Real-World Treatment Patterns and Outcomes Among Patients With Metastatic NSCLC Previously Treated With Programmed Cell Death Protein-1/Programmed Death-Ligand 1 Inhibitors.

INTRODUCTION: Programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1)/programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitors are standard-of-care treatment for metastatic NSCLC (mNSCLC). Intolerance to treatment/disease progression warrants additional lines of therapy. Real-world treatment patterns and efficacy outcomes after PD-1/PD-L1 use are insufficiently characterized to inform treatment decisions. METHODS: Electronic health records of adults with stage IV NSCLC initiating PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors as first-line monotherapy (cohort 1), first-line combination therapy (cohort 2), or second-line monotherapy (cohort 3) who received a subsequent line of therapy (i.e., index therapy) in the Flatiron NSCLC Core Registry Dataset were identified. Patient characteristics, types of index treatments/therapies, and associated index treatment outcomes were extracted. RESULTS: A total of 1061 patients with mNSCLC were included in this analysis. In cohort 1 (n = 242), median real-world overall survival (mrwOS) with index therapies for the overall population was 9.18 months (95% confidence interval: 7.54-12.13); platinum-based chemotherapy was the most common index therapy (39.3%) with mrwOS of 12.52 months (8.39-not applicable). In cohort 2 (n = 145), mrwOS for the overall population was 6.43 months (5.34-7.61); vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor plus chemotherapy was the most common index therapy (32.4%) with mrwOS of 5.97 months (4.95-7.34). In cohort 3 (n = 647), mrwOS for the overall population was 7.21 months (6.39-7.80); single-agent chemotherapy was the most common index therapy (45.4%) with mrwOS of 6.59 months (5.64-7.61). CONCLUSIONS: Real-world treatment patterns and survival outcomes of index therapies in mNSCLC after PD-1/PD-L1 use are variable. These analyses provide insights to optimize post-PD-1/PD-L1 treatments and inform standards of care.

Patient characteristics, treatment patterns, and clinical outcomes among patients with previously treated recurrent or metastatic cervical cancer: A community oncology-based analysis.

OBJECTIVE: There is no standard systemic treatment for recurrent or metastatic cervical cancer (r/mCC) after failure of first-line (1L) therapy. This study characterizes the patient experience, treatment patterns, and clinical outcomes of patients who initiated second-line (2L) therapy for r/mCC in a US community oncology setting. METHODS: This is an observational study of cervical cancer patients who failed 1L systemic treatment for r/mCC and initiated 2L systemic therapy between 2014 and 2019 within the US Oncology Network (USON). USON's electronic health records were used to identify eligible patients and abstract data. Overall survival (OS), time to treatment discontinuation (TTD), and time to first subsequent treatment (TFST) were estimated using Kaplan-Meier methods. RESULTS: A total of 130 patients were identified (mean age 53 years). Over 60% of patients had Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group score of 0-1. Cytotoxic monotherapy was the most frequently prescribed regimen (N = 60, 46%) in 2L, followed by combination therapies (N = 45, 35%), pembrolizumab monotherapy (N = 19, 15%), and bevacizumab monotherapy (N = 6, 5%). Median OS was 9.1 months (95% CI: 7.2-12.2) after initiation of 2L therapy. Median TTD was 2.8 months (95% CI: 2.5-3.3), and median TFST was 4.9 months (95% CI: 4.2-5.7). No significant difference in outcomes was found when stratified by 2L treatments. CONCLUSIONS: The observed heterogeneity in 2L r/mCC therapy suggests no clear standard-of-care in this setting. Additionally, short duration of OS observed was consistent across 2L regimens. New, effective treatment options in this setting are needed.

Cost effectiveness and impact on quality of life of abobotulinumtoxinA and onabotulinumtoxinA in the treatment of children with lower limb spasticity in Canada.

Background: Injectable botulinum neurotoxins are a mainstay of treatment for pediatric spasticity. AbobotulinumtoxinA and onabotulinumtoxinA are both injectable toxin therapies used to treat pediatric lower limb (PLL) spasticity in Canada. The objective of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of abobotulinumtoxinA vs. onabotulinumtoxinA in the treatment of PLL spasticity in Canada.Methods: A probabilistic Markov cohort model with a 2-year time horizon was developed, with health states defined by response to therapy, as characterized by the goal attainment scale (GAS). Based on randomized controlled trial evidence, response to therapy was similar or higher for abobotulinumtoxinA relative to onabotulinumtoxinA; uncertainty was incorporated into model parameters, however, as the two therapies have not been compared head-to-head. Canadian resource use and cost data were incorporated.Results: In the base case, abobotulinumtoxinA generated 1.48 quality-adjusted life years over the model time horizon, compared to 1.47 for onabotulinumtoxinA. AbobotulinumtoxinA was associated with cost savings of $123 CAD, reflecting lower costs in both medication acquisition and health services. The estimated improvement to quality of life and reduced costs result in an estimate of economic dominance for abobotulinumtoxinA over onabotulinumtoxinA. This dominant result persisted across probabilistic and scenario analyses.Key points for decision makersBased on a review of available clinical evidence, abobotulinumtoxinA was found to have significant and/or numerical efficacy benefits to onabotulinumtoxinA on functional outcomes (Goal Attainment Scale) and tone (Modified Ashworth Scale) and in the treatment of pediatric lower limb spasticityIn this cost-effectiveness analysis, abobotulinumtoxinA was found to be associated with greater quality-adjusted life years and lower costs than onabotulinumtoxinA (economically dominant)A limitation of this analysis was the uncertainty around key parameters. Specifically, the lack of head-to-head comparison data for the two therapies, and variable data regarding likely onabotulinumtoxinA dosing in PLL in clinical practice. However, across a range of plausible scenarios, the economic dominant result remained.

Prevalence, Patterns, and Cost of Care for Children with Cerebral Palsy Enrolled in Medicaid Managed Care.

BACKGROUND: In the United States, many children with cerebral palsy (CP) obtain health care coverage through managed Medicaid, but little is known about the current demographics or management of this high-need, complex population. OBJECTIVE: To develop U.S. population-level information about the prevalence of CP, management patterns, and costs. METHODS: Data (2013-2015) were analyzed from a managed Medicaid database with coverage of children and adolescents in 15 states. Analyses included demographic information and use of 10 prespecified CP management options often used to manage spasticity. Code-based algorithms were applied to indicate presence of spasticity and determine the likely ambulatory status. RESULTS: In this claims analysis, the prevalence estimate of CP was 1.78 per 1,000 patients. Most (69.8%) children with CP had spasticity, of which 20.8% had hemiplegia, 15.6% diplegia, 32.9% quadriplegia, and 30.5% CP unspecified. Overall, 42.4% of children with CP were not treated with any of the 10 CP management options via Medicaid. Among treated children, the most common management options were physical therapy (37.1%), orthotics (29.9%), oral baclofen (13.5%) and botulinum toxins (9.4%). Overall annualized Medicaid costs were higher for children with CP versus children in the overall database population ($22,383 vs. $1,358). Within the CP population, costs were higher for those children who were likely nonambulatory than for those who were likely ambulatory ($43,687 vs. $10,368, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Most children with CP have spasticity, and the costs of care are high. This study highlights wide variation in the way CP is managed, with many young patients not receiving CP management options via Medicaid. DISCLOSURES: This analysis was funded by Ipsen Biopharmaceuticals and conducted by Milliman. Pulgar and Bains were employees of Ipsen Biopharmaceuticals during the conduct of this study. Chambers is a consultant for OrthoPediatrics and an employee of the University of California. Pyenson and Ferro are employees of Milliman, as was Sawhney during the analysis. Gooch, Noritz, and Wright report no conflicts of interest. Part of this work was presented as a poster at TOXINS 2017: Basic Science and Clinical Aspects of Botulinum and Other Neurotoxins, held January 18-21, 2017, in Madrid, Spain.