Characteristics and outcomes of patients with RET-fusion positive non-small lung cancer in real-world practice in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Contradictory and limited data are available about the presentation and outcomes of patients with RET-fusion positive metastatic NSCLC as compared to patients without RET fusions. This observational study utilizing a linked electronic health records (EHR) database to genomics testing results was designed to compare characteristics, tumor response, progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) outcomes by RET fusion status among patients with metastatic NSCLC treated with standard therapies. METHODS: Adult patients with metastatic NSCLC with linked EHR and genomics data were eligible who received systemic anti-cancer therapy on or after January 1, 2011. Adjusted, using all available baseline covariates, and unadjusted analyses were conducted to compare tumor response, PFS and OS between patients with RET-fusion positive and RET-fusion negative disease as detected by next-generation sequencing. Tumor response outcomes were analysed using Fisher's exact test, and time-to-event analyses were conducted using Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: There were 5807 eligible patients identified (RET+ cohort, N = 46; RET- cohort, N = 5761). Patients with RET fusions were younger, more likely to have non-squamous disease and be non-smokers and had better performance status (all p < 0.01). In unadjusted analyses, there were no significant differences in tumor response (p = 0.17) or PFS (p = 0.06) but OS was significantly different by RET status (hazard ratio, HR = 1.91, 95% CI:1.22-3.0, p = 0.005). There were no statistically significant differences by RET fusion status in adjusted analyses of either PFS or OS (PFS HR = 1.24, 95% CI:0.86-1.78, p = 0.25; OS HR = 1.52, 95% CI: 0.95-2.43, p = 0.08). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with RET fusions have different baseline characteristics that contribute to favorable OS in unadjusted analysis. However, after adjusting for baseline covariates, there were no significant differences in either OS or PFS by RET status among patients treated with standard therapy prior to the availability of selective RET inhibitors.

Predictors of heterogeneity in the first-line treatment of patients with advanced/metastatic gastric cancer in the U.S.

BACKGROUND: Patients with metastatic gastric cancer have a poor prognosis (5-year survival of less than 10%). This study was designed to describe the treatment patterns of patients with gastric cancer and to understand the factors associated with treatment choices to inform evidence-based care. METHODS: A retrospective observational study was conducted using two real-world databases to describe treatment trends and to quantify variability in treatment patterns of patients diagnosed with advanced/metastatic gastric cancer between 1/1/2007 and 9/30/2014 in the U.S. Heterogeneity was measured by the Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI). Predictors (baseline clinical, treatment, and demographic variables) of treatment regimen choice were evaluated using logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 5772 patients with advanced/metastatic gastric cancer were included in this study [5044 from claims data and 728 from electronic medical records (EMR)]. Of the 5044 from claims data, 2457 had evidence of metastatic disease at diagnosis. Only the fluorouracil + oxaliplatin regimen exceeded 10% utilization in the first-line setting [claims metastatic (12.1%), claims advanced (8.2%), and EMR metastatic (16.6%) cohorts]. The HHI demonstrated extreme heterogeneity (0.14 for first-line therapy and 0.13 for second-line therapy). Patient age and geographic region of residence were significantly associated with treatment choice across all three cohorts in the first-line setting (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Treatment of patients with gastric cancer was highly variable. Despite the availability of treatment guidelines, there is a lack of consistent treatment patterns. There is a need to improve evidence-based care for patients with gastric cancer.

Baseline characteristics, adenosine diphosphate receptor inhibitor treatment patterns, and in-hospital outcomes of myocardial infarction patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention in the prospective Canadian Observational AntiPlatelet sTudy (COAPT).

BACKGROUND: Contemporary use of dual antiplatelet therapy and consistency with guideline recommendations in acute coronary syndrome patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) have not been well characterized. METHODS: The COAPT was a prospective, observational, multicenter, longitudinal study of patients with myocardial infarction (MI) undergoing PCI. Baseline characteristics, treatment patterns, processes of care, factors associated with switching to and from novel adenosine diphosphate receptor inhibitors (ADPris), and in-hospital outcomes are described. RESULTS: Among 2,179 MI patients undergoing PCI during their index hospitalization, 1,328 (60.9%) had ST elevation. Initial ADPri use included clopidogrel in 1,812 (83.2%), prasugrel in 125 (5.7%), and ticagrelor in 242 (11.1%). At discharge, 1,597 patients (73.4%) were prescribed clopidogrel, 220 (10.1%) prasugrel, and 358 (16.5%) ticagrelor. Switching between ADPri therapies during the index hospitalization occurred in 15.3%, 22.4%, and 25.2% of patients initially started on clopidogrel, prasugrel, and ticagrelor, respectively. Most switches over the 15-month study period occurred during the index admission (16.8% of patients vs 4.4% switches postdischarge). Major adverse cardiovascular events occurred in 7.5% of patients during the index hospitalization. In-hospital bleeding events occurred in 6.0% of patients and most were mild. CONCLUSIONS: Despite randomized trial evidence and guideline recommendations, only a minority of Canadian MI patients undergoing PCI initially received or were discharged on one of the newer ADPri agents. These findings suggest an opportunity to improve upon the appropriate selection of the ADPris at index hospitalization and discharge in Canadian MI patients undergoing PCI.

Real-world maintenance therapy and survival outcomes for pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed and platinum for non-small-cell lung cancer in USA.

Aim: To evaluate treatment patterns and overall survival (OS) in real world metastatic non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSQ-NSCLC) patients that received pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed-platinum (pembro+pem+plat) aligned with KEYNOTE-189. Materials & methods: OS was evaluated for the overall cohort and maintenance therapy (MT) subgroups and analyzed using Kaplan-Meier estimates and Cox proportional hazards model. Results: Of 2488 patients that received first-line treatment, 45.1% received less than four cycles of pembro+pem+plat, 43.9% received four cycles plus MT with pembro and/or pem, and 11.1% received four cycles without continuing on MT. The median OS was 21.0 months and 9.1 months in patients that continued and did not continue MT. Conclusion: Real world patients that received KEYNOTE-189-aligned treatment had similar OS benefits.

What is this article about? KEYNOTE-189 was a research study (i.e., clinical trial) that compared two different combinations of medicine to treat patients with advanced non-squamous (NSQ) non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This was the first treatment after being diagnosed for all patients, and they received one of two combinations ­ either pembrolizumab, pemetrexed, plus a platinum-based chemotherapy (pembro+pem+plat) or placebo plus pemetrexed plus a platinum-based chemotherapy. After receiving these combinations four-times, patients were switched to maintenance therapy with pembro and/or pem. In general, patients first treated with pembro+pem+plat survived longer than those treated with placebo plus pemetrexed-platinum. In the current study, researchers wanted to learn if the same results can be expected for patients being treated in the community. What are the results? Patients who completed four sessions of pembro+pem+plat and continued on maintenance therapy survived for 21.0 months and those who completed four sessions of pembro+pem+plat but did not continue on maintenance therapy survived for 9.1 months. What do the results of the study mean? Patients in the community who were treated with pembro+pem+plat and continued on maintenance therapy survived as long as those in the KEYNOTE-189 study.

Health care resource utilization and treatment variability in the care of patients with advanced or metastatic colorectal or gastric cancer.

AIMS: This study was designed to describe health care resource utilization (HCRU) of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) or gastric cancer to test the hypothesis that greater treatment variability would be associated with increased HCRU. METHODS: A retrospective observational study using Marketscan claims data was conducted. Eligible patients had a first diagnosis of metastatic CRC or gastric cancer between 2004 and 2015 and must have received systemic anti-cancer therapy after diagnosis. Treatment variability was measured using the Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI). HHI scores were stratified by quartile. HCRU variables were evaluated throughout the follow-up period and described by 6-month periods. Chi-square test was used for categorical variables and ANOVA for continuous variables. RESULTS: A total of 55,403 CRC and 9,073 gastric cancer patients were eligible. First-line HHI scores ranged from 0.1304-0.2778 for CRC and 0.0383-0.1778 for gastric cancer by state of residence. Statistically significant differences by HHI quartiles for HCRU in CRC included hospitalizations (p = 0.0003), ER visits (p < 0.0001), ER visits leading to hospitalization (p < 0.0001), and supportive care (all agents studied, p < 0.01). For gastric cancer, significant differences by HHI quartile were observed for ER visits (p = 0.002) and selected supportive care (G-CSF, erythropoiesis-stimulating agents, bisphosphonates, nutritional support, and antiemetics, each p < 0.05). No consistent increasing or decreasing trends were observed across the quartiles for either cohort. LIMITATIONS: Large sample sizes could lead to statistical significance without being clinically meaningful. High treatment heterogeneity in the gastric cancer cohort and lack of a homogeneous quartile for comparisons limited the ability to evaluate HCRU by different levels of treatment variability. CONCLUSIONS: Statistically significant relationships were observed between treatment variability as measured by HHI and increased HCRU, but no consistent directional trends in HCRU variables were observed. Therefore, this study failed to reject the null hypothesis of equivalent HCRU by level of treatment variability.

Treatment patterns for patients with advanced/metastatic cancers by site of care.

OBJECTIVES: To compare treatments, overall survival (OS), and total costs among patients receiving anticancer therapy in hospital outpatient vs physician office settings. STUDY DESIGN: This retrospective observational study utilized claims data from a large national health plan to identify patients with advanced/metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (aNSCLC), metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), or metastatic breast cancer (mBC) treated in hospital outpatient or physician office settings. METHODS: Patients enrolled in Medicare Advantage Prescription Drug or commercial plans for at least 180 days prior to and at least 30 days after start of first-line (1L) therapy were included. Treatments by lines of therapy, OS, and total costs were evaluated by site of care. RESULTS: Eligible patients included 4618 with aNSCLC, 2304 with mCRC, and 1411 with mBC. There were no major differences in 1L, second-line, or third-line therapy by site of care. Patients with aNSCLC in physician office had longer 1L duration (hospital outpatient, 96 days vs physician office, 102 days; P < .01), but there were no differences in duration of therapy by site of care for mBC or mCRC. Costs were higher in the hospital outpatient setting for mCRC and mBC, but there were no differences in OS for any of the cancers. CONCLUSIONS: Although patients received similar care in hospital outpatient and physician office settings, the differences in duration of treatment and costs warrant further evaluation.

Development of a Prognostic Factor Index Among Women With HR+/HER2- Metastatic Breast Cancer in a Community Oncology Setting.

BACKGROUND: This study explored the impact of multiple prognostic factors on patient overall survival (OS) and real-world progression-free survival (rwPFS) for patients with hormone receptor-positive (HR+)/human epidermal growth factor 2 negative (HER2-) metastatic breast cancer (MBC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study used electronic health record data of patients in the United States from community oncology practices from January 1, 2008 to April 30, 2017. Eligibility included HR+/HER2- MBC diagnosis in 2008 or later and prior systemic therapy for MBC. An index variable was created to assess the effect of multiple clinical prognostic factors collectively, including liver metastases (LM), primary endocrine resistance (PER), negative progesterone receptor (PR-) status, and high tumor grade (TG). Patients were grouped based on the number of prognostic factors present at MBC diagnosis: 0, 1, and 2+. Differences in rwPFS and OS from start of first-line therapy were evaluated by the Kaplan-Meier method and multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression. RESULTS: Approximately 29.1% of the 378 eligible patient sample had 0, 36.0% had 1, and 34.9% had 2+ prognostic factors. For the patients with 1 of the prognostic factors, 24.3% had high TG, 14.7% were LM+, 39.7% had PER, and 21.3% were PR-. Univariate and multivariate results showed that rwPFS and OS were significantly (P < .05) shorter in patients with 1 and 2+ prognostic factors compared with patients with 0. CONCLUSIONS: The individual prognostic factors and the prognostic factor index may enable early identification of patients with a less favorable prognosis across the HR+/HER2- MBC population and help inform treatment decisions in difficult-to-treat populations.

Real-world treatment patterns and outcomes of abemaciclib for the treatment of HR+, HER2- metastatic breast cancer.

OBJECTIVE: This retrospective observational study described baseline characteristics, real-world treatment patterns, and outcomes among patients with metastatic breast cancer treated with abemaciclib in the United States. METHODS: De-identified electronic health record-derived data were used to describe patients who began abemaciclib treatment on or after 30 June 2016 and ≥4 months before data cutoff (31 December 2018). Real-world response (rwR) and real-world progression assessments were abstracted from clinical documentation. Descriptive statistics were used to calculate the real-world best response. The Kaplan-Meier method estimated real-world time to first response (rwTTFR) and real-world progression-free survival (rwPFS). RESULTS: The median age of 118 female patients at abemaciclib initiation was 66.5 years (interquartile range, 57.0, 73.0). The breakdown of patients who received abemaciclib in first, second, third, or later lines was 28.8%, 21.2%, 20.3%, and 29.7%, respectively. Patients received abemaciclib as monotherapy (12.7%) or in combination with endocrine therapy: fulvestrant (59.3%); aromatase inhibitor (22.9%); aromatase inhibitor and fulvestrant (5.1%). There were 68 patients (57.6%) with ≥1 rwR assessment: 41.2% with a real-world complete response or real-world partial response. Median rwTTFR was 3.6 months (95% confidence interval, 3.5, 5.2). Twelve-month rwPFS probability was 61.7%. CONCLUSIONS: This study represents utilization and outcomes associated with abemaciclib approximately 1 year following FDA approval. Treatment patterns demonstrated heterogeneity and, as in clinical trials, patients appeared to benefit from abemaciclib treatment in the real world. More research investigating outcomes associated with abemaciclib treatment is needed, with larger samples and longer follow-up to enable closer evaluation by subgroup, regimen, and line of therapy.

Safety outcomes in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer patients treated with first-line platinum-based regimens in the United States.

BACKGROUND: We analyzed the treatment patterns and safety outcomes of the most common first-line platinum-based regimens initiated on or after non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) diagnosis in a real-world setting. METHODS: Based on a United States oncology electronic medical record (EMR) database, patients treated with first-line platinum-based regimens after advanced NSCLC diagnosis from September 2008 to November 2014 were analyzed. Baseline characteristics and selected adverse events during treatment [incidence proportions and incidence rates (IRs)] were described by regimen. Propensity score stratification was used to adjust for baseline characteristics differences. Hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated using Cox proportional hazards model, with paclitaxel (Pac)/carboplatin (Carbo) as reference. Subgroup analysis was conducted for elderly patients (≥70 years old). RESULTS: The most common five regimens for the eligible patients were as follows: Pac/Carbo (n=3,009), pemetrexed (Pem)/Carbo (n=1,625), Pem/Carbo/bevacizumab (Bev) (n=735), Pac/Carbo/Bev (n=531), Pem/cisplatin (Cis) (n=357), and docetaxel (Doc)/Carbo (n=355). Highest IRs were reported for anemia, neutropenia, nausea, and vomiting across these regimens in patients of all ages. After propensity score stratification, compared with Pac/Carbo, risk of anemia was significantly lower with Pac/Carbo/Bev (HR =0.67), Pem/Cis (HR =0.68), and Pem/Carbo/Bev (HR =0.82); risk of neutropenia was comparable among all regimens except Doc/Carbo (significantly lower risk; HR =0.72); and risk of nausea (HR =1.45) and vomiting (HR =1.50) was significantly higher with Pem/Cis. Safety outcomes in elderly patients were consistent with the overall population. CONCLUSIONS: While EMR data have limitations, the real-world safety outcome with individual chemotherapy regimen could be considered for the better selection of platinum-based therapies in NSCLC.

Treatment patterns, duration and outcomes of pemetrexed maintenance therapy in patients with advanced NSCLC in a real-world setting.

OBJECTIVES: In patients with non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), maintenance therapy regimens, including pemetrexed, have been shown to prolong overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). The purpose of this study was to describe real-world maintenance use of pemetrexed and associated outcomes in patients with advanced NSCLC. METHODS: This was a retrospective, observational study that used longitudinal, demographically and geographically diverse electronic health record data in the United States. Eligible patients were adults with advanced non-squamous NSCLC who had received maintenance treatment with pemetrexed monotherapy or pemetrexed plus bevacizumab. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the patient population and multivariable logistic regression was used to identify the factors associated with duration of maintenance therapy. Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox regression models were used for time-to-event analysis. RESULTS: Patients receiving pemetrexed maintenance therapy were treated with either pemetrexed monotherapy (66.0%) or pemetrexed plus bevacizumab (34.0%). Carboplatin and pemetrexed (37.9%) or carboplatin, pemetrexed and bevacizumab (36.1%) were the most commonly used first-line therapies observed. The majority (84.9%) of these maintenance patients responded to first-line therapy. The median duration of maintenance therapy was 6.0 months for pemetrexed and bevacizumab and 4.1 months for pemetrexed monotherapy. The median OS from the start of first-line therapy of the total study cohort was 21.5 months (95% CI 20.0, 22.9). CONCLUSION: Real-world effectiveness of pemetrexed maintenance therapy is similar to that observed in published randomized controlled trials, confirming a role for pemetrexed maintenance in eligible patients in clinical practice.

Treatment Patterns by EGFR Mutation Status in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients in the USA: A Retrospective Database Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Targeted therapies, including tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) that target the sensitizing epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) gene are recommended for patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Most patients with NSCLC who test positive for the EGFR mutation and receive TKIs develop resistance to these drugs. Questions remain regarding which treatment sequence is optimal for patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC, and few studies have evaluated patterns of TKI treatment use in NSCLC, irrespective of EGFR mutation status, in a real-world setting. This population-based study aimed to evaluate treatment patterns at a national level in the USA. METHODS: This retrospective observational study used data from the US Oncology Network's iKnowMed database. Patients with advanced NSCLC who initiated first-line therapy with erlotinib and/or intravenous chemotherapy between January 1, 2012 and June 30, 2015 and met all other study criteria were included. Descriptive analyses assessed demographic and clinical characteristics and treatment patterns among the overall study cohort, as well as for specific erlotinib treatment subgroups, stratified by EGFR status. RESULTS: Among the 3108 patients identified, 18.5% were EGFR positive, 49.8% were EGFR negative, and 31.7% were EGFR documented unknown. For the overall cohort, 18.4% received first-line erlotinib monotherapy, fewer than 1% received first-line combination therapy (erlotinib plus chemotherapy), 4.7% received second-line erlotinib monotherapy, and 3.3% received second-line combination therapy. First-line erlotinib monotherapy was used in 77.8% of all EGFR positive patients. Almost two-thirds of the overall cohort were not observed to have advanced to second-line therapy. CONCLUSIONS: As treatment options evolve, this study provides real-world treatment patterns that suggest concordance with NCCN guidelines and confirm the remaining need to understand sequencing of therapies and related outcomes. FUNDING: Eli Lilly and Company.

Duration of dual antiplatelet therapy and associated outcomes following percutaneous coronary intervention for acute myocardial infarction: contemporary practice insights from the Canadian Observational Antiplatelet Study.

Aims: There is a paucity of real-world, contemporary data of practice patterns and clinical outcomes following dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in acute myocardial infarction (AMI) patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Methods and results: The Canadian Observational Antiplatelet Study was a prospective, multicentre, cohort study examining adenosine diphosphate receptor antagonist use following PCI for AMI. We compared practice patterns, patient characteristics, and clinical outcomes in relation to DAPT duration (<6 weeks, 6 weeks to <6 months, 6 to <12, and ≥12 months). The primary outcome was the composite of non-fatal AMI, unplanned coronary revascularization, stent thrombosis, new or worsening heart failure, cardiogenic shock, or stroke. We identified 2034 patients with AMI treated with PCI. DAPT duration was <6 weeks in 5.2% of patients; 6 weeks to <6 months in 7.0%; 6 to <12 months in 12.6%; and ≥12 months in 75.3%. Patients who discontinued DAPT early had higher GRACE risk scores. Overall, mortality rate at 15 months was 2.5%. Compared with a duration of DAPT of ≥12 months, discontinuation of DAPT <6 weeks (P < 0.0001) and 6 weeks to <6 months (P = 0.02), but not 6 months to <12 months (P = 0.06), were independently associated with a higher incidence of the primary outcome among survivors. Conclusion: One-in-four patients with AMI treated with PCI discontinued DAPT prior to the guideline-recommended 12-month duration. Patients in whom DAPT was discontinued early were at higher baseline risk and had higher rates of non-fatal ischaemic events during follow up.