Prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia with lipegfilgrastim in patients with lung cancer: final results from the non-interventional study NADIR.

OBJECTIVE: Real-world evidence on the application of the granulocyte colony-stimulating factor lipegfilgrastim for the reduction of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia and febrile neutropenia (FN) is limited. The NADIR study aimed to evaluate effectiveness and safety of lipegfilgrastim as primary or secondary prophylaxis in patients with lung cancer undergoing chemotherapy in routine clinical practice. METHODS: The non-interventional study NADIR (German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS) Number DRKS00005711) enrolled 156 patients with small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) and 145 patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), who received lipegfilgrastim during chemotherapy. Primary endpoint was the incidence of severe neutropenia (CTCAE grade 3/4) and FN. The analysis was stratified for age groups (≤65 years vs. >65 years). RESULTS: Approximately half of the patients were aged >65 years (SCLC 54.5%; NSCLC 46.9%). Intention of antineoplastic treatment was mostly palliative (SCLC 89.1%; NSCLC 73.1%). Patients with high FN risk (SCLC 44.9%; NSCLC 28.3%) mostly received lipegfilgrastim for primary prophylaxis (SCLC 81.4%; NSCLC 70.7%). FN was reported in 1.9% SCLC and 1.4% NSCLC patients. At least one severe neutropenia was documented in 30.1% SCLC and 17.9% NSCLC patients. For NSCLC patients aged >65 years, less severe neutropenia was reported as compared to younger patients (14.7% vs. 20.8%). Lipegfilgrastim-related adverse events were reported in 10.3% SCLC and 7.7% NSCLC patients. CONCLUSION: Lipegfilgrastim in routine clinical practice of patients with lung cancer showed similar effectiveness and safety as compared to the pivotal trial. Interestingly, in older patients severe neutropenia was reported less frequently. While most patients with high FN risk received lipegfilgrastim for primary prophylaxis as recommended, there are still 20-30% of patients at high FN risk without primary prophylaxis who could benefit from better adherence to guidelines.

Improving Chemotherapy-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy in Patients with Breast or Colon Cancer after End of (Neo)adjuvant Therapy: Results from the Observational Study STEFANO.

INTRODUCTION: Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) is a common side effect persisting after completion of neurotoxic chemotherapies. This observational study was designed to evaluate the effectiveness of the dietary supplement OnLife® (patented mixture of specific fatty acids and palmitoylethanolamide) in improving symptoms of CIPN in breast and colon cancer patients. METHODS: Improvement of CIPN was evaluated in adult patients, previously treated with (neo)adjuvant paclitaxel- (breast cancer) or oxaliplatin-based (colon cancer) therapies, receiving OnLife® for 3 months after completion of chemotherapy. The primary endpoint was to compare the severity of peripheral sensory neuropathy (PSN) and peripheral motor neuropathy (PMN) before and at the end of OnLife® treatment. Secondary endpoints included the assessment of patient-reported quality of life and CIPN symptoms as assessed by questionnaires. RESULTS: 146 patients (n = 75 breast cancer patients and n = 71 colon cancer patients) qualified for analysis; 31.1% and 37.5% of breast cancer patients had an improvement of PSN and PMN, respectively. In colon cancer patients, PSN and PMN improved in 16.9% and 20.0% of patients, respectively. According to patient-reported outcomes, 45.9% and 37.5% of patients with paclitaxel-induced PSN and PMN, and 23.9% and 22.0% of patients with oxaliplatin-induced PSN and PMN experienced a reduction of CIPN symptoms, respectively. CONCLUSION: OnLife® treatment confirmed to be beneficial in reducing CIPN severity and in limiting the progression of neuropathy, more markedly in paclitaxel-treated patients and also in patients with oxaliplatin-induced CIPN.

Thrombospondin-2 and LDH Are Putative Predictive Biomarkers for Treatment with Everolimus in Second-Line Metastatic Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma (MARC-2 Study).

There is an unmet need for predictive biomarkers in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) therapy. The phase IV MARC-2 trial searched for predictive blood biomarkers in patients with predominant clear cell mRCC who benefit from second-line treatment with everolimus. In an exploratory approach, potential biomarkers were assessed employing proteomics, ELISA, and polymorphism analyses. Lower levels of angiogenesis-related protein thrombospondin-2 (TSP-2) at baseline (≤665 parts per billion, ppb) identified therapy responders with longer median progression-free survival (PFS; ≤665 ppb at baseline: 6.9 months vs. 1.8, p = 0.005). Responders had higher lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) levels in serum two weeks after therapy initiation (>27.14 nmol/L), associated with a longer median PFS (3.8 months vs. 2.2, p = 0.013) and improved overall survival (OS; 31.0 months vs. 14.0 months, p < 0.001). Baseline TSP-2 levels had a stronger relation to PFS (HR 0.36, p = 0.008) than baseline patient parameters, including IMDC score. Increased serum LDH levels two weeks after therapy initiation were the best predictor for OS (HR 0.21, p < 0.001). mTOR polymorphisms appeared to be associated with therapy response but were not significant. Hence, we identified TSP-2 and LDH as promising predictive biomarkers for therapy response on everolimus after failure of one VEGF-targeted therapy in patients with clear cell mRCC.

Patient, nurse, and physician preferences: final results of the CONVENIENCE study evaluating pegfilgrastim prophylaxis via pre-filled syringe or on-body injector in cancer patients.

PURPOSE: The on-body injector (OBI) automatically delivers pegfilgrastim the day after chemotherapy (CTx), thus eliminating the need of return visits to the medical office for guideline-compliant pegfilgrastim administration. The CONVENIENCE study aimed to evaluate patient, nurse, and physician preferences as well as health economics for pegfilgrastim administration either with OBI or manually using a pre-filled syringe (PS). METHODS: Patients with early breast cancer, receiving two or three weekly anthracycline/cyclophosphamide or three weekly taxane-based CTx, and patients with Non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) receiving first-line R-CHOP-14 or -21 were randomized 1:1 to receive both pegfilgrastim application forms for four consecutive CTx cycles in an alternating sequence starting either with OBI or PS. Primary endpoint was patient preference, assessed by questionnaires. RESULTS: A total of 308 patients were evaluable in the per-protocol analysis. Patients slightly preferred OBI over PS (OBI, n = 133, 43.2%; vs. PS, n = 111, 36.0%; p-value = 0.159), while study nurses slightly preferred PS (n = 19, 46.3%) over OBI (n = 18, 43.9%) and physicians clearly preferred PS (n = 24, 58.8%) over OBI (n = 15, 36.6%). Among patients with preference for OBI, saving of time was their major reason for preference (53.4%). Pegfilgrastim was administered 24-72 h after each CTx cycle in 97.6% of OBI and 63.1% of PS applications. CONCLUSION: The OBI was slightly preferred by patients and saving time was the major reason for their preference. PS was physicians' most preferable choice and slightly preferred by nurses. Using OBI, pegfilgrastim was almost always administered within the time period recommended by current guidelines, while it was often not applied as specified using PS. TRIAL REGISTRATION: No: ClinicalTrials.gov No. NCT03619993. Registered on June 25, 2018.

Everolimus after failure of one prior VEGF-targeted therapy in metastatic renal cell carcinoma: Final results of the MARC-2 trial.

MARC-2, a prospective, multicenter phase IV trial, aimed to investigate clinical outcomes in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) treated with everolimus after failure of one initial vascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor (VEGFR-TKI) therapy and to identify subgroups benefiting most, based on clinical characteristics and biomarkers. Patients with clear cell mRCC failing one initial VEGFR-TKI received everolimus until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Primary endpoint was 6-month progression-free survival rate (6moPFS). Secondary endpoints were overall response rate (ORR), PFS, overall survival (OS), and safety. Between 2011 and 2015, 63 patients were enrolled. Median age was 65.4 years (range 43.3-81.1). 6moPFS was 39.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 27.0-51.3) overall, 54.4% (95% CI, 35.2-70.1) vs 23.7% (95% CI, 10.5-39.9) for patients aged ≥65 vs <65 years and 51.4% (95% CI, 34.7-65.7) vs 18.2% (95% CI, 5.7-36.3) for patients with body mass index (BMI) >25 vs ≤25 kg/m2 . A Cox proportional hazards model confirmed a longer PFS for patients aged ≥65 years (hazard ratio [HR] 0.46; 95% CI, 0.26-0.80) and a longer OS for patients with BMI >25 kg/m2 (HR 0.36; 95% CI, 0.18-0.71). Median PFS and median OS were 3.8 months (95% CI, 3.2-6.2) and 16.8 months (95% CI, 14.3-24.3). ORR was 7.9% and disease control rate was 60.3%. No new safety signals emerged. Most common adverse events were stomatitis (31.7%), fatigue (31.7%), and anemia (30.2%). One patient died from treatment-related upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage. Everolimus remains a safe and effective treatment option for mRCC patients after one prior VEGFR-TKI therapy. Patients aged ≥65 years and patients with BMI >25 kg/m2 benefited most.

Effectiveness and Tolerability of Nab-paclitaxel in Younger versus Elderly Patients With Metastatic HR-positive/HER2-negative Breast Cancer: Results From the Noninterventional, Prospective Study NABUCCO.

BACKGROUND: There are only scarce data on treatment of elderly patients with nab-paclitaxel for metastatic breast cancer, especially from the real-world setting. Here we present data from the noninterventional study NABUCCO with special focus on taxane-induced peripheral neuropathy (TIPN) in younger and elderly patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 407 patients with HR-positive/HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer were enrolled between April 2012 and April 2015 into the prospective, multicenter, noninterventional study NABUCCO. Details on effectiveness, tolerability, and safety of nab-paclitaxel were evaluated for younger (<70 years) and elderly (≥70 years) patients. RESULTS: Neither median time to progression (TTP, younger 6.0 months, 95% confidence interval [CI], 5.5-7.1; elderly 6.9 months, 95% CI, 5.5-8.6) nor median overall survival (younger 16.4 months, 95% CI, 14.2-18.1; elderly 14.5 months, 95% CI, 11.9-17.4) differed by age group, also not in view of prior treatments. A multivariate regression model revealed that age did not significantly influence the TTP. TIPN was reported by 49.0% younger (44.3% common terminology criteria for adverse events [CTCAE] grade 1/2, 4.7% grade 3/4) and 45.8% elderly patients (41.1% CTCAE grade 1/2, 4.7% grade 3/4). The cumulative nab-paclitaxel dose did not correlate with the severity/grading of TIPN. CONCLUSION: Treatment with nab-paclitaxel in first- or further-line of metastatic HR-positive/HER2-negative breast cancer resulted in similar effectiveness and safety, irrespective of age. Therefore, nab-paclitaxel is a valid treatment option for elderly and partially heavily pretreated patients. However, incidence of TIPN is high, influencing the patients' quality of life. A close monitoring and awareness for early TIPN symptoms is warranted.

Similar effectiveness of R-CHOP-14 and -21 in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma-data from the prospective German Tumour Registry Lymphatic Neoplasms.

OBJECTIVES: R-CHOP (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisone) is the standard therapy for patients with previously untreated diffuse large B-cell lymphomas (DLBCL). Dose-dense two-weekly 'R-CHOP-14' was not superior over three-weekly 'R-CHOP-21' in randomised clinical trials (RCTs). We present real-world data on effectiveness of R-CHOP-14 and R-CHOP-21 in patients with DLBCL treated in German routine practice. METHODS: We identified 582 patients with DLBCL treated with R-CHOP-14 or R-CHOP-21 in 92 sites from the prospective clinical cohort study Tumour Registry Lymphatic Neoplasms. Patients' schedules were classified by (a) length of the initial first cycle and (b) length of cycles 1-4. RESULTS: About 55% of patients received R-CHOP-21, 45% R-CHOP-14, in median 6 cycles. 51% and 55% of patients, respectively, were able to continue their initial R-CHOP-14 and R-CHOP-21 schedule. While most characteristics between the patient cohorts were similar, patients receiving R-CHOP-21 presented slightly more often with tumour stage I and lower IPI risk. 3-year overall survival of patients with R-CHOP-14 and R-CHOP-21 did not differ: 84% vs 84% (first cycle), 87% vs 89% (cycles 1-4). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with DLBCL in Germany are slightly more likely to receive R-CHOP-21 than R-CHOP-14. Both schedules are similarly effective in routine practice confirming the results from RCTs.

Quality of life in pre- and postmenopausal patients with early breast cancer: a comprehensive analysis from the prospective MaLife project.

PURPOSE: Quality of life (QoL) plays an important role in recovery-especially after an incisive diagnosis such as breast cancer. Here, we present a comprehensive assessment of QoL for pre- and postmenopausal patients, starting from initial systemic treatment of early breast cancer until 3 years later, in patients from a so-called "real-world" setting. METHODS: 251 premenopausal and 478 postmenopausal patients with early breast cancer have been recruited into the longitudinal MaLife project within the prospective, multicentre, German Tumour Registry Breast Cancer between 2011 and 2015. The questionnaires FACT-G, FACT-Taxane, FACT-ES, EORTC QLQ-BR23, BFI and HADS were filled in at start of treatment (T0), 6, 12, 24 and 36 months later. The proportion of patients with clinically meaningful changes at 36 months was determined. RESULTS: This first interim analysis shows that the FACT-G global QoL improved over time regardless of the menopausal status. However, clinically meaningful decrease of social/family well-being (48-51%), arm symptoms (44-49%) and symptoms of neurotoxicity (55-56%) was frequently reported 3 years after start of treatment. Many premenopausal patients also reported a clinically meaningful worsening of endocrine symptoms (64%), emotional well-being (36%) and fatigue intensity (37%). Additionally, 3 years after start of treatment, 15% of the patients were classified as doubtful cases and 18% as definite cases of anxiety. CONCLUSIONS: Despite improvements in global QoL, breast cancer survivors report worsened ailments 3 years after start of therapy. Follow-up care should distinguish between premenopausal patients needing special attention for emotional/menopausal issues, and postmenopausal patients needing particular care regarding physical concerns.

Prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia and febrile neutropenia with lipegfilgrastim in 2489 cancer patients: final results from the non-interventional study NADIR.

Objectives: The non-interventional study (NIS) NADIR (DRKS00005711) evaluated the effectiveness and safety of prophylaxis with lipegfilgrastim, a glycopegylated granulocyte-colony stimulating factor, in 2500 patients undergoing chemotherapy in routine clinical practice. Primary objective was the incidence of chemotherapy-induced severe neutropenia, febrile neutropenia (FN), and neutropenia-associated complications. Methods: NADIR was a prospective NIS conducted in 201 study centers in Germany. Results: The analysis included 2489 patients. Main tumor types were breast cancer (n = 1198, 48.1%), lung cancer (n = 303, 12.2%), non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL; n = 337, 13.5%), and prostate cancer (n = 111, 4.5%). Nine hundred and ten (36.6%) patients were aged ≥65 years (regarded as "elderly" patients). Severe neutropenia (CTCAE grade 3/4) was reported in 26.8% (n = 666) and 25.2% (n = 229) of the total population and elderly patients, respectively. FN was documented in 2.7% (n = 68) of the total population vs 3.0% (n = 27) of elderly patients. Primary prophylaxis with lipegfilgrastim among patients with high risk of FN (>20%) was documented in 83.5% of the total population and 75.1% of elderly patients. Infections (CTCAE grade 3/4) were documented in 99 patients (4.0%) in the total population vs 47 (5.1%) elderly patients. Fatal infections were reported in 14 (0.6%) patients in the total population vs 11 (1.2%) elderly patients. Overall, most frequent lipegfilgrastim-related adverse events (AEs) included bone pain (8.0%), anemia (3.2%), leucocytosis (2.7%), and thrombocytopenia (2.5%). Of the patients, 18.0% had ≥1 documented serious AE; none of the fatal events (2.7%) was lipegfilgrastim-related. Conclusions: Lipegfilgrastim administered to patients with solid tumor/NHL undergoing chemotherapy in routine clinical practice showed similar effectiveness and safety compared to the pivotal trials.

Prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia and febrile neutropenia with lipegfilgrastim in patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NADIR study).

OBJECTIVE: The prospective non-interventional study (NIS) NADIR was designed to evaluate both effectiveness and safety of prophylactic use of lipegfilgrastim (Lonquex® ), a glycopegylated granulocyte colony-stimulating factor, in cancer patients with different tumor entities undergoing chemotherapy in routine clinical practice. The primary objective was incidence of severe neutropenia, febrile neutropenia (FN), and neutropenia-associated complications. METHOD: NADIR was a national, multicenter, prospective NIS. RESULTS: Here, we present the data on patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL). Final analysis comprised 337 NHL patients having received ≥1 administration of lipegfilgrastim. Primary prophylaxis with lipegfilgrastim was documented in 78.7% of patients with high risk to develop FN. In total, ≥1 severe neutropenia (grade 3/4) was reported in 115 (34.1%) patients and ≥1 event of FN documented in 15 (4.5%) patients. Grade 3/4 infections were reported in 22 (6.5%) patients overall. Most frequently reported adverse events (AEs) related to lipegfilgrastim in total were bone pain (5.4%), leukocytosis (2.1%), back pain (1.8%), platelet count decreased (1.2%), and myalgia (1.2%). Fatal serious AEs were documented in 9 (2.7%) patients; none were attributable to lipegfilgrastim. CONCLUSION: Prophylaxis or therapeutic intention with lipegfilgrastim in NHL patients in routine clinical practice showed similar effectiveness and safety as demonstrated in the pivotal trials.

Final Effectiveness and Safety Results of NABUCCO: Real-World Data From a Noninterventional, Prospective, Multicenter Study in 697 Patients With Metastatic Breast Cancer Treated With nab-Paclitaxel.

BACKGROUND: One of the most effective chemotherapies for metastatic breast cancer (MBC) is nab-paclitaxel (nab-P), which is approved for treatment of MBC after failure of first-line therapy and when anthracyclines are not indicated. Randomized clinical trials have shown high efficacy and acceptable toxicity. Real-world data of nab-P in MBC, however, are still limited. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The prospective multicenter noninterventional study NABUCCO collected data on the routine treatment of patients with MBC receiving nab-P in 128 sites across Germany. The primary objective was time to progression. Secondary objectives were overall response rate, overall survival, safety, and quality of life. RESULTS: Between April 2012 and April 2015, a total of 705 patients with MBC at 128 active sites had been enrolled. A total of 697 patients had evaluable data with a median follow-up of 17.7 months. Median time to progression was 5.9 months (95% confidence interval, 5.6-6.4), overall response rate was 37.2%, and median overall survival was 15.6 months (95% confidence interval, 14.2-17.2). The results were similar in patients aged < 65 versus ≥ 65 years as well as in patients who received nab-P on a weekly or a triweekly schedule. The most frequently reported grade 3/4 adverse events were leukopenia (55, 7.9%), peripheral sensory neuropathy (30, 4.3%), and infections (29, 4.2%). Patients reported no apparent treatment-related impact on global quality of life. CONCLUSION: The results of the NABUCCO study confirm the clinical trial outcomes and the favorable safety profile of nab-P in patients with metastatic breast cancer in a real-world setting.

Impact of performance status and transfusion dependency on outcome of patients with myelodysplastic syndrome, acute myeloid leukemia and chronic myelomonocytic leukemia treated with azacitidine (PIAZA study).

OBJECTIVE: Azacitidine (Vidaza® ) is the standard treatment for patients with higher-risk myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) not eligible for allogeneic stem cell transplantation. In the noninterventional study PIAZA, we evaluated the effectiveness and safety of azacitidine treatment in 149 patients with higher-risk MDS, chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML) and acute myeloid leukemia (AML) in routine clinical practice. METHOD: Patients were treated according to physician's discretion. Besides evaluation of safety and effectiveness, impact of covariates on progression-free survival (PFS) was assessed. RESULTS: Median age of patients was 75 years. 61.1% of patients were diagnosed with MDS, 31.5% with AML and 7.4% with CMML. Patients were treated with azacitidine for a median of seven cycles. Median PFS was 10.9 months. Median OS was 14.1 months. Two-year survival rate was 28.9%. 45.9% of patients showed CR or PR. Stable and progressive disease were observed in 37.2% and 8% of patients, respectively. Transfusion independence was reported in 64 of 89 patients. Eastern cooperative oncology group (ECOG) performance status (PS) and red blood cell (RBC) transfusion before azacitidine therapy were identified as predictive factors for PFS. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, we estimated the duration of PFS in a real-world setting and identified ECOG PS and RBC transfusion as predictive factors for PFS. The safety of azacitidine showed a similar profile as demonstrated in the pivotal clinical trials.

Lenalidomide plus dexamethasone for patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma: Final results of a non-interventional study and comparison with the pivotal phase 3 clinical trials.

Lenalidomide (LEN) is an immunomodulatory drug with significant clinical activity against relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (r/r MM). Based on the pivotal phase 3 trials MM-009 and MM-010, LEN in combination with dexamethasone (DEX) is approved for treatment of patients with MM who have received at least one prior therapy. LEN monotherapy is also approved in first line treatment. Here, we evaluated LEN/DEX combination therapy in a non-interventional study in patients with r/r MM in routine clinical practice. Patients received LEN/DEX as per Summary of Product Characteristics. Ninety-eight patients were treated with at least 1 cycle of LEN/DEX (median age 71 years; range, 42-88), forty-eight patients with at least 6 cycles. The Kaplan-Meier estimate for overall median time to progression was 12.0 months, 13.9 months for patients receiving second-line therapy and 10.3 months for third-line or higher-line therapy. The overall response rate was 60.2%. The median overall survival was 24.3 months. The most common adverse events were anemia (32.7%), thrombocytopenia (27.6%) and leukopenia (24.5%). Seven (7.1%) patients developed thromboembolic events despite prophylaxis. In conclusion, the combination of LEN/DEX administered to patients with r/r MM in routine clinical practice showed similar effectiveness and safety as demonstrated in the registration trials.

Persistent impairments 3 years after (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer: results from the MaTox project.

PURPOSE: Although treatment for early breast cancer improved prognosis greatly, it can have significant long-term consequences, which must be considered during treatment decision. METHODS: 453 patients with neoadjuvant or adjuvant treatment intention were recruited into the MaTox project within the prospective, multicentre, population-based German TMK cohort study (Tumour Registry Breast Cancer) between 2008 and 2009. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) on 26 treatment-related symptoms were assessed via a specifically designed questionnaire at 4 weeks, 6 months, 18 months and 3 years after start of systemic treatment. RESULTS: The results show that alterations in smell, taste and appetite were clearly improved 3 years after treatment. In contrast, post-surgical symptoms, restrictions in memory/attention, musculoskeletal system and polyneuropathy worsened substantially over time and were persistent after 3 years: 78% of the patients recorded impairment in memory, 73% muscle pain, 67% pain at the operated site and 57% paraesthesia in fingers or toes. A logistic regression model showed that risk factors for developing persistent paraesthesia symptoms were age, early paraesthesia symptoms and taxane-based therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Our data show that most patients with breast cancer have persistent impairments negatively influencing their daily life even 3 years after treatment. Furthermore, we highlight areas requiring special attention in follow-up care.

Survival of Patients With Advanced or Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma in Routine Practice Differs From That in Clinical Trials-Analyses From the German Clinical RCC Registry.

INTRODUCTION: Because "real-life" patients often do not meet the strict eligibility criteria of clinical trials, we assessed the trial eligibility of patients with advanced or metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) in routine practice and compared the survival of "trial-ineligible" and potentially "trial-eligible" patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The present prospective, multicenter German cohort study is recruiting patients from 110 oncology/urology outpatient centers and hospitals at initiation of systemic first-line treatment. The demographic, clinical, treatment, and survival data were collected. We defined patients as "trial-ineligible" when ≥ 1 exclusion criterion (Karnofsky performance status < 80%, hemoglobin less than the lower limit of normal, non-clear cell carcinoma histology) was documented. Otherwise, the patients were considered "trial-eligible". RESULTS: Of 732 patients included, 57% were classified as "trial-ineligible". Overall, the median first-line progression-free survival (PFS) was 7.9 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 6.9-8.9 months). The median first-line PFS of "trial-eligible" and "trial-ineligible" patients was 11.0 months (95% CI, 9.6-13.1 months) and 5.3 months (95% CI, 4.6-6.5 months), respectively. The median OS of the "trial-eligible" and "trial-ineligible" patients was 26.0 months (95% CI, 22.1-29.7 months) and 12.6 months (95% CI, 10.6-15.8 months), respectively. CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that patients in routine practice differ from patients treated in clinical trials and that almost 60% of mRCC patients in German routine practice would be ineligible for participation in clinical trials. While their first-line PFS and OS were shorter than those of "trial-eligible" patients, the PFS and OS of "trial-eligible" patients were comparable with the results from clinical trials. Physicians should be aware of these differences when discussing treatment options and outcome expectations with patients.

NADIR: A Non-Interventional Study on the Prophylaxis of Chemotherapy-Induced Neutropenia Using Lipegfilgrastim - First Interim Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The non-interventional study (NIS) NADIR was designed to assess the effectiveness and safety of lipegfilgrastim, a novel glycopegylated granulocyte-colony stimulating factor, in reducing the risk of both febrile and severe neutropenia. METHODS: Here, the interim analysis of NIS Nadir performed under real-world conditions at 80 oncology practices across Germany is reported. For a patient to be included, lipegfilgrastim at a subcutaneous single dose of 6 mg had to be administered during at least 1 cycle of the chemotherapy under consideration. RESULTS: The interim analysis included 224 patients. Median patient age was 61.1 years (interquartile range 51.2-70.2 years). Main tumor type was breast cancer followed by lung cancer, and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (46.0, 13.4, and 10.7%, respectively). When lipegfilgrastim was given as primary prophylaxis, no patient developed febrile neutropenia (FN). 1.3% of patients developed FN when primary prophylaxis was withheld. Only 68.6% of patients undergoing chemotherapy and at high risk (> 20%) of developing FN were treated with lipegfilgrastim during the first cycle, exposing disparity between real-world practices and current treatment guidelines. Lipegfilgrastim was well tolerated. The only grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse event was anemia in 1 patient. CONCLUSION: Lipegfilgrastim was effective and safe when administered for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia under real-world conditions.