Real-world outcomes of patients with locally advanced or metastatic epithelioid sarcoma.

BACKGROUND: Limited data are available on the real-world effectiveness and safety of systemic therapies for advanced (surgically unresectable and/or metastatic) epithelioid sarcoma (ES). METHODS: A retrospective medical records review was conducted in patients with advanced ES who were initiating first-line or ≥2 lines of systemic therapy (2000-2017) at 5 US cancer centers. The real-world overall response rate (rwORR), the duration of response (rwDOR), the disease control rate (rwDCR) (defined as stable disease for ≥32 weeks or any duration of response), and progression-free survival (rwPFS) were assessed by radiology reports. Overall survival (OS), rwDOR, and rwPFS were estimated from the time therapy was initiated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Serious adverse events were assessed. RESULTS: Of 74 patients (median age at diagnosis, 33 years; range, 10.6-76.3 years), 72% were male, and 85% had metastatic disease. The median number of lines of therapy was 2 (range, 1-7 lines of therapy), and 46 patients (62%) received ≥2 lines of systemic therapy. First-line regimens were usually anthracycline-based (54%) or gemcitabine-based (24%). For patients receiving first-line systemic therapy, the rwORR was 15%, the rwDCR was 20%, the median rwDOR was 3.3 months (95% CI, 2.1-5.2 months), the median rwPFS was 2.5 months (95% CI, 1.7, 6.9 months), and the median OS was 15.2 months (95% CI, 11.4-21.7 months). For those who received ≥2 lines of systemic therapy, the rwORR was 9%, the rwDCR was 20%, the median rwDOR was 4.5 months (95% CI, 0.7-5.6 months), and the median rwPFS was 6.0 months (95% CI, 3.2-7.4 months). Over one-half of patients (51.4%) experienced an adverse event, most frequently febrile neutropenia (14%), pain (10%), anemia, dyspnea, fever, thrombocytopenia, or transaminitis (5% each). CONCLUSIONS: Systemic therapies demonstrate limited efficacy in patients with advanced ES and have associated toxicities.

Treatment Patterns and Clinical Outcomes Among Patients With Metastatic Prostate Cancer Harboring Homologous Recombination Repair Mutations.

BACKGROUND: There is currently limited literature assessing the real-world treatment patterns and clinical outcomes of patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) and homologous recombination repair (HRR) mutations. METHODS: Medical charts were abstracted for mCRPC patients with ≥ 1 of 12 HRR somatic gene alterations treated at US oncology centers participating in the American Association for Cancer Research Project Genomics Evidence Neoplasia Information Exchange. Treatment patterns and clinical outcomes were assessed from the initiation of first-line or later (1L+) mCRPC therapy received on or after July 1, 2014. RESULTS: Among 138 patients included in the study, the most common somatic HRR mutations were CDK12 (47.8%), BRCA2 (22.5%), and ATM (21.0%). Novel hormonal therapy and taxane chemotherapy were most commonly used in 1L; taxane use increased in later lines. Median overall survival (95% confidence interval [CI]) was 36.3 (30.7-47.8) months from initiation of 1L therapy and decreased for subsequent lines. Similarly, there was a trend of decreasing progression-free survival and prostate-specific antigen response from 1L to 4L+ therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment patterns identified in this study were similar to those among patients with mCRPC regardless of tumor HRR mutation status in the literature.

Efficacy of avapritinib versus best available therapy in the treatment of advanced systemic mastocytosis.

Advanced systemic mastocytosis (AdvSM) is a rare myeloid neoplasm associated with poor overall survival (OS). This study (NCT04695431) compared clinical outcomes between patients with AdvSM treated with avapritinib in the Phase 1 EXPLORER (NCT0256198) and Phase 2 PATHFINDER (NCT03580655) trials (N = 176) and patients treated with best available therapy (BAT; N = 141). A multi-center, observational, retrospective chart review study was conducted at six study sites (four European, two American) to collect data from patients with AdvSM who received BAT; these data were pooled with data from EXPLORER and PATHFINDER. Comparisons between outcomes of OS, duration of treatment (DOT), and maximum reduction in serum tryptase were conducted between the treatment cohorts, with adjustment for key covariates. The results indicated that the avapritinib cohort had significantly better survival (adjusted hazard ratio (HR) (95% confidence interval (CI)): 0.48 (0.29, 0.79); p = 0.004) and significantly longer DOT (HR: 0.36 (0.26, 0.51); p < 0.001) compared to the BAT cohort. Additionally, the mean difference in percentage maximum reduction in serum tryptase levels was 60.3% greater in the avapritinib cohort (95% CI: -72.8, -47.9; p < 0.001). With no randomized controlled trials comparing avapritinib to BAT, these data offer crucial insights into the improved efficacy of avapritinib for the treatment of AdvSM.

Development and Validation of a Healthcare Utilization-Based Algorithm to Identify Acute Exacerbations of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.

Introduction: Acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) are important events that may precipitate other adverse outcomes. Accurate AECOPD event identification in electronic administrative data is essential for improving population health surveillance and practice management. Objective: Develop codified algorithms to identify moderate and severe AECOPD in two US healthcare systems using administrative data and electronic medical records, and validate their performance by calculating positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV). Methods: Data from two large regional integrated health systems were used. Eligible patients were identified using International Classification of Diseases (Ninth Edition) COPD diagnosis codes. Two algorithms were developed: one to identify potential moderate AECOPD by selecting outpatient/emergency visits associated with AECOPD-related codes and antibiotic/systemic steroid prescriptions; the other to identify potential severe AECOPD by selecting inpatient visits associated with corresponding codes. Algorithms were validated via patient chart review, adjudicated by a pulmonologist. To estimate PPV, 300 potential moderate AECOPD and 250 potential severe AECOPD events underwent review. To estimate NPV, 200 patients without any AECOPD identified by the algorithms (100 patients each without moderate or severe AECOPD) during the two years following the index date underwent review to identify AECOPD missed by the algorithm (false negatives). Results: The PPVs (95% confidence interval [CI]) for both moderate and severe AECOPD were high: 293/298 (98.3% [96.1-99.5]) and 216/225 (96.0% [92.5-98.2]), respectively. NPV was lower for moderate AECOPD (75.0% [65.3-83.1]) than for severe AECOPD (95.0% [88.7-98.4]). Results were consistent across both healthcare systems. Conclusion: This study developed healthcare utilization-based algorithms to identify moderate and severe AECOPD in two separate healthcare systems. PPV for both algorithms was high; NPV was lower for the moderate algorithm. Replication and consistency of results across two healthcare systems support the external validity of these findings.