncomine Dx target test (ODxTT), a next-generation sequencing-based multiplex biomarker panel test approved in Japan in 2019, is expected to improve time to treatment due to changes in testing methods. This retrospective observational study examined data claims for reimbursement submitted for patients with lung cancer in Japan between June 1, 2019, and March 31, 2020. To evaluate the change in testing prevalence over time and associated improvements in time to treatment, descriptive statistics were used to characterize biomarker testing patterns and rates and evaluate the time to treatment in the time following the approval of ODxTT considering transitions over time during the evaluation period. EGFR and programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) were the most tested biomarkers in overall single and simultaneous single testing in the 6177 patients in this study. Individual single biomarker testing gradually decreased over time, except testing for PD-L1, which remained constant. The use of ODxTT gradually increased in this period. Time to treatment decreased from 29 to 22 days with ODxTT, in contrast to single biomarker tests (median 21-23 days overall). These results indicate that biomarker testing frequency changed in Japanese clinical practice during the study and that the use of ODxTT has increased over time, which potentially contributed to the shortening of time to treatment.


Subject(s)
Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung , Lung Neoplasms , Humans , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/diagnosis , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/genetics , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/drug therapy , B7-H1 Antigen/genetics , Japan , Biomarkers, Tumor/genetics , Lung Neoplasms/diagnosis , Lung Neoplasms/genetics , Lung Neoplasms/drug therapy , High-Throughput Nucleotide Sequencing , Retrospective Studies
2.
Future Oncol ; 19(37): 2453-2463, 2023 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37605861

ABSTRACT

Aim: Crizotinib, approved in Japan (2017) for ROS1-positive NSCLC, has limited real-world data. Materials & methods: Crizotinib monotherapy real-world effectiveness and treatment status were analyzed from claims data (June 2017-March 2021; Japanese Medical Data Vision; 58 patients tested for ROS1-NSCLC). Results: Median duration of treatment ([DoT]; primary end point), any line: 12.9 months; 22 patients on crizotinib, 23 discontinued, 13 receiving post-crizotinib treatment. 1L (n = 27) median DoT: 13.0 months (95% CI, 4.4-32.0 months); 13 patients on crizotinib; seven discontinued; seven receiving post-crizotinib treatment. 2L (n = 13) median DoT: 14.0 months (95% CI, 4.6-22.2 months); 2L+ (n = 31): nine patients on crizotinib; 16 discontinued; six receiving post-crizotinib treatment. Post-crizotinib treatments (chemotherapy, cancer immunotherapy, anti-VEGF/R) did not affect crizotinib DoT. Conclusion: Data supplement crizotinib's effectiveness in ROS1-positive NSCLC previously seen in clinical trials/real-world.


Non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is a common type of cancer in the lung that is often caused by mutations in specific genes in the DNA. One type of NSCLC occurs when you have mutations in a gene called ROS1, whose normal function is not well understood. Crizotinib, an oral medicine, was approved in Japan for the treatment of NSCLC with mutations in ROS1 in 2017; however, this was based upon data from controlled clinical trials. This study was looking at crizotinib use in Japan based upon claims data from the Japanese Medical Data Vision database, which captures all use of medications provided in Japan. Data was collected from June 2017 to March 2021 for 58 Japanese patients who had NSCLC, tested positive for ROS1 mutations, and received crizotinib. Patients took crizotinib for a median of 13.0 months as a first treatment option and 14.0 months as a second treatment option for their NSCLC. The type of and duration of anticancer treatments given before crizotinib did not have an effect on the length of time crizotinib was used. Other treatments outside of crizotinib were given before or after crizotinib and include chemotherapy, therapy that modifies the immune system to treat cancer, or treatments that inhibit the growth of blood vessels that help the cancer grow/spread. Together, these real-world data provide evidence supporting the use of crizotinib in the treatment of patients with NSCLC and ROS1 mutations.


Subject(s)
Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung , Lung Neoplasms , Humans , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/drug therapy , Crizotinib/therapeutic use , Protein-Tyrosine Kinases/therapeutic use , Japan , Lung Neoplasms/drug therapy , Proto-Oncogene Proteins/genetics , Protein Kinase Inhibitors/therapeutic use
3.
Heliyon ; 10(19): e37867, 2024 Oct 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39398036

ABSTRACT

Objective: To clarify the cost-effectiveness of comprehensive diagnosis and treatment of metastatic non-small cell lung cancer in Japan, from initial diagnosis to post-standard treatment, using three different strategies. Methods: A decision tree was created using three diagnostic and treatment strategies, assuming that Foundation One CDx (F1CDx), a comprehensive genome panel, was introduced in Japan in June 2019. This comprehensive decision tree includes Markov models, cost-effectiveness analyses (CEA), and cost-utility analyses (CUA) of the three strategies from the perspective of Japanese payers. Specifically, Strategy1 involves single-gene testing at the initial diagnosis and F1CDx after standard treatment; Strategy2 involves only single-gene testing at the initial diagnosis; Strategy3 involves F1CDx at the initial diagnosis. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) of the three strategies are estimated. Sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the uncertainty of the parameter settings. Results: Strategy3 was dominated for both CUA and CEA. The ICER/quality-adjusted life year (QALY) for Strategy2 versus Strategy1 was USD 13,734 (JPY 2,080,923, USD 1 = JPY 151.39 on April 1st, 2024), which is less than the willingness to pay of USD 45,900 (JPY 7,500,000), and Strategy2 was more cost-effective than Strategy1. F1CDx was not cost-effective compared to multiple simultaneous single tests at the initial diagnosis, either after standard treatment or at the initial diagnosis. Sensitivity analysis also showed that the most influential factor on the ICER for both CEA and CUA was treatment cost. Conclusions: From both patient benefit and health economic perspectives, introducing F1CDx after standard treatment in June 2019 was not as cost-effective as multiple simultaneous single tests at the initial diagnosis but was more realistic from a health economic perspective than introducing F1CDx at the time of initial diagnosis. Therefore, the policy at the time of F1CDx introduction in Japan was appropriate from a short-term health-economic perspective.

4.
JTO Clin Res Rep ; 4(5): 100508, 2023 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37250506

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Lorlatinib is an ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitor approved in Japan for the treatment of advanced ALK+ NSCLC. There has been little evidence about lorlatinib efficacy after first-line (1L) alectinib in clinical practice in Japan. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed patients with advanced ALK+ NSCLC previously treated with 1L alectinib at multiple sites in Japan. Primary objectives were to collect patient demographics at baseline and estimate time to treatment failure (TTF) with second-line (2L) or third-line (3L) or later line (≥3L) lorlatinib treatment. Secondary objectives included objective response rate (ORR) with lorlatinib, reason for discontinuation and time to last treatment failure with lorlatinib, TTF and ORR of alectinib, and combined TTF. Results: Among the 51 patients included in the study, 29 (56.9%) received 2L and 22 (43.1%) received ≥3L lorlatinib treatment. At lorlatinib initiation, brain metastases were reported in 25 patients (49.0%), and 32 (62.7%) had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1. Median TTF with lorlatinib was 11.1 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 4.6-13.8) in any line, 10.8 months (95% CI: 3.9-13.8) in 2L, and 11.5 months (95% CI: 2.9-not reached) in ≥3L. Median TTF was 11.5 months (95% CI: 3.9-not reached) in patients with brain metastases at lorlatinib initiation and 9.9 months (95% CI: 4.3-13.8) in patients without brain metastases. ORR was 35.7% with any-line lorlatinib treatment. Conclusions: Patient characteristics and efficacy were comparable with previous reports when lorlatinib was given after 1L alectinib in patients with ALK+ NSCLC.

5.
Sci Rep ; 10(1): 16773, 2020 10 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33033286

ABSTRACT

Ceritinib is a selective anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) inhibitor approved for the treatment of patients with unresectable advanced and/or recurrent ALK fusion gene-positive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). As per the approval condition in Japan, this post-marketing surveillance (PMS) study evaluated the clinical safety (including adverse events [AEs], adverse drug reactions [ADRs] and priority investigation items) and efficacy (including ORR and PFS) of ceritinib in Japanese patients. Interim analysis was conducted ~ 2 years after the start of this non-interventional, multicentre, uncontrolled, open-label, special drug-use investigation and results are reported from March 28, 2016 to April 28, 2018. Each patient was followed up for 1 year. Most patients started treatment with 750 mg ceritinib. Safety profile was similar to that observed at the time of approval. No new AEs or ADRs with incidences higher than that at approval were identified. The rate of gastrointestinal ADRs (nausea, vomiting and diarrhoea) was 73.64%. Meaningful efficacy was observed in both post-crizotinib and post-alectinib settings, with ORR of 29.55% (95% CI 20.29-40.22) and disease control rate of 53.41% (95% CI 42.46-64.12). No concerns regarding the safety and efficacy of ceritinib were identified. No new measures, including modification of the PMS study protocol, are considered necessary.


Subject(s)
Anaplastic Lymphoma Kinase/antagonists & inhibitors , Antineoplastic Agents/therapeutic use , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/drug therapy , Lung Neoplasms/drug therapy , Pyrimidines/therapeutic use , Sulfones/therapeutic use , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Anaplastic Lymphoma Kinase/metabolism , Antineoplastic Agents/adverse effects , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/enzymology , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/mortality , Female , Humans , Japan , Kaplan-Meier Estimate , Lung Neoplasms/enzymology , Lung Neoplasms/mortality , Male , Middle Aged , Product Surveillance, Postmarketing , Progression-Free Survival , Pyrimidines/adverse effects , Sulfones/adverse effects
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL