Real-world patient characteristics, treatment patterns, and treatment outcomes of patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma by line of therapy.

BACKGROUND: Although initial treatment of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) with rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP) can be effective, up to 50% of patients will develop refractory or relapsed (R/R) disease. This study aimed to provide contemporary data on characteristics, treatment patterns, and outcomes for R/R-DLBCL. METHODS: Patients with incident (January 2016 to March 2021) DLBCL age ≥18 years who initiated first-line (1L) therapy were identified from the COTA real-world database. Baseline characteristics, treatment patterns, and real-world outcomes, including time to next treatment (rwTTNT) and overall survival (rwOS), were assessed for the study population and by line of therapy (LOT). RESULTS: A total of 1347 eligible DLBCL patients were identified. Of these, 340 (25.2%) proceeded to receive 2L, of whom 141 (41.5%) proceeded to receive 3L, of whom 51 (36.2%) proceeded to receive 4L+. Most common treatments were R-CHOP in 1L (63.6%), stem cell transplant (SCT) in 2L (17.9%), polatuzumab vedotin, bendamustine, and rituximab (Pola-BR) in 3L (9.9%), and chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy (CAR-T) in 4L (11.8%). Treatment patterns were more variable in later LOTs. One- and 3-year rwOS from 1L initiation were 88.5% and 78.4%, respectively. Patients who received later LOTs experienced numerically lower 1- and 3-year rwOS (from 2L initiation: 62.4% and 46.4%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: In this real-world analysis, 25.2% of patients experienced R/R-DLBCL after 1L with poor outcomes. Given the findings of this study, there is a high unmet need for novel, safe, and effective treatment options for patients with R/R DLBCL.

Real-world study of disease-free survival & patient characteristics associated with disease-free survival in early-stage non-small cell lung cancer: A retrospective observational study.

INTRODUCTION/ BACKGROUND: Surgical resection remains standard of care for patients with early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but research shows that adjuvant therapy can reduce the risk of disease recurrence. Our objective was to characterize disease-free survival (DFS) using real-world data. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective study using the COTA real-world database derived from electronic health records in the United States (US). Adults diagnosed with stage IB-IIIA NSCLC from 2013 to 2018 who underwent complete surgical resection (index date) for NSCLC were included. DFS was analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method. A multivariable Cox-Proportional Hazard (PH) model stratified by year of diagnosis was developed to evaluate covariates associated with DFS. RESULTS: 703 patients met the study criteria (mean age 66.2 years, female (56%), White (82%), and median follow-up time was 37.4 months from index date. Approximately 48% of patients experienced recurrence or death with a median DFS of 42.9 months (95% CI: 37.4-52.2). Patients who received adjuvant therapy, neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapy, neoadjuvant therapy, and surgery only experienced a median DFS of 43.7, 32.3, 33.7, and 49.4 months, respectively. After adjustment, stage at diagnosis and adjuvant therapy status were significantly associated with DFS events. CONCLUSIONS: Higher stage at diagnosis and lack of adjuvant therapy were associated with greater risk of recurrence. Future research should focus on the adoption and effect of adjuvant/ neoadjuvant therapies on disease recurrence, including in patients with oncogenic driver mutations.

Eligibility criteria and enrollment of a diverse racial and ethnic population in multiple myeloma clinical trials.

The narrow eligibility criteria may contribute to the underrepresentation of racial and ethnic subgroups in cancer clinical trials. We conducted a retrospective pooled analysis of multicenter global clinical trials submitted to the US Food and Drug Administration between 2006 and 2019 to support the approval of the use of multiple myeloma (MM) therapies that analyze the rates and reasons for trial ineligibility based on race and ethnicity in MM clinical trials. Race and ethnicity were coded per Office of Management and Budget standards. Patients flagged as having screen failures were identified as ineligible. Ineligibility rates were calculated as the percentage of patients who were ineligible compared with the screened population within the respective racial and ethnic subgroups. Trial eligibility criteria were grouped into specific categories to analyze the reasons for trial ineligibility. Black patients (24%) and other (23%) race subgroups had higher ineligibility rates than White patients (17%). The Asian race had the lowest ineligibility rate (12%) among all racial subgroups. Failure to meet the hematologic laboratory criteria (19%) and treatment-related criteria (17%) were the most common reasons for ineligibility among Black patients and were more common in Black patients than in other races. Failure to meet disease-related criteria was the most common reason for ineligibility among White (28%) and Asian (29%) participants. Our analysis indicates that specific eligibility criteria may contribute to enrollment disparities for racial and ethnic subgroups in MM clinical trials. However, the small number of screened patients in the underrepresented racial and ethnic subgroups limits definitive conclusions.

Exploring racial disparities in treatment patterns and outcomes for patients with multiple myeloma using real world data.

This retrospective observational study evaluated racial disparities among Black and White patients with multiple myeloma (MM). We included patients from a longitudinal de-identified EHR-derived database who had ≥2 visits recorded on or after 1/1/2011, documented treatment, and race listed as White or Black. Black patients (n = 1172) were more likely female (54.8%/42.9%) and younger (<65 years, 40.8%/30.8%) than White patients (n = 4637). Unadjusted median real-world overall survival (rwOS) indexed to first-line of therapy (LOT) was 64.6 months (95% CI: 57.8-74.0) for Blacks and 54.5 months (95% CI: 50.9-56.2) for Whites. Adjusted rwOS estimates (for sex, age at index date, and practice type) to either first- (aHR = 0.94; 95% CI: 0.84-1.06) or second-LOT (aHR = 0.90; 95% CI: 0.77-1.05) were similar. Unadjusted derived response rate (dRR) during first-LOT was 84.8% (95% CI: 80.7-88.1) for Blacks and 86.9% (95% CI: 85.0-88.5) for Whites (odds ratio [OR] = 0.78 [95% CI: 0.57-1.10]); in second-LOT, 67.2% (95% CI: 58.4-75.0) for Blacks and 72.4% (95% CI: 68.1-76.3) for Whites (OR = 0.72 [95% CI: 0.46-1.13]). High representation of Black patients enabled this robust analysis, albeit with limitations inherent to the observational data source, the retrospective design, and the analytic use of newly derived endpoints requiring further validation.

Analysis of racial and ethnic disparities in multiple myeloma US FDA drug approval trials.

African Americans (AAs) have a higher incidence of multiple myeloma (MM) than White patients. Mortality is also higher in AAs compared with White patients. AAs more commonly have immunoglobulin H translocations t(11;14) and t(14;16) compared with White patients. We sought to characterize the demographic representation in MM clinical trials and evaluate outcomes based on race and ethnicity. We conducted a pooled analysis of all trials submitted to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to support approval of a MM therapeutic between 2006 and 2019. Demographic characteristics were analyzed descriptively. An age-adjusted stratified Cox regression model was used to evaluate the relationship between time-to-event outcomes and race and ethnicity. Nineteen global trials comprising 10 157 patients were pooled. White, Asian, and Black patients comprised 84%, 7%, and 4% of the dataset, respectively; Hispanic patients comprised 4%. The age-adjusted overall survival hazard ratio (HR) for Black compared with White patients was 0.89 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.75-1.05). The age-adjusted HR for US Black vs US White patients was 0.82 (95% CI, 0.66-1.02). For rest-of-world (RoW) Black vs RoW White patients, the HR was 1.31 (95% CI, 0.97-1.77). Black and Hispanic patients were underrepresented in the trials supporting FDA approval of MM drugs. Black patients were primarily enrolled in the United States. Outcomes in US patients were more favorable compared with those in patients in the RoW. Given the higher incidence of MM in AAs and the different disease characteristics, efforts should be made to improve representation of AAs in MM clinical trials.

Review of patient-reported outcomes in multiple myeloma registrational trials: highlighting areas for improvement.

Over the past 13 years, there have been advances in characterizing the patient experience in oncology trials, primarily using patient-reported outcomes (PROs). This review aims to provide details on the PRO measures and analyses used in multiple myeloma (MM) registrational trials. We identified registrational trials supporting MM indications from 2007 to 2020 from FDA databases. Trial protocols, statistical analysis plans, and clinical study reports were reviewed for PRO measures used, collection methods, statistical analyses, baseline and instrument completion definitions, and thresholds for clinical meaningfulness. Twenty-five trials supporting 20 MM indications were identified; 17 (68%) contained submitted PRO data. Of the 17 trials, 14 were randomized controlled trials and the remainder were single-arm trials. All but one trial were open label trials. Seven trials collected data electronically and five in paper format. The majority of trials evaluated at least two PRO measures (82%) with two trials (12%) utilizing four measures. Nine unique PRO measures were used, most commonly the EORTC QLQ-30 (87%), EQ-5D (65%), and QLQ-MY20 (47%). All 17 (100%) trials provided descriptive summaries, 10 (59%) carried out longitudinal mixed model analysis, 9 (53%) conducted responder analysis, and 2 (12%) did a basic inferential test. We noted substantial heterogeneity in terms of PRO collection methods, measures, definitions, and analyses, which may hinder the ability to effectively capture and interpret patient experience in future MM clinical trials. Further research is needed to determine the most appropriate approaches for statistical and analytical methodologies for PRO data in MM trials.

FDA Approval Summary: Alpelisib Plus Fulvestrant for Patients with HR-positive, HER2-negative, PIK3CA-mutated, Advanced or Metastatic Breast Cancer.

On May 24, 2019, the FDA granted regular approval to alpelisib in combination with fulvestrant for postmenopausal women, and men, with hormone receptor (HR)-positive, HER2-negative, phosphatidylinositol-4,5-bisphosphate 3-kinase catalytic subunit alpha (PIK3CA)-mutated, advanced or metastatic breast cancer as detected by an FDA-approved test following progression on or after an endocrine-based regimen. Approval was based on the SOLAR-1 study, a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of alpelisib plus fulvestrant versus placebo plus fulvestrant. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) per RECIST v1.1 in the cohort of trial participants whose tumors had a PIK3CA mutation. The estimated median PFS by investigator assessment in the alpelisib plus fulvestrant arm was 11 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 7.5-14.5] compared with 5.7 months (95% CI, 3.7-7.4) in the placebo plus fulvestrant arm (HR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.50-0.85; two-sided P = 0.001). The median overall survival was not yet reached for the alpelisib plus fulvestrant arm (95% CI, 28.1-NE) and was 26.9 months (95% CI, 21.9-NE) for the fulvestrant control arm. No PFS benefit was observed in trial participants whose tumors did not have a PIK3CA mutation (HR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.58-1.25). The most common adverse reactions, including laboratory abnormalities, on the alpelisib plus fulvestrant arm were increased glucose, increased creatinine, diarrhea, rash, decreased lymphocyte count, increased gamma glutamyl transferase, nausea, increased alanine aminotransferase, fatigue, decreased hemoglobin, increased lipase, decreased appetite, stomatitis, vomiting, decreased weight, decreased calcium, decreased glucose, prolonged activated partial thromboplastin time, and alopecia.

Regulatory Considerations for Contribution of Effect of Drugs Used in Combination Regimens: Renal Cell Cancer Case Studies.

The development and review of combination drug regimens in oncology may present unique challenges to investigators and regulators. For regulatory approval of combination regimens, it is necessary to demonstrate the contribution of effect of each monotherapy to the overall combination. Alternative approaches to traditional designs may be needed to accelerate oncology drug development, for example, when combinations are substantially superior to available therapy, to reduce exposure to less effective therapies, and for drugs that are inactive as single agents and that in combination potentiate activity of another drug. These approaches include demonstration of activity in smaller randomized trials and/or monotherapy trials conducted in a similar disease setting. This article will discuss alternative approaches used in the development of approved drugs in combination, based on examples of recent approvals of combination regimens in renal cell carcinoma.

Analysis of the Association Between Adverse Events and Outcome in Patients Receiving a Programmed Death Protein 1 or Programmed Death Ligand 1 Antibody.

PURPOSE: To assess the relationship among tumor response rate, overall survival, and the development of related adverse events of special interest (AESIs) or related immune-mediated adverse events (imAEs) in patients with urothelial cancer treated with anti-programmed death protein 1 or ligand 1 (anti-PD-1/L1) antibodies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We examined seven trials in 1,747 patients with metastatic or locally advanced urothelial cancer that led to approval of an anti-PD-1/L1 antibody. Five trials enrolled patients who had received prior platinum-based therapy, and two enrolled patients who were cisplatin ineligible. The data sets were searched for AESIs, related AESIs, imAEs, and related imAEs. The relationship to study drug was determined by the investigator. ImAEs were defined as AESIs treated with topical or systemic corticosteroids. RESULTS: In these exploratory analyses, a related AESI was reported in 64% of responding patients and in 34% of patients who did not respond to the anti-PD-1/L1 antibody, whereas a related imAE occurred in 28% and 12% of patients who did and did not respond to study drug, respectively. In a responder analysis, an increase in overall survival was seen in patients with related AESIs compared with those with no related AESIs (hazard ratio, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.39 to 0.52). Fifty-seven percent of responding patients with a related AESI reported the AESI before documentation of response. CONCLUSION: Patients who responded to treatment with an anti-PD-1/L1 antibody were more likely to report a related AESI or related imAE. This relationship did not seem to be due to the increased duration of exposure in responding patients. Systemic corticosteroid use did not appear to affect the duration of response.

FDA Approval Summary: Atezolizumab or Pembrolizumab for the Treatment of Patients with Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma Ineligible for Cisplatin-Containing Chemotherapy.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) granted accelerated approval to atezolizumab and pembrolizumab in April and May 2017, respectively, for the treatment of patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma who are not eligible for cisplatin-containing chemotherapy. These approvals were based on efficacy and safety data demonstrated in the two single-arm trials, IMvigor210 (atezolizumab) and KEYNOTE-052 (pembrolizumab). The primary endpoint, confirmed objective response rate, was 23.5% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 16.2%-32.2%) in patients receiving atezolizumab and 28.6% (95% CI: 24.1%-33.5%) in patients receiving pembrolizumab. The median duration of response was not reached in either study and responses were seen regardless of PD-L1 status. The safety profiles of both drugs were generally consistent with approved agents targeting PD-1/PD-L1. Two ongoing trials (IMvigor130 and KEYNOTE-361) are verifying benefit of these drugs. Based on concerning preliminary reports from these trials, FDA revised the indications for both agents in cisplatin-ineligible patients. Both drugs are now indicated for patients not eligible for any platinum-containing chemotherapy or not eligible for cisplatin-containing chemotherapy and whose tumors/infiltrating immune cells express a high level of PD-L1. The indications for atezolizumab and pembrolizumab in patients who have received prior platinum-based therapy have not been changed. This article summarizes the FDA thought process and data supporting the accelerated approval of both agents and the subsequent revision of the indications. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The accelerated approvals of atezolizumab and pembrolizumab for cisplatin-ineligible patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma represent the first approved therapies for this patient population. These approvals were based on single-arm trials demonstrating reasonable objective response rates and favorable durations of response with an acceptable toxicity profile compared with available non-cisplatin-containing chemotherapy regimens. However, based on concerning preliminary reports from two ongoing phase III trials, the FDA revised the indication for both agents in cisplatin-ineligible patients. Both are now indicated either for patients not eligible for any platinum-containing chemotherapy or not eligible for cisplatin-containing chemotherapy and whose tumors have high expression of PD-L1.

FDA Approval Summary: Rucaparib for the Treatment of Patients with Deleterious BRCA Mutation-Associated Advanced Ovarian Cancer.

On December 19, 2016, the FDA granted accelerated approval to rucaparib (RUBRACA; Clovis Oncology, Inc.) for the treatment of patients with deleterious BRCA mutation (germline and/or somatic)-associated advanced ovarian cancer who have been treated with two or more chemotherapies. The FDA also approved the FoundationFocus CDx BRCA test (Foundation Medicine, Inc.), the first next-generation sequencing-based companion diagnostic, for identifying patients with advanced ovarian cancer eligible for treatment with rucaparib based on detection of deleterious BRCA1 and/or BRCA2 mutations in tumor tissue. Rucaparib's approval was based primarily on efficacy data from 106 patients with BRCA mutation-associated ovarian cancer who had prior treatment with two or more chemotherapies and safety data from 377 patients with ovarian cancer treated with rucaparib 600 mg orally twice daily on two open-label, single-arm trials. Investigator-assessed objective response rate was 54% [57/106; 95% confidence interval (CI), 44-64], and median duration of response was 9.2 months (95% CI, 6.6-11.7). The approved companion diagnostic verified tumor BRCA mutation status retrospectively in 96% (64/67) of patients. Common adverse reactions (≥20%) to rucaparib were nausea, fatigue, vomiting, anemia, abdominal pain, dysgeusia, constipation, decreased appetite, diarrhea, thrombocytopenia, and dyspnea. This article summarizes the FDA review and data supporting rucaparib's accelerated approval. Clin Cancer Res; 23(23); 7165-70. ©2017 AACRSee related commentary by Kohn et al., p. 7155.

Rendering the 3 + 3 Design to Rest: More Efficient Approaches to Oncology Dose-Finding Trials in the Era of Targeted Therapy.

Selection of the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) as the recommended dose for registration trials based on a dose-escalation trial using variations of an MTD/3 + 3 design often occurs in the development of oncology products. The MTD/3 + 3 approach is not optimal and may result in recommended doses that are unacceptably toxic for many patients and in dose reduction/interruptions that might have an impact on effectiveness. Instead of the MTD/3 + 3 approach, the authors recommend an integrated approach. In this approach, typically an adaptive/Bayesian model provides a general framework to incorporate and make decisions for dose escalation based on nonclinical data, such as animal efficacy and toxicity data; clinical data, including pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics data; and dose/exposure-response data for efficacy and safety. To improve dose-ranging trials, model-based estimation, rather than hypothesis testing, should be used to maximize and integrate the information gathered across trials and doses. This approach may improve identification of optimal recommended doses, which can then be confirmed in registration trials. Clin Cancer Res; 22(11); 2623-9. ©2016 AACR SEE ALL ARTICLES IN THIS CCR FOCUS SECTION, "NEW APPROACHES FOR OPTIMIZING DOSING OF ANTICANCER AGENTS".

Multivariate Markov models for the conditional probability of toxicity in phase II trials.

In addition to getting a preliminary assessment of efficacy, phase II trials can also help to determine dose(s) that have an acceptable toxicity profile over repeated cycles as well as identify subgroups with particularly poor toxicity profiles. Correct modeling of the dose-toxicity relationship in patients receiving multiple cycles of the same dose in oncology trials is crucial. A major challenge lies in taking advantage of the conditional nature of data collection, that is each cycle is observed conditional on having no previous toxicities on earlier cycles. We develop a novel and parsimonious model for the probability of toxicity during a kth cycle of therapy, conditional on not seeing toxicity in any of the k-1 previous cycles using a Markov model, hereafter we refer to these probabilities as conditional probabilities of toxicity. Our model allows the conditional probability of toxicity to depend on randomized dose group, cumulative dose from prior cycles, a measure of how consistently a patient responds to the same dose exposure and individual risk factors influencing the ability to tolerate the treatment regimen. Simulations studying finite sample properties of the model are given. Finally, the approach is demonstrated in a phase II trial studying two dose levels of ifosfamide plus doxorubicin and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor in soft tissue sarcoma patients over four cycles. The Markov model provides correct estimates of the probabilities of toxicity in finite sample simulations. It also correctly models the data from the phase II clinical trial, and identifies particularly high cumulative toxicity in females.

Adaptive Phase I clinical trial design using Markov models for conditional probability of toxicity.

Many Phase I trials in oncology involve multiple-dose administrations on the same patient over multiple cycles, with a typical cycle lasting 3 weeks and having about six cycles per patient with a goal to find the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and study the dose-toxicity relationship. A patient's dose is unchanged over the cycles and the data are reduced to a binary endpoint and the occurrence of a toxicity and analyzed by considering the toxicity either from the first dose or from any cycle on the study. In this article, an alternative approach allowing an assessment of toxicity from each cycle and dose variations for patient over cycles is presented. A Markov model for the conditional probability of toxicity on any cycle given no toxicity in previous cycles is formulated as a function of the current and previous doses. The extra information from each cycle provides more precise estimation of the dose-toxicity relationship. Simulation results demonstrating gains in using the Markov model as compared to analyses of a single binary outcome are presented. Methods for utilizing the Markov model to conduct a Phase I study, including choices for selecting doses for the next cycle for each patient, are developed and presented via simulation.

Parotid glands dose-effect relationships based on their actually delivered doses: implications for adaptive replanning in radiation therapy of head-and-neck cancer.

PURPOSE: Doses actually delivered to the parotid glands during radiation therapy often exceed planned doses. We hypothesized that the delivered doses correlate better with parotid salivary output than the planned doses, used in all previous studies, and that determining these correlations will help make decisions regarding adaptive radiation therapy (ART) aimed at reducing the delivered doses. METHODS AND MATERIALS: In this prospective study, oropharyngeal cancer patients treated definitively with chemoirradiation underwent daily cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) with clinical setup alignment based on the C2 posterior edge. Parotid glands in the CBCTs were aligned by deformable registration to calculate cumulative delivered doses. Stimulated salivary flow rates were measured separately from each parotid gland pretherapy and periodically posttherapy. RESULTS: Thirty-six parotid glands of 18 patients were analyzed. Average mean planned doses was 32 Gy, and differences from planned to delivered mean gland doses were -4.9 to +8.4 Gy, median difference +2.2 Gy in glands in which delivered doses increased relative to planned. Both planned and delivered mean doses were significantly correlated with posttreatment salivary outputs at almost all posttherapy time points, without statistically significant differences in the correlations. Large dispersions (on average, SD 3.6 Gy) characterized the dose-effect relationships for both. The differences between the cumulative delivered doses and planned doses were evident at first fraction (r=.92, P<.0001) because of complex setup deviations (eg, rotations and neck articulations), uncorrected by the translational clinical alignments. CONCLUSIONS: After daily translational setup corrections, differences between planned and delivered doses in most glands were small relative to the SDs of the dose-saliva data, suggesting that ART is not likely to gain measurable salivary output improvement in most cases. These differences were observed at first treatment, indicating potential benefit for more complex setup corrections or adaptive interventions in the minority of patients with large deviations detected early by CBCT.

Preoperative topical antimicrobial decolonization in head and neck surgery.

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: Surgical site infections (SSIs) are an important cause of morbidity and mortality after head and neck surgery. Our primary objective was to determine the efficacy of preoperative topical antimicrobial decolonization before head and neck surgery. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, randomized controlled trial. METHODS: This study was conducted among 84 patients presenting for head and neck surgery requiring admission to an academic medical center. Preoperative cultures were performed to identify Staphylococcus aureus carriers. Patients were randomized to preoperative topical antimicrobial decolonization with a 5-day regimen of chlorhexidine skin rinses and intranasal mupirocin coupled with standard perioperative systemic antimicrobial prophylaxis, versus standard prophylaxis alone. The main outcome was the incidence of SSIs. RESULTS: Despite a trend suggesting a decrease in SSIs with perioperative topical antimicrobial decolonization (24% vs. 10%), there was no significant difference (odds ratio, 0.34; 95% confidence interval, 0.10-1.18; P = .079). Patients with a higher American Society of Anesthesiologists score (3 vs. 1; P = .02), with more operative blood loss (P = .05), and who required operative takeback (P = .04) had a higher rate of SSIs; there was a trend suggesting a higher rate of SSIs among patients undergoing clean-contaminated surgery compared to clean cases (P = .08) and among those having received prior radiation (P = .07) or chemotherapy (P = .06). CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative antimicrobial decolonization did not significantly decrease the incidence of SSIs after head and neck surgery, but might be considered for high-risk groups despite the lack of conclusive evidence confirming efficacy. Risk factors for SSIs after head and neck surgery are identified for the first time in a prospective study.