Use of the Decipher genomic classifier among men with prostate cancer in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Management of localized or recurrent prostate cancer since the 1990s has been based on risk stratification using clinicopathological variables, including Gleason score, T stage (based on digital rectal exam), and prostate-specific antigen (PSA). In this study a novel prognostic test, the Decipher Prostate Genomic Classifier (GC), was used to stratify risk of prostate cancer progression in a US national database of men with prostate cancer. METHODS: Records of prostate cancer cases from participating SEER (Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results) program registries, diagnosed during the period from 2010 through 2018, were linked to records of testing with the GC prognostic test. Multivariable analysis was used to quantify the association between GC scores or risk groups and use of definitive local therapy after diagnosis in the GC biopsy-tested cohort and postoperative radiotherapy in the GC-tested cohort as well as adverse pathological findings after prostatectomy. RESULTS: A total of 572 545 patients were included in the analysis, of whom 8927 patients underwent GC testing. GC biopsy-tested patients were more likely to undergo active active surveillance or watchful waiting than untested patients (odds ratio [OR] =2.21, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.04 to 2.38, P < .001). The highest use of active surveillance or watchful waiting was for patients with a low-risk GC classification (41%) compared with those with an intermediate- (27%) or high-risk (11%) GC classification (P < .001). Among National Comprehensive Cancer Network patients with low and favorable-intermediate risk, higher GC risk class was associated with greater use of local therapy (OR = 4.79, 95% CI = 3.51 to 6.55, P < .001). Within this subset of patients who were subsequently treated with prostatectomy, high GC risk was associated with harboring adverse pathological findings (OR = 2.94, 95% CI = 1.38 to 6.27, P = .005). Use of radiation after prostatectomy was statistically significantly associated with higher GC risk groups (OR = 2.69, 95% CI = 1.89 to 3.84). CONCLUSIONS: There is a strong association between use of the biopsy GC test and likelihood of conservative management. Higher genomic classifier scores are associated with higher rates of adverse pathology at time of surgery and greater use of postoperative radiotherapy.In this study the Decipher Prostate Genomic Classifier (GC) was used to analyze a US national database of men with prostate cancer. Use of the GC was associated with conservative management (ie, active surveillance). Among men who had high-risk GC scores and then had surgery, there was a 3-fold higher chance of having worrisome findings in surgical specimens.

Effect of adjuvant chemotherapy on survival of patients with stage III colon cancer diagnosed after age 75 years.

PURPOSE: Few patients 75 years of age and older participate in clinical trials, thus whether adjuvant chemotherapy for stage III colon cancer (CC) benefits this group is unknown. METHODS: A total of 5,489 patients ≥ 75 years of age with resected stage III CC, diagnosed between 2004 and 2007, were selected from four data sets containing demographic, stage, treatment, and survival information. These data sets included SEER-Medicare, a linkage between the New York State Cancer Registry (NYSCR) and its Medicare programs, and prospective cohort studies Cancer Care Outcomes Research and Surveillance Consortium (CanCORS) and the National Comprehensive Cancer Network. Data sets were analyzed in parallel using covariate adjusted and propensity score (PS) matched proportional hazards models to evaluate the effect of treatment on survival. PS trimming was used to mitigate the effects of selection bias. RESULTS: Use of adjuvant therapy declined with age and comorbidity. Chemotherapy receipt was associated with a survival benefit of comparable magnitude to clinical trials results (SEER-Medicare PS-matched mortality, hazard ratio [HR], 0.60; 95% CI, 0.53 to 0.68). The incremental benefit of oxaliplatin over non-oxaliplatin-containing regimens was also of similar magnitude to clinical trial results (SEER-Medicare, HR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.69 to 1.04; NYSCR-Medicare, HR, 0.82, 95% CI, 0.51 to 1.33) in two of three examined data sources. However, statistical significance was inconsistent. The beneficial effect of chemotherapy and oxaliplatin did not seem solely attributable to confounding. CONCLUSION: The noninvestigational experience suggests patients with stage III CC ≥ 75 years of age may anticipate a survival benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy. Oxaliplatin offers no more than a small incremental benefit. Use of adjuvant chemotherapy after the age of 75 years merits consideration in discussions that weigh individual risks and preferences.

Comparison of adverse events during 5-fluorouracil versus 5-fluorouracil/oxaliplatin adjuvant chemotherapy for stage III colon cancer: a population-based analysis.

BACKGROUND: In clinical trials, combined 5-fluorouracil (5FU) plus oxaliplatin improves the survival of patients who have resected, stage III colon cancer with manageable toxicity. However, the tolerability of this in the general population of patients with colon cancer is uncertain. METHODS: Adverse outcomes were compared in patients with stage III colon cancer who received either 5FU or 5FU/oxaliplatin within 120 days of undergoing resection versus a control group of patients with stage II colon cancer who did not receive chemotherapy in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database and in data from the New York State Cancer Registry linked to Medicare and Medicaid. Hospitalizations, emergency room (ER) visits, and outpatient adverse events (AEs) were measured in claims from 30 days to 9 months after patients underwent resection. Multiple logistic regression was used to calculate adjusted odds ratios of events by treatment. Propensity score matching was used to minimize selection bias. RESULTS: Adverse outcomes were more frequent for chemotherapy recipients. AE rates were higher in patients who received 5FU/oxaliplatin (81%) compared with patients who received 5FU alone (72%), in the SEER-Medicare data. The effect of oxaliplatin on AEs was greater in older patients: The odds ratio was 2.10 (95% confidence interval, 1.53-2.87) for patients aged ≥ 75 years versus 1.75 (95% confidence interval, 1.39-2.21) for patients aged <75 years. ER use was high in Medicaid patients (83% of those who received chemotherapy), but neither ER use nor hospitalization was increased by oxaliplatin. The 60-day mortality rate was 1% to 3% for patients who received 5FU alone and 1% to 2% for patients who received combined 5FU/oxaliplatin. CONCLUSIONS: The incremental harms of adjuvant chemotherapy with 5FU/oxaliplatin versus 5FU alone were modest in patients with stage III colon cancer who were insured by Medicare and Medicaid. The additional harms in patients aged ≥ 75 years largely were restricted to outpatient events and did not extend to an increased rate of hospitalization or early death.

Comparative effectiveness of oxaliplatin vs non-oxaliplatin-containing adjuvant chemotherapy for stage III colon cancer.

BACKGROUND: The addition of oxaliplatin to adjuvant 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) improves survival of patients with stage III colon cancer in randomized clinical trials (RCTs). However, RCT participants are younger, healthier, and less racially diverse than the general cancer population. Thus, the benefit of oxaliplatin outside RCTs is uncertain. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Patients younger than 75 years with stage III colon cancer who received chemotherapy within 120 days of surgical resection were identified from five observational data sources-the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registry linked to Medicare claims (SEER-Medicare), the New York State Cancer Registry (NYSCR) linked to Medicaid and Medicare claims, the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Outcomes Database, and the Cancer Care Outcomes Research & Surveillance Consortium (CanCORS). Overall survival (OS) was compared among patients treated with oxaliplatin vs non-oxaliplatin-containing adjuvant chemotherapy. Overall survival for 4060 patients diagnosed during 2004-2009 was compared with pooled data from five RCTs (the Adjuvant Colon Cancer ENdpoinTs [ACCENT] group, n = 8292). Datasets were juxtaposed but not combined using Kaplan-Meier curves. Covariate and propensity score adjusted proportional hazards models were used to calculate adjusted survival hazard ratios (HR). Stratified analyses examined effect modifiers. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: The survival advantage associated with the addition of oxaliplatin to adjuvant 5-FU was evident across diverse practice settings (3-year OS: RCTs, 86% [n = 1273]; SEER-Medicare, 80% [n = 1152]; CanCORS, 88% [n = 129]; NYSCR-Medicaid, 82% [n = 54]; NYSCR-Medicare, 79% [n = 180]; and NCCN, 86% [n = 438]). A statistically significant improvement in 3-year overall survival was seen in the largest cohort, SEER-Medicare, and in the NYSCR-Medicare cohort (non-oxaliplatin-containing vs oxaliplatin-containing adjuvant therapy, adjusted HR of death: pooled RCTs: HR = 0.80, 95% CI = 0.70 to 0.92, P = .002; SEER-Medicare: HR = 0.70, 95% CI = 0.60 to 0.82, P < .001; NYSCR-Medicare patients aged ≥65 years: HR = 0.58, 95% CI = 0.38 to 0.90, P = .02). The association between oxaliplatin treatment and better survival was maintained in older and minority group patients, as well as those with higher comorbidity. CONCLUSION: The addition of oxaliplatin to 5-FU appears to be associated with better survival among patients receiving adjuvant colon cancer treatment in the community.