ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Oncology clinical trial enrollment is strongly recommended for patients with cancer who are not eligible for established and approved therapies. Many trials are specific to biomarker-targeted therapies, which are typically managed as specialty pharmacy services. Comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) of advanced cancers has been shown to detect biomarkers, guide targeted treatment, improve outcomes, and result in the clinical trial enrollment of patients, which is modeled to offset pharmacy costs experienced by US payers, yet payer policy coverage remains inconsistent. A common concern limiting coverage of CGP by payers is the potential of identifying biomarkers beyond guideline-recommended treatments, which creates a perception that insurance companies are being positioned to "pay for research." However, these biomarkers can increase clinical trial eligibility, and specialty pharmacy management may have an interest in maximizing the clinical trial enrollment of members. OBJECTIVE: To investigate if clinical trial enrollment following liquid biopsy CGP for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is clinically and/or economically impactful from a payer claims perspective. METHODS: Clinical and economic outcomes were studied using a real-world clinical genomic database (including payer claims data) from patients with NSCLC who enrolled in clinical trials immediately following liquid biopsy CGP (using Guardant360) and matched NSCLC patient controls also tested with liquid biopsy CGP. RESULTS: Real-world overall survival was significantly (log-rank P < 0.0001) better for patients enrolled in clinical trials with similar costs of care, albeit with more outpatient encounters among those enrolled compared with matched controls. CONCLUSIONS: The results, together with previous analyses, suggest that, in addition to the clinical benefits associated with targeted therapies directed by CGP and other testing approaches, payers and specialty pharmacy managers may consider clinical trial direction and enrollment as a clinical and economic benefit of liquid biopsy CGP and adopt this into coverage decision frameworks and formularies.
Subject(s)
Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung , Lung Neoplasms , Humans , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/genetics , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/drug therapy , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/economics , Lung Neoplasms/drug therapy , Lung Neoplasms/economics , Lung Neoplasms/genetics , Lung Neoplasms/pathology , Liquid Biopsy/economics , Female , Male , Middle Aged , Aged , Clinical Trials as Topic/economics , Biomarkers, Tumor/genetics , Genomics/economics , United StatesABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) is typically treated with agents directly or indirectly targeting the androgen receptor (AR) pathway. However, such treatment is limited by resistance mechanisms, including the development of activating mutations in the AR ligand-binding domain (AR-LBD). METHODS: This study evaluated a database of over 15,000 patients with advanced prostate cancer (PC) undergoing comprehensive circulating-tumor DNA analysis (Guardant360, Redwood City, CA) between 2014 and 2021, with associated clinical information from administrative claims (GuardantINFORM database). RESULTS: Of 15,705 patients with PC included, 54% had mCRPC at the time of their blood draw. Of those, 49% had previous treatment with an AR pathway inhibitor (ARPi). AR-LBD mutation prevalence was 15% in patients with mCRPC who were untreated with a next-generation ARPi, 22% in those after one line of ARPi therapy, and 24% in those after two lines of ARPi treatment. Next-generation ARPi treatment yielded an increase in AR L702H and T878A/S mutations after abiraterone, and an increase in AR L702H and F877L mutations after enzalutamide. AR-LBD+ patients demonstrated unique biology, including increased concurrent mutations in the cell-cycle, wingless-related integration site, homologous recombination repair, and phospho-inositide 3-kinase pathways (all P < .0005), and greater low-level (copy number <10) AR amplifications (P = .0041). AR-LBD+ patients exhibited worse overall survival (OS) relative to a matched cohort of AR-LBD- patients (50.1 v 60.7 months, unadjusted log-rank P = .013). CONCLUSION: This large database analysis demonstrates that AR-LBD mutation prevalence increases after next-generation ARPi use. AR-LBD+ tumors demonstrate unique biology (more oncogenic pathway mutations and low-level AR amplification) and reduced OS. These findings inform the development of novel therapies designed to circumvent AR-mediated therapeutic resistance.