Drug-Drug Interactions Between Glucagon-Like Peptide 1 Receptor Agonists and Oral Medications: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP1RAs) are used in the treatment of diabetes and obesity. Their slowing effect of gastric emptying might change oral drug absorption, potentially affecting pharmacokinetics, particularly in the case of medications with a narrow therapeutic index. PURPOSE: The purpose of this systematic review is to summarize data on drug-drug interactions between GLP1RAs and oral drugs. DATA SOURCES: The PubMed and EMBASE databases were searched up to November, 1st 2023. STUDY SELECTION: We selected pharmacokinetic studies of any injectable GLP1RA given with an oral medication, and product prescribing sheets reporting data without access to the original study. DATA EXTRACTION: Two authors independently extracted the data. DATA SYNTHESIS: Twenty-two reports and six prescribing sheets were included. Treatment with GLP1RAs resulted in unaffected or reduced Cmax and delayed tmax of drugs with high solubility and permeability (warfarin, contraceptive pills, acetaminophen), drugs with high solubility and low permeability (angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors), drugs with low solubility and high permeability (statins) and drugs with low solubility and permeability (digoxin). However, the use of GLP1RAs did not exert clinically significant changes in the AUC or differences in clinically relevant endpoints. LIMITATIONS: The major limitations of the studies that are included in this systematic review are the enrollment of healthy subjects and insufficient data in conditions that might affect pharmacokinetics (e.g., kidney dysfunction). CONCLUSIONS: To conclude, reduced Cmax and delayed tmax of drugs co-administered with GLP1RAs are consistent with the known delayed gastric output by the latter. Nevertheless, the overall drug exposure was not considered clinically significant. Dose adjustments are probably not required for simultaneous use of GLP1RAs with oral medications. Still, results should be carefully generalized to cases of background kidney dysfunction or when using drugs with narrow therapeutic index. The study is registered in PROSPERO: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42022332339 .

Reporting of post-protocol therapies in metastatic breast cancer registration clinical trials: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: As the treatment for metastatic breast cancer (MBC) often includes sequential lines of therapy, data on post-protocol treatment in clinical trials are valuable in the assessment of long-term outcomes. The objective of this study was to assess the reported data on post-protocol therapy in clinical trials supporting US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval of drugs for MBC. METHODS: All initial and subsequent publications related to FDA approved indications for MBC between January 2000 and February 2023 were identified. Collected data included study design, patients' characteristics and whether reporting on post-protocol therapy was available. Differences in study design and population between studies with and without data on post-protocol therapy were evaluated. FINDINGS: Forty-one indications for MBC were identified. Data were evaluated from 249 publications or abstracts, comprising 20,152 patients. Reporting of post-protocol therapy was available for 22 (53.7 %) indications. Reported data were often incomplete. Reporting has not improved over time with reported data in 50 % and 55.2 % studies between 2000 and 2010 and 2011-2023 (p value for the difference = 1.0), respectively. Studies with OS as their primary endpoints were associated with significantly higher reporting of post-protocol therapy, (p = 0.02). Other characteristics of study design and population were comparable between studies with and without data on post-protocol therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Data on post-protocol therapy in trials supporting FDA approval of drugs for MBC are available for only half of the indications. As subsequent lines of therapy may have a crucial role in patients' outcome, post-protocol reporting should be included in the regulatory submission and be made available publicly.

Rate of Correction and All-Cause Mortality in Patients With Severe Hypernatremia.

Importance: Hypernatremia is common among hospitalized patients and is associated with high mortality rates. Current guidelines suggest avoiding fast correction rates but are not supported by robust data. Objective: To investigate whether there is an association between hypernatremia correction rate and patient survival. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study examined data from all patients admitted to the Tel Aviv Medical Center between 2007 and 2021 who were diagnosed with severe hypernatremia (serum sodium ≥155 mmol/L) at admission or during hospitalization. Statistical analysis was performed from April 2022 to August 2023. Exposure: Patients were grouped as having fast correction rates (>0.5 mmol/L/h) and slow correction rates (≤0.5 mmol/L/h) in accordance with current guidelines. Main Outcomes and Measures: All-cause 30-day mortality. Results: A total of 4265 patients were included in this cohort, of which 2621 (61.5%) were men and 343 (8.0%) had fast correction rates; the median (IQR) age at diagnosis was 78 (64-87) years. Slow correction was associated with higher 30-day mortality compared with fast correction (50.7% [1990 of 3922] vs 31.8% [109 of 343]; P < .001). These results remained significant after adjusting for demographics (age, gender), Charlson comorbidity index, initial sodium, potassium, and creatinine levels, hospitalization in an ICU, and severe hyperglycemia (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 2.02 [95% CI, 1.55-2.62]), regardless of whether hypernatremia was hospital acquired (aOR, 2.19 [95% CI, 1.57-3.05]) or documented on admission (aOR, 1.64 [95% CI, 1.06-2.55]). There was a strong negative correlation between absolute sodium correction during the first 24 hours following the initial documentation of severe hypernatremia and 30-day mortality (Pearson correlation coefficient, -0.80 [95% CI, -0.93 to -0.50]; P < .001). Median (IQR) hospitalization length was shorter for fast correction vs slow correction rates (5.0 [2.1-14.9] days vs 7.2 [3.5-16.1] days; P < .001). Prevalence of neurological complications was comparable for both groups, and none were attributed to fast correction rates of hypernatremia. Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study of patients with severe hypernatremia found that rapid correction of hypernatremia was associated with shorter hospitalizations and significantly lower patient mortality without any signs of neurologic complications. These results suggest that physicians should consider the totality of evidence when considering the optimal rates of correction for patients with severe hypernatremia.

A tailored phase I-specific patient-reported outcome (PRO) survey to capture the patient experience of symptomatic adverse events.

BACKGROUND: Patient perspectives are fundamental to defining tolerability of investigational anti-neoplastic therapies in clinical trials. Phase I trials present a unique challenge in designing tools for efficiently collecting patient-reported outcomes (PROs) given the difficulty of anticipating adverse events of relevance. However, phase I trials also offer an opportunity for investigators to optimize drug dosing based on tolerability for future larger-scale trials and in eventual clinical practice. Existing tools for comprehensively capturing PROs are generally cumbersome and are not routinely used in phase I trials. METHODS: Here, we describe the creation of a tailored survey based on the National Cancer Institute's PRO-CTCAE for collecting patients' perspectives on symptomatic adverse events in phase I trials in oncology. RESULTS: We describe our stepwise approach to condensing the original 78-symptom library into a modified 30 term core list of symptoms which can be efficiently applied. We further show that our tailored survey aligns with phase I trialists' perspectives on symptoms of relevance. CONCLUSIONS: This tailored survey represents the first PRO tool developed specifically for assessing tolerability in the phase I oncology population. We provide recommendations for future work aimed at integrating this survey into clinical practice.

Evaluating the Impact of Black Box Warning Updates on the Reporting of Drug-Related Adverse Events: a Cross Sectional Study of the FAERS Database.

BACKGROUND: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA)'s Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) is a post-marketing surveillance system which relies on spontaneous reports of adverse drug reactions (ADRs). Our objective was to evaluate how black box warning (BBW) updates impact ADR reporting rates. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We searched MEDWATCH for all BBW updates issued between January 2014 and December 2016 and categorized them as new, major, and minor. Rates of relevant ADR reports from the FAERS database in the 4 years preceding and following a BBW update were assessed among the different BBW categories. RESULTS: Forty BBW updates were included (16 major, 3 new, and 21 minor). A meaningful increase in the proportion of relevant ADRs of all ADRs reported following BBW updates was documented for 53% of new or major updates and 24% of minor updates (p = 0.06). The median percentage of reported relevant ADRs increased by 5% following new and major BBW updates and decreased by 30% following minor BBW updates (p = 0.3). CONCLUSIONS: Reporting of adverse events to the FAERS database is affected by the severity and timing of related BBW updates, highlighting the drawbacks of spontaneous reporting systems. Regulators should promote proactive pharmacovigilance strategies to cope with these limitations.

Twenty Years of Targeted and Biologic Immunomodulatory Drugs: Postmarketing Modifications of Drug Labels Approved by the US Food and Drug Administration.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the extent and characteristics of postmarketing safety issues associated with targeted and biologic immunomodulatory drugs. METHODS: We searched Drugs@FDA to identify immunomodulatory drugs approved between January 1, 1998, and December 31, 2017. Supporting studies characteristics, regulatory pathways, and label modifications from approval to May 2020 were collected from drug labels. RESULTS: The study cohort included 31 drugs, mostly (n=23, 74%) monoclonal antibodies. The most common indications were rheumatologic disorders (n=10, 32%). A total of 372 postmarketing safety-related label modifications were identified, with a median duration of 5 years (interquartile range [IQR], 32 to 105 months) following initial approval. Most drugs were affected by modifications of warnings and precautions (n=25, 81%), 10 drugs (32%) were affected by black box warnings, and 3 drugs (10%) were withdrawn from the market. The most common safety issues were related to infections (n=109, 27%) followed by immunologic phenomena (n=99, 24%). The most common data source was postmarketing reports to pharmacovigilance programs (n=205, 55%). Drugs approved by the FDA through expedited regulatory pathways (n=12, 39%) had more postmarketing safety issues compared with those approved through regular approval (15.5 vs 9.8 per drug, respectively), with longer durations from approval to identification (6 years; IQR, 38 to 111 months, vs 4 years; IQR, 28 to 95 months). CONCLUSION: Safety issues associated with targeted and biologic immunomodulatory drugs are often identified postmarketing, with substantial time intervals following initial approval. Clinicians should follow updates of the safety profiles of immunomodulatory drugs closely and be vigilant for previously unidentified adverse events.

Evaluation of the patient experience of symptomatic adverse events on Phase I clinical trials using PRO-CTCAE.

BACKGROUND: Adverse event (AE) reporting in early-phase clinical trials is essential in determining the tolerability of experimental anticancer therapies. The patient-reported outcome version of the CTCAE (PRO-CTCAE) evaluates AE components such as severity and interference in daily life. The aim of this study was to correlate the grade of clinician-reported AEs with patients' reported experience of these toxicities using PRO-CTCAE. METHODS: Patients with advanced solid tumours enrolled on Phase I clinical trials were surveyed using the PRO-CTCAE. Symptomatic AEs were recorded by physicians using the CTCAE. A logistic regression model was used to assess associations between CTCAE grade and PRO responses. RESULTS: Of 219 evaluable patients, 81 experienced a high-grade (3/4) clinician-reported symptom, and of these, only 32 (40%) and 26 (32%) patients concordantly reported these as either severe or very severe, and interfering with daily life either 'quite a bit' or 'very much', respectively. Of the 137 patients who experienced a low-grade (1/2) clinician-reported AE as their worst symptom, 98 (72%) and 118 (86%) patients concordantly reported these as either mild-moderate severity and minimally interfering with daily life, respectively. There was a statistically significant association between clinician-reported AE grade and interference. Interference scores were also associated with dose reductions. CONCLUSION: This is the first study to explore patient-reported severity and interference from symptomatic toxicities and compare clinician grading of the same toxicities. The study provided further evidence to support the added value of the PRO-CTCAE in Phase I oncology trials, which would make AE reporting patient-centred. Further work is needed to determine how this would affect the assessment of tolerability.

Absence of hemoglobin increase is associated with reduced graft survival after kidney transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Anemia is prevalent following kidney transplantation and is associated with reduced graft survival. The association between temporal changes in hemoglobin (Hb) level at the early post-transplant period and graft survival is unknown. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study cohort included consecutive patients included in a single center transplantation registry between January 2002 and December 2016. Temporal changes in Hb values during the first 90 days after the transplantation were evaluated by piecewise linear regression model. Significant Hb increase rate was defined as an increase of .5 gram/deciliter/month. Patients were divided into groups according to the presence of significant Hb increase. The primary outcome was death-censored graft failure. RESULTS: Of 946 patients included in the study cohort, 831 (87.8%) had at least one interval of Hb increase, and 115 (12.2%) had no Hb increase. The absence of Hb increase was associated with an elevated risk of death censored graft failure by univariate (HR 2.9, 95% CI 1.88-4.49, P < .001) and multivariate (HR 2.47, 95% CI 1.48-4.12, P = .001) analyses. The timing and rate of Hb increase had no association with the main outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Lack of Hb increase during the early post-transplant period is associated with an increased risk of graft loss.

Rapid 8-Zone Lung Ultrasound Protocol is Comparable to a Full 12-Zone Protocol for Outcome Prediction in Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients.

OBJECTIVES: Safety precautions limit the clinical assessment of hospitalized Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. The minimal exposure required to perform lung ultrasound (LUS) paired with its high accuracy, reproducibility, and availability make it an attractive solution for initial assessment of COVID-19 patients. We aim to evaluate whether the association between sonographic findings and clinical outcomes among COVID 19 patients is comparable between the validated 12-zone protocol and a shorter, 8-zone protocol, in which the posterior lung regions are omitted. METHODS: One hundred and one COVID-19 patients hospitalized in a dedicated COVID-19 ward in a tertiary referral hospital were examined upon admission and scored by 2 LUS protocols. The association between the scores and a composite outcome consisting of death, transfer to the intensive care unit (ICU) or initiation of invasive or noninvasive mechanical ventilation was estimated and compared. RESULTS: LUS scores in both the 8- and the 12-zone protocols were associated with the composite outcome during hospitalization (hazard ratio [HR] 1.21 [1.03-1.42, P = .022] and HR 1.13 [1.01-1.27, P = .037], respectively). The observed difference in the discriminatory ROC-AUC values for the 8- and 12-zone scores was not significant (0.767 and 0.754 [P = .647], respectively). CONCLUSION: A short 8-zone LUS protocol is as accurate as the previously validated, 12-zone protocol for prognostication of clinical deterioration in nonventilated COVID-19 patients.

Targeted therapies for immune thrombocytopenic purpura: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Several targeted therapies have been approved in recent years for second-line treatment of immune thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP), providing an alternative to rituximab and splenectomy. The extent to which these drugs reduce bleeding risk has not been well defined. Targeted therapies recently approved for the treatment of ITP in adults were identified through a search of recently published professional guidelines. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) supporting regulatory approval were identified through a search of drug labels on FDA@gov. Odds ratios (ORs) and associated 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were computed for pre-specified efficacy outcomes including platelet recovery to ≥ 50,000/µL, major and minor bleeding events, and survival. ORs for all adverse events were also computed. Four targeted therapies were identified, including three thrombopoietin receptor agonists and one tyrosine kinase inhibitor. Six RCTs, comprising 752 patients, were included in the meta-analysis. More patients treated with targeted therapies for ITP as compared to placebo achieved platelet counts over ≥ 50,000/µL (OR 8.29, 95% CI 5.59-12.29). Compared to placebo, targeted therapies for ITP were associated with significantly lower odds for major bleeding (OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.21-0.91), minor bleeding (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.45-0.97), and with numerically lower mortality rates (OR 0.24, 95% CI 0.05-1.07). The odds for adverse events were comparable between the two arms (OR 1.43 95% CI 0.76-2.67). Compared to placebo, targeted therapies for ITP increase platelet counts, decrease bleeding events, and show a trend towards lower mortality, without increased toxicity. These findings support their use as a second-line ITP treatment.

The impact of radiological assessment schedules on progression-free survival in metastatic breast cancer: A systemic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The impact of interval of restaging on the observed magnitude of benefit of progression-free survival (PFS) is undefined. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Phase 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating anti-neoplastic drugs for metastatic breast cancer which reported the restaging interval and hazard ratio (HR) for PFS were included. Data on study design and study population were collected. HRs and 95% confidence intervals for PFS and OS (overall survival) were pooled in a meta-analysis. Studies were categorized according to short (<9 weeks) or long (≥9 weeks) restaging interval. The differences in PFS and OS effect between trials employing short and long restaging intervals were assessed as subgroup analyses. Analyses were repeated for pre-specified subgroups. RESULTS: Eighty-nine studies comprising 95 comparisons and 44,901 patients were included. The magnitude of PFS benefit was larger in trials which employed short compared to long restaging intervals, but this difference did not reach the pre-defined threshold for statistical significance (HR = 0.79 vs. 0.86, P = 0.15). Short restaging interval was associated with significantly higher magnitude of effect on PFS in pre-specified subgroups including non-first line trials (HR = 0.78 vs. 0.92, P = 0.04), trials with drugs replacing standard treatment (HR = 0.86 vs. 1.04, P = 0.02) and studies performed in exclusively human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) positive disease (HR = 0.72 vs. 0.90, P = 0.02). The magnitude of OS benefit was similar with short and long restaging intervals. CONCLUSIONS: Shorter restaging intervals are associated with a higher magnitude of effect on PFS, but not OS. Awareness of the impact of the restaging interval on quantification of PFS is important for the design and interpretation of RCTs.

Concordance between the results of randomized and non-randomized interventional clinical trials assessing the efficacy of drugs for COVID-19: a cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVES: To assess whether results of observational studies of potential anti-COVID-19 drugs were reproduced in subsequent randomized controlled trials (RCTs). METHODS: This was a retrospective cross-sectional study, including studies published online between 1 January and 27 October 2020 that evaluated potential COVID-19 treatments and reported all-cause mortality. RESULTS: Of 133 comparisons included in 117 studies, most were non-randomized (104/133, 78%). Hydroxychloroquine was the most common drug type, combined with azithromycin (n = 27, 20%) or alone (n = 22, 16%), followed by IL-6 inhibitors (n = 36, 27%) and corticosteroids (n = 26, 20%). Seventy-one percent (74/104) of non-randomized studies reported adjusted survival results and only 8% (8/104) adjusted for immortal time bias. Only two RCTs (2/29, 7%) reported significant survival benefit, both reporting treatment with corticosteroids, while 32/104 (31%) non-randomized studies showed statistically significant survival benefit associated with the intervention arm. The results of the majority (28/32, 88%) of non-randomized studies reporting survival benefit were not replicated by large-scale RCTs. CONCLUSIONS: The results of most non-randomized studies reporting survival benefit of potential anti-COVID-19 drugs were not replicated by large RCTs. Regulators and healthcare professionals should exercise caution and resist the pressure to approve and prescribe drugs of unproven efficacy and potential toxicity to optimize patient care and maintain public trust in medical science.

Quality evaluation of the underlying evidence in the updated treatment recommendations for systemic lupus erythematosus.

OBJECTIVES: SLE is a multisystem autoimmune disorder known for its broad clinical spectrum. Recently, the European, British and Latin American rheumatology professional societies [EULAR, British Society for Rheumatology (BSR) and Pan-American League of Associations of Rheumatology (PANLAR)] published updated recommendations for SLE management. The objective of this study was to characterize the data supporting the updated recommendations, with the goal of highlighting areas that could benefit from additional high-quality research. METHODS: References were compiled from the recently published EULAR, BSR and PANLAR SLE treatment recommendations. Data collected from each study included publication year, treatment regimen, study design, sample size, inclusion and exclusion criteria and relevant SLE diagnostic criteria. Studies with less than 10 patients and those that did not specify the SLE diagnostic criteria used were excluded. RESULTS: Altogether, 250 studies were included in this study. The majority were prospective and retrospective cohorts (72%), with only a small percentage of randomized controlled trials (28%). The median (interquartile range) number of patients included was 37 (19-86). The revised ACR 1982 criteria were the most commonly used criteria for SLE diagnosis (52%), followed by the revised ACR criteria from 1997 (27%). Only a small proportion of studies included the use of disease activity scores when defining study population (15%). CONCLUSION: Our study has indicated a scarcity of sufficiently powered high-quality research referenced in the recently published SLE treatment guidelines. Well-designed large-scale studies utilizing the updated 2019 SLE diagnostic criteria are needed to better inform healthcare professionals caring for patients with SLE.

Underreporting of Symptomatic Adverse Events in Phase I Clinical Trials.

BACKGROUND: Clinician reporting of symptomatic adverse events (AEs) in phase I trials uses the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE). The utility of the patient-reported outcomes (PROs) version of the CTCAE (PRO-CTCAE) in this setting is unknown. This prospective, observational study compared patient- and clinician-reported symptomatic AEs in phase I patients. METHODS: Phase I study-eligible patients at Princess Margaret were surveyed with the PRO-CTCAE full-item library (78 symptomatic AEs) at baseline (BL), mid-cycle 1, and mid-cycle 2 (C2). Patient and trial characteristics, best response, and survival data were collected. Presence or absence of patient- (PRO-CTCAE) or clinician-reported symptomatic AEs were compared (kappa) at defined timepoints and overall (BL+ mid-cycle 1 + C2). RESULTS: Of 292 patients approached from May 2017 to January 2019, a total of 265 (90.8%) were consented, with 243 (91.7%) evaluable and 552 PRO-CTCAE surveys (completion rate = 98.7%) included in analyses. Evaluation of overall patient-reported symptomatic AEs identified 50 PRO-CTCAE and 11 CTCAE items with 10% or greater reporting frequency. Nineteen CTCAE items were reported as 1% or less despite matched PRO-CTCAE items reporting as 10% or greater. Underreported categories included sexual health, bodily emissions, and cognition. Clinician- relative to patient-reporting frequency (ratio) demonstrated 9 symptomatic AEs with a 50-fold or more lower clinician reporting rate. Overall patient-clinician agreement for individual symptomatic AEs ranged from poor (κ = 0.00-0.19) to moderate (κ = 0.40-0.59), with discordance driven by lack of clinician reporting. Dyspnea (κ = 0.54) and peripheral neuropathy (κ = 0.63) at BL and limb edema (κ = 0.55) at C2 demonstrated the highest patient-clinician agreement. CONCLUSIONS: Poor to moderate patient-clinician agreement for symptomatic AEs suggests clinician underreporting in phase I trials. Analyses of severity and interference PRO categories are ongoing.

Cost Analysis of New Antibiotics to Treat Multidrug-Resistant Bacterial Infections: Mind the Gap.

INTRODUCTION: Guidelines for treatment of multidrug-resistant (MDR) bacteria rely on newly approved antibiotics, with limited evidence of their effectiveness for treating these infections. Data regarding cost of such an approach are lacking. We aimed to evaluate estimated cost of using newly approved antibiotic drugs compared to older antibiotics for the treatment of difficult-to-treat pathogens. METHODS: MDR bacteria of interest included those defined by the World Health Organization as critical or of high priority for research. Old and newly approved antibiotics for these bacteria, defined as approved before or after January 2010, respectively, were evaluated for treatment cost and for 14-day treatment course. Estimated annual costs were calculated based on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's' report on MDR bacteria prevalence in US hospitalized patients. Old and new drugs costs were compared. RESULTS: The cost of a 14-day treatment course for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia with a newly approved drug was found to be 6 to 60 times higher than that of older drugs. Similarly, the cost of a 14-day course for carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales or MDR Pseudomonas aeruginosa was doubled with new drugs; and for carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii, ~ 20 times higher with newer drugs. Annual incremental costs of treating difficult-to-treat Gram-negative bacteria with new drugs ranged from 30 million to over 500 million USD. CONCLUSIONS: Using newly approved antibiotic drugs for MDR infections carries a large incremental cost. Additional data to support survival benefit of these drugs are required to justify the price differences. Subgroups of patients who would benefit most from treatment should be defined.

The relationship between body-mass index and overall survival in non-small cell lung cancer by sex, smoking status, and race: A pooled analysis of 20,937 International lung Cancer consortium (ILCCO) patients.

INTRODUCTION: The relationship between Body-Mass-Index (BMI) and lung cancer prognosis is heterogeneous. We evaluated the impact of sex, smoking and race on the relationship between BMI and overall survival (OS) in non-small-cell-lung-cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: Data from 16 individual ILCCO studies were pooled to assess interactions between BMI and the following factors on OS: self-reported race, smoking status and sex, using Cox models (adjusted hazard ratios; aHR) with interaction terms and adjusted penalized smoothing spline plots in stratified analyses. RESULTS: Among 20,937 NSCLC patients with BMI values, females = 47 %; never-smokers = 14 %; White-patients = 76 %. BMI showed differential survival according to race whereby compared to normal-BMI patients, being underweight was associated with poor survival among white patients (OS, aHR = 1.66) but not among black patients (aHR = 1.06; pinteraction = 0.02). Comparing overweight/obese to normal weight patients, Black NSCLC patients who were overweight/obese also had relatively better OS (pinteraction = 0.06) when compared to White-patients. BMI was least associated with survival in Asian-patients and never-smokers. The outcomes of female ever-smokers at the extremes of BMI were associated with worse outcomes in both the underweight (pinteraction<0.001) and obese categories (pinteraction = 0.004) relative to the normal-BMI category, when compared to male ever-smokers. CONCLUSION: Underweight and obese female ever-smokers were associated with worse outcomes in White-patients. These BMI associations were not observed in Asian-patients and never-smokers. Black-patients had more favorable outcomes in the extremes of BMI when compared to White-patients. Body composition in Black-patients, and NSCLC subtypes more commonly seen in Asian-patients and never-smokers, may account for differences in these BMI-OS relationships.