Patient-reported outcomes in advanced NSCLC before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: Real-world data from the German prospective CRISP Registry (AIO-TRK-0315).

Patients with lung cancer under treatment have been associated with a high risk of COVID-19 infection and potentially worse outcome, but real-world data on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are rare. We assess patients' characteristics and PROs before and during the COVID-19 pandemic in an advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) cohort in Germany. Patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC from the prospective, multicentre, observational CRISP Registry (NCT02622581) were categorised as pre-pandemic (March 2019 to Feb 2020, n = 1621) and pandemic (March 2020 to Feb 2021, n = 1317). From baseline to month 15, patients' health-related quality of life (HRQoL) was assessed by FACT-L, anxiety and depression by PHQ-4. Association of pandemic status with time to deterioration (TTD) in QoL scales adjusted for potential covariates was estimated using Cox modelling. PROs were documented for 1166 patients (72%) in the pre-pandemic, 979 (74%) in the pandemic group. Almost 60% of patients were male, median age was 66 years, comorbidities occurred in 85%. Regarding HRQoL, mean-change-from-baseline plots hardly differed between both samples. Approximately 15%-21% of patients reported anxiety, about 19%-27% signs of depression. For the pandemic group, TTD was slightly, but statistically significantly, worse for the physical well-being-FACT-G subscale (HR 1.15 [95%CI 1.02-1.30]) and the anxiety-GAD-2 subscale (HR 1.14 [95%CI 1.01-1.29]). These prospectively collected real-world data provide valuable insights into PROs before and during the COVID-19 pandemic in advanced NSCLC. For the patients, the pandemic seemed to be less of a burden than the disease itself, as there was a considerable proportion of patients with anxiety and depression in both groups.

FOLFIRINOX or gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel in advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma: A novel validated prognostic score to facilitate treatment decision-making in real-world.

There is no prospective, randomised head-to-head trial comparing first-line FOLFIRINOX and gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel in advanced pancreatic cancer. We assess real-world effectiveness and quality of life (QoL) of both regimens using a new prognostic score. This analysis includes 1540 patients with advanced pancreatic cancer from the prospective, clinical cohort study Tumour Registry Pancreatic Cancer separated into learning (n = 1027) and validation sample (n = 513). The Pancreatic Cancer Score (PCS) was developed using multivariate Cox regression. We compared overall survival (OS) and time to deterioration (TTD) for longitudinal QoL between first-line FOLFIRINOX (n = 407) and gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (n = 655) according to patients' prognostic risk, after inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) by propensity score analysis. The PCS includes nine independent prognostic factors for survival: female sex, BMI ≥24/unknown, ECOG performance status ≥1, Charlson comorbidity index ≥1, tumour staging IV/unknown at primary diagnosis, liver metastases, bilirubin >1.5× upper limit of normal (ULN), leukocytes >ULN and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio ≥4. Median OS of the validation sample was 11.4 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 10.4-14.4), 8.5 (95% CI: 6.8-9.6) and 5.9 months (95% CI: 4.0-7.4) for favourable- (0-3 risk factors), intermediate- (4-5 factors) and poor-risk group (6-9 factors), respectively. After IPTW, only poor-risk patients had significantly longer median OS and TTD of overall QoL with FOLFIRINOX (OS: 6.9 months, 95% CI: 3.9-13.3; TTD: 10.6 months, 95% CI: 2.0-14.1) vs gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (OS: 4.0 months, 95% CI: 2.8-4.8; TTD: 4.1 months, 95% CI: 2.4-4.5). Our novel PCS may facilitate treatment decisions in clinical routine of advanced pancreatic cancer, since only poor-risk, but not favourable-risk patients, seem to benefit from intensified treatment with FOLFIRINOX.

Prognostic factors in nonsmall cell lung cancer: insights from the German CRISP registry.

INTRODUCTION: Understanding prognosis, especially long-term outcome, in advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is crucial to inform patients, guide treatment and plan supportive and palliative care. METHODS: Prognostic factors influencing overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in 2082 patients with wild-type (WT)-NSCLC (629 M1a, 249 M1b, 1204 M1c) are reported. Patients were included in the prospective German CRISP registry recruiting in >150 centres. Analysis for pre-therapeutic factors was based on results from Cox proportional hazard models. RESULTS: Current M-descriptors of the Union for International Cancer Control-8 staging system were validated: M1a and M1b patients had significantly longer median time to events compared to M1c (OS/PFS 16.4/7.2 months, 17.8/6.7 months and 10.9/5.4 months, respectively). OS and PFS were influenced by number and location of metastatic organ systems. M1c and four or more metastatic organs involved had shorter OS and PFS than M1c with one to three organs (OS hazard ratio (HR) 1.69, p<0.001; PFS HR 1.81, p<0.001). M1b-liver metastases had shorter OS/PFS than M1b involving other organs (OS HR 2.70, p=0.006; PFS HR 2.48, p=0.007). Based on number of involved organs (orgsys) and liver metastases, two risk groups (low-risk: M1a, M1b-non-liver, M1c-1-3-orgsys-non-liver; high-risk: M1c-liver, M1b-liver, M1c-4+-orgsys) with significantly different prognoses could be amalgamated (median OS/PFS 14.3/6.5 months and 7.7/4.1 months, respectively). Other favourable factors were female gender and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group stage 0, with age showing no impact. Those with T1- or N0-status were associated with longer OS than T2-4 or N2-3. CONCLUSION: In this large observational dataset, we further defined factors for outcome in WT-NSCLC, including increased number of involved metastatic organ systems and liver metastases, as those with overall poorer prognosis and reduced survival chance.

Rare lymphomas in routine practice - Treatment and outcome in marginal zone lymphoma in the prospective German Tumour Registry Lymphatic Neoplasms.

Owing to its heterogeneity and rarity, management of disseminated marginal zone B-cell lymphoma (MZL) remains largely understudied. We present prospective data on choice of systemic treatment and survival of patients with MZL treated in German routine practice. Of 175 patients with MZL who had been documented in the prospective clinical cohort study Tumour Registry Lymphatic Neoplasms (NCT00889798) collecting data on systemic treatment, 58 were classified as extranodal MZL of mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue (MALT) and 117 as non-MALT MZL. We analyzed the most commonly used first-line and second-line chemo(immuno)therapies between 2009 and 2016 and examined objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and prognostic factors for survival. Compared to patients with MALT MZL, those with non-MALT MZL more often presented with bone marrow involvement (43% vs. 14%), Ann Arbor stage III/IV (72% vs. 57%) and were slightly less often in good general condition (ECOG = 0; 41% vs. 47%). In German routine practice, rituximab-bendamustine for a median of 6 cycles was the most frequently used first-line (76%) and second-line treatment (36%), with no major differences between MZL subtypes. The ORR for patients encompassing any positive response was 81%. For patients with MALT and non-MALT MZL, respectively, 5-years PFS was 69% (95% CI 52%-81%) and 66% (95% CI 56%-75%), 5-years OS 79% (95% CI 65%-89%) and 75% (95% CI 66%-83%). Cox proportional hazards models showed a significantly increased risk of mortality for higher age in all patient groups. Our prospective real world data give valuable insights into the management and outcome of non-selected patients with MZL requiring systemic treatment and can help optimize therapy recommendations.

Rare lymphomas in routine practice-Treatment and outcome in Waldenström's macroglobulinaemia in the prospective German Tumour Registry Lymphatic Neoplasms.

Waldenström's macroglobulinaemia (WM) is a rare indolent B-cell lymphoma for which only little prospective phase III evidence exists. Thus, real world data are important to provide insight into treatment and survival. We present here data on choice and outcome of systemic treatment of patients with WM treated in German routine practice. In total, 139 patients with WM who had been documented in the prospective clinical cohort study Tumour Registry Lymphatic Neoplasms (NCT00889798) were included into this analysis. We analysed the most frequently used first-line and second-line treatments between 2009 and 2017 and examined best response, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Bendamustine plus rituximab, with a median of six cycles, was by far the most frequently used first-line treatment (81%). Second-line treatment was more heterogenous and mainly based on bendamustine, cyclophosphamide/doxorubicin/vincristine/prednisone (CHOP), fludarabine or ibrutinib, the latter approved in 2014. Three-year PFS from start of first-line treatment was 83% (95% confidence interval [CI] 74%-88%), 3-year OS was 87% (95% CI 80%-92%). These prospective data give valuable insights into the management and outcome of non-selected patients with WM treated in German routine practice. In the lack of prospective phase III clinical trials, real world data can help bridging the gap of evidence.

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.