Real-World Treatment Patterns and Clinical Outcomes Among Patients With Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Nearly 30% of new renal cell carcinoma (RCC) cases are diagnosed at an advanced or metastatic stage. Recent approvals of immunotherapies (IO) have significantly impacted patient care, but real-world outcomes of these treatments have not been widely evaluated. METHODS: Eligible physicians abstracted demographic and clinical data from patient medical records for patients with advanced clear and non-clear cell RCC (aRCC) who initiated treatment between January 1, 2018, and December 31, 2020. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. A multivariate Cox regression model was developed to assess the impact of treatment category on clinical outcomes while controlling for International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) risk category, histology, and other patient characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 498 patients were included (201 from US, 62 from Canada, 58 from UK, 59 from France, 58 from Germany, 60 from Spain). Of these, 250 received tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) monotherapy, 197 received immunotherapy (IO) combination (119 IO+TKI, 78 IO+IO), and 32 received IO monotherapy as first-line treatment for aRCC; 19 patients received various other regimens. 16% of patients had a favorable IMDC risk score. Based on results of multivariable Cox regression, PFS (hazard ratio [HR] [95% confidence interval (CI)]: 0.50 [0.36-0.72]) (P < .001) and time to next treatment (TTNT) were significantly longer (HR [95% CI]: 0.54 [0.39-0.73]) (P < .001) for patients treated with IO combination versus TKI monotherapy. IO combination had a numerically reduced, but statistically insignificant, risk of death versus TKI monotherapy (HR: 0.66; P = .114). IO+TKI combination was associated with significantly longer PFS and reduced risk of progression (HR: 0.52; P = .04) versus IO+IO combination; similar results were observed for TTNT (HR: 0.57; P = .03). CONCLUSION: Our evaluation of real-world treatment outcomes in aRCC revealed that IO + TKI combination is associated with improved PFS and prolonged TTNT compared with TKI monotherapy and IO+IO combination.

Real-world clinical effectiveness of sorafenib among patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma at two centers in the United States.

BACKGROUND: In the United States, sorafenib monotherapy was approved in 2007 for first-line (1L) treatment of patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC). As other therapies have been approved in recent years for hepatocellular carcinoma treatment in later lines, it is essential to assess clinical effectiveness of older therapies in actual clinical practice to inform healthcare practitioners' decisions for better patient care. AIM: To assess patient characteristics/clinical effectiveness of 1L sorafenib in uHCC patients treated in United States academic and community practice settings. METHODS: A retrospective observational study was conducted among adult patients (≥ 18 years) in the United States initiating sorafenib monotherapy as 1L systemic therapy for uHCC with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group status of 0 or 1 between January 2016 and December 2019 at City of Hope and Advent Health. Data were extracted by trained abstractionists from individual patients' electronic health records and captured in electronic case report forms. Institutional Review Board approvals were obtained prior to study initiation. Data were captured from the time of sorafenib initiation until death or the end of follow-up. All data were de-identified prior to analyses. Clinical outcomes assessed included provider-reported best response, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). PFS and OS were estimated using Kaplan-Meier methods. RESULTS: Among 134 uHCC patients treated with 1L sorafenib, majority were male (75%), and most were Caucasian (62%) or Asian (19%). Median patient age was 64 years. The most common etiologies of liver disease were hepatitis C (54%), alcohol-related liver disease (16%), and hepatitis B (11%). Most patients were reported to have Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage B (19%) or stage C (70%) disease. Of 134 patients, 110 (82%) were reported to have discontinued treatment or died during follow-up. Primary reasons for sorafenib discontinuation were reported as progression (35%) and toxicity (30%). Best overall response was reported for 124 patients, of which 7.3% reported complete or partial response. Median time to treatment discontinuation was 2.3 mo. Overall, 103 patients (77%) had disease progression or died during sorafenib therapy. Median PFS was estimated to be 2.9 mo. At the end of follow-up, 82 patients (61%) were deceased. Median OS was 8.5 mo. CONCLUSION: Newer therapeutic options that have reported higher PFS and OS in real-world clinical practice should be considered to enhance patient outcomes.

Real-World Effectiveness of Lenvatinib in Hepatocellular Carcinoma Patients with Nonalcoholic Steatohepatitis.

Hepatocellular (HCC) is the most common type of primary liver cancer and the fourth most common cause of cancer-related deaths globally.1 Although most cases of HCC were historically attributed to underlying chronic viral hepatitis, nonalcoholic fatty liver disease is projected to become the most common risk factor for HCC with the rising prevalence of obesity and diabetes mellitus and increasing availability of effective treatments for hepatitis B and C infection.2 Although patients with viral and nonviral HCC seem to have similar overall prognosis,3 prior data have suggested possible differential efficacy of systemic therapies by liver disease etiology. For example, sorafenib was shown to have greater efficacy in patients with chronic hepatitis C infection than other etiologies.4 The aim of our descriptive study was to report the effectiveness of lenvatinib in a real-world cohort of patients with nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH)-related HCC.

Real-world effectiveness of lenvatinib monotherapy in previously treated unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma in US clinical practice.

BACKGROUND: Lenvatinib monotherapy was approved in the United States for first-line treatment of patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC) in 2018. This study assessed real-world treatment patterns and outcomes of lenvatinib beyond first-line systemic treatment in the United States. METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted among US adults (≥18 years) with uHCC. Eligible patients initiated lenvatinib monotherapy as second- or later-line systemic therapy (2L-plus) from August 2018 to September 2019. Clinical outcomes included physician-reported best response, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Of 164 patients who received lenvatinib in 2L-plus, most (n = 133; 81.1%) received lenvatinib in 2 L. There were 109 patients (66.4%) who initiated lenvatinib after immunotherapy. At lenvatinib initiation, only 31.1% of patients had Child-Pugh class A, while half (49.4%) had Child-Pugh class B. Most patients had Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage B (23.8%) or C (38.4%) uHCC. Median duration of lenvatinib treatment was 6.9 months, with 42.7% of patients still on treatment at the end of follow-up. Physician-reported best response was complete and partial response for 8.5% and 44.5% of patients, respectively. PFS and OS rate estimates from lenvatinib initiation at 12 months were 51.7% and 57.8%, respectively. Among patients treated after immunotherapy, complete and partial responses were 10.1% and 43.1%, respectively, and PFS and OS estimates from lenvatinib initiation at 12 months were 52.8% and 60.0%, respectively. CONCLUSION: This retrospective study suggests clinical effectiveness of lenvatinib monotherapy in a real-world setting among previously treated patients with uHCC, including among those previously treated with immunotherapy.

Real-world effectiveness of lenvatinib monotherapy among unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma patients in the USA.

Aim: This study evaluated the effectiveness of lenvatinib monotherapy for first-line treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC) in a real-world setting. Materials & methods: This retrospective cohort study included patients who initiated lenvatinib monotherapy as first-line treatment for uHCC (n = 233). Clinical outcomes included provider-reported best response, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). PFS and OS were estimated using Kaplan-Meier methods. Results: Most patients (67.8%) were male. A total of 44.6% had Child-Pugh A and 39.1% had Child-Pugh B. Dose reductions were reported in 9%. Median PFS and OS were not reached. At 6 and 12 months, landmark PFS were 85.1 and 64.9%, respectively; landmark OS were 91.8 and 72.6%, respectively. Conclusion: These results affirm the clinical effectiveness of first-line lenvatinib monotherapy in uHCC.

Lay abstract Lenvatinib is a targeted therapy that prevents tumor growth. It was approved for the treatment of advanced liver cancer in 2018, but few studies have examined how it is used in everyday clinical practice, especially in the USA. In this study, we reviewed the medical records of 233 patients in the USA with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma, who were treated with lenvatinib in first line to better understand its effectiveness and use in real-world care. We collected information on how long they were on treatment and time to tumor progression and/or death. Overall, our study found that in this demographically and clinically diverse sample, results affirm findings from prior studies that found lenvatinib is an effective treatment for patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma.

Palbociclib Plus Letrozole as First-Line Therapy in Postmenopausal Asian Women With Metastatic Breast Cancer: Results From the Phase III, Randomized PALOMA-2 Study.

PURPOSE: In PALOMA-2, palbociclib plus letrozole significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) as initial treatment of estrogen receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative advanced breast cancer. We assessed the benefit of palbociclib plus letrozole in Asians. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Of 666 enrolled postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative advanced breast cancer (no prior treatment of advanced disease), 95 were Asian. Patients were randomly assigned 2:1 to receive palbociclib plus letrozole or placebo plus letrozole. The primary end point was investigator-assessed PFS. Secondary end points were overall survival, objective response, patient-reported outcomes, pharmacokinetics, and safety. RESULTS: Median PFS was significantly longer in Asian patients who received palbociclib plus letrozole versus placebo plus letrozole (25.7 months [95% CI, 19.2 months to not estimable] v 13.9 months [95% CI, 7.4 to 22.0 months]; hazard ratio, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.27 to 0.87; P = .007). The most common toxicities with palbociclib were hematologic and more frequent among Asians versus non-Asians: neutropenia (any grade, 95.4% v 76.8%; grade 3/4, 89.2% v 62.5%), leukopenia (43.1% v 38.3%; 32.3% v 23.5%), and thrombocytopenia (27.7% v 13.5%; 4.6% v 1.1%). No Asians had febrile neutropenia. Discontinuation rates as a result of adverse events were similar among Asian and non-Asian patients who received palbociclib plus letrozole (10.8% and 9.5%). In Asians, quality of life (QOL) was maintained with no significant differences observed between treatments from baseline in breast cancer-specific QOL and general health status scores. Change from baseline in EuroQol five dimensions index scores was significantly higher with palbociclib plus letrozole (0.013 v -0.069; P = .0132). Geometric mean palbociclib trough concentration values were higher in Asians versus non-Asians (93.8 v 61.7 ng/mL). CONCLUSION: Consistent with the overall study population, the addition of palbociclib to letrozole significantly improved PFS in Asians. Hematologic toxicities were more frequent in Asians versus non-Asians but manageable with early dose modifications while maintaining QOL.

Real-World Treatment Patterns and Clinical Outcomes in Patients Receiving Palbociclib for Hormone Receptor-Positive, Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-Negative Advanced or Metastatic Breast Cancer in Argentina: The IRIS Study.

PURPOSE: The selective cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor palbociclib was approved in Argentina in 2015 for postmenopausal women with hormone receptor (HR)-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative advanced breast cancer (ABC) or metastatic breast cancer (MBC) based on phase III study results. The Ibrance Real World Insights (IRIS) study aims to evaluate palbociclib in patients with HR-positive/HER2-negative ABC or MBC in the real-world setting in multiple countries globally. Here we report results from patients enrolled in the IRIS study in Argentina. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This retrospective medical chart review study included postmenopausal women with confirmed HR-positive/HER2-negative ABC or MBC who were treated with palbociclib plus letrozole as first-line endocrine-based therapy or with palbociclib plus fulvestrant in women with disease progression after endocrine therapy. Participating physicians reviewed medical records of up to six patients each, collecting demographic and clinical data. Outcomes included progression-free and overall survival rates. RESULTS: Records were extracted for 162 patients in Argentina (palbociclib plus letrozole, n = 105 [65%]; palbociclib plus fulvestrant, n = 57 [35%]). The 6-month progression-free survival rate was 94% for patients treated with palbociclib plus letrozole and 95% for patients treated with palbociclib plus fulvestrant; 85% and 80% of patients treated with palbociclib plus letrozole were progression free at 12 and 18 months, respectively. Six-month survival rates were 98% for palbociclib plus letrozole and 98% for palbociclib plus fulvestrant; 93% and 89% of patients treated with palbociclib plus letrozole were alive at 12 and 18 months, respectively. CONCLUSION: Results from this first real-world evaluation of clinical outcomes in Argentina suggest that palbociclib plus letrozole or fulvestrant delivers favorable effectiveness, as measured by progression-free and overall survival rates.

Treatment patterns and clinical outcomes among patients receiving palbociclib in combination with an aromatase inhibitor or fulvestrant for HR+/HER2-negative advanced/metastatic breast cancer in real-world settings in the US: Results from the IRIS study.

PURPOSE: Palbociclib is a selective cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK) 4/6 inhibitor approved for use in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor 2-negative (HR+/HER2-) advanced/metastatic breast cancer (ABC/MBC). Palbociclib has proven benefits in phase III placebo-controlled studies; however, real-world outcome data are lacking. The Ibrance Real World Insights (IRIS) study evaluated palbociclib use in patients with HR+/HER2- ABC/MBC in the real-world setting in the US, Argentina, and Germany. Here we describe results for the US patient subgroup. PATIENTS AND METHODS: IRIS was a retrospective medical chart review study of patients with confirmed HR+/HER2- ABC/MBC who received palbociclib with either an aromatase inhibitor (AI) as initial endocrine-based therapy in postmenopausal women or fulvestrant-based therapy in women with disease progression following endocrine therapy. Physicians extracted data from patient medical records for ≤16 sequential patients each. Outcomes included progression-free and survival rates. RESULTS: Records were extracted for 652 patients: 360 (55.2%) treated with palbociclib + AI and 292 (44.8%) treated with palbociclib + fulvestrant. The 12-month progression-free rate was 84.1% for patients treated with palbociclib + AI and 79.8% for those treated with palbociclib + fulvestrant; 12-month survival rates were 95.1% for palbociclib + AI and 87.9% for palbociclib + fulvestrant. CONCLUSION: In this first real-world assessment of clinical outcomes in US patients with HR+/HER- ABC/MBC, treatment with palbociclib in combination with AI or fulvestrant demonstrated favorable effectiveness in terms of progression-free and survival rates. Ongoing studies are needed to deliver mature clinical outcome data beyond 12/24 months in the real-world setting.

Treatment satisfaction in women receiving palbociclib combination therapies for advanced/metastatic breast cancer.

AIM: To understand treatment satisfaction in patients with advanced or metastatic breast cancer receiving palbociclib plus an aromatase inhibitor or palbociclib plus fulvestrant in a real-world setting. PATIENTS & METHODS: We performed an observational, cross-sectional, web-based survey of 604 patients with self-reported hormone receptor-positive (HR+)/HER2-negative (HER2-) ABC/mBC in six countries. RESULTS: Overall, more than 96% of patients reported the benefits of their palbociclib combination therapy met or exceeded their expectations. Patient expectations and satisfaction with therapy did not differ between patients on palbociclib plus letrozole and palbociclib plus fulvestrant, or between patients with visceral and nonvisceral metastases. CONCLUSION: The patients on palbociclib combination therapy reported high satisfaction scores across multiple countries.

Real-world treatment patterns and outcomes of patients with stage IV squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck.

AIM: To understand the treatment patterns and outcomes for stage IV squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck, patients receiving second-line or later drug therapy. MATERIALS & METHODS: Real-world data were collected from 1152 patients in the USA, France, Germany and the UK through a retrospective chart analysis and patient-reported outcomes were collected using validated questionnaires in a subgroup of patients. RESULTS: Forty-four percent of patients had stage IVA/B disease. A total of 77, 19 and 3% of patients had received two, three and four plus lines of active drug treatment. Platinum- and cetuximab-based regimens were common at early treatment lines. Time to progression was short (5.2 months post first line), survival rates low and patient-reported health status poor. CONCLUSION: Novel therapies that could improve clinical and patient-reported outcomes would address a significant unmet need.

Palbociclib plus endocrine therapy in older women with HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer: a pooled analysis of randomised PALOMA clinical studies.

AIM: Because incidence of breast cancer and comorbidities increase with age, it is important to determine treatment benefit in elderly patients. We evaluated outcomes with palbociclib plus endocrine therapy in patients aged ≥65 years. METHODS: Data were pooled from three randomised studies (NCT00721409, NCT01740427 and NCT01942135) of women with HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer (ABC). In PALOMA-1 (open-label) and PALOMA-2 (double-blind, placebo-controlled), treatment-naïve patients received palbociclib plus letrozole or letrozole alone. In PALOMA-3 (double-blind, placebo-controlled), patients with endocrine-resistant disease received palbociclib plus fulvestrant or fulvestrant alone. RESULTS: Among 528 patients treated with palbociclib plus letrozole and 347 treated with palbociclib plus fulvestrant, 218 (41.3%) and 86 (24.8%), respectively, were aged ≥65 years. Versus endocrine therapy alone, median progression-free survival was significantly improved in patients aged 65-74 years (hazard ratio [HR], 0.66; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.45-0.97; P = 0.016) and ≥75 years (HR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.16-0.61; P<0.001) receiving palbociclib plus letrozole and in patients aged 65-74 years (HR, 0.27; 95% CI, 0.16-0.48; P<0.001) receiving palbociclib plus fulvestrant; few patients aged ≥75 years received palbociclib plus fulvestrant (HR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.19-1.8; P = 0.18). Patient-reported functioning and quality of life was maintained. No clinically relevant differences in palbociclib exposure were observed between age groups. Although myelosuppression was more common among patients aged ≥75 years, incidence of grade ≥III myelosuppression was similar across age groups, and febrile neutropenia was uncommon (≤2.4%); no new safety concerns were identified in older patients. CONCLUSIONS: Palbociclib plus endocrine therapy is an effective, well-tolerated treatment for older patients with ABC.

Final results of the large-scale multinational trial PROFILE 1005: efficacy and safety of crizotinib in previously treated patients with advanced/metastatic ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE: Crizotinib is a potent, orally administered tyrosine kinase inhibitor approved for the treatment of anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-positive advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We report final results from PROFILE 1005, the largest clinical trial to date for an ALK inhibitor in ALK-positive NSCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: PROFILE 1005 (NCT00932451) was a multicenter, single-arm phase 2 trial of the efficacy, safety and tolerability of crizotinib (250 mg twice daily; 3 week continuous treatment cycles) in patients with ALK-positive NSCLC after failure of ≥1 lines of systemic treatment for locally advanced/metastatic disease. Patients' tumour ALK status was initially determined by a central laboratory until a protocol amendment permitted enrolment of patients based on locally determined ALK status. Co-primary endpoints were objective response rate (ORR), evaluated using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours V.1.1 and adverse events (AEs). Cancer-specific patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were also assessed using the European Organisation for the Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 and its lung cancer module QLQ-LC13. RESULTS: 1069 patients were enrolled; 1066 received crizotinib. The as-treated population comprised 908 and 158 patients, in whom tumour positive ALK-status was determined centrally (± locally) or locally only, respectively. At baseline, a majority of patients were <65 years (84%), 66% were never smokers and 46% were Asian. Derived investigator-assessed ORR was 54% (95% CI 51 to 57) and 41% (95% CI 33 to 49) in the central-testing and local-testing subgroups, respectively. The most common treatment-related AEs in the overall population (any grade) were vision disorder (58%), nausea (51%), diarrhoea (47%) and vomiting (47%). PRO scores demonstrated clinically meaningful improvement in lung cancer symptoms and global quality of life. CONCLUSION: The efficacy, safety and PRO profiles of crizotinib in this cohort of 1066 patients with ALK-positive NSCLC are consistent with previous reports. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Phase 2 trial (NCT00932451); Results.

Patient-reported pain severity, pain interference and health status in HR+/HER2- advanced/metastatic breast cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Patient-reported pain severity and related impact in advanced/metastatic breast cancer (ABC/MBC) are not well documented. The objective of this study was to assess pain and general health status in hormone receptor-positive (HR+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) ABC/MBC. METHODS: Data were collected in the USA and Europe in a real-world, cross-sectional study. Patients were recruited at oncology practices and completed validated questionnaires; pain severity and interference were assessed using the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) and general health status using the EuroQoL-5D (EQ-5D-3L). Descriptive statistics were generated for the overall cohort, and stratified by type of therapy and sites of metastases. Differences between patient groups were assessed via the Mann-Whitney Wilcoxon test. The relationship between pain scores and general health status was assessed using Kruskal-Wallis tests. RESULTS: Overall, 173 oncologists and 739 patients participated. The majority of patients rated their worst pain, average pain and pain interference as mild (59%, 77% and 70%, respectively). Most patients (>90%) reported no problems or moderate problems for all items of the EQ-5D-3L. Current treatment had no significant associations with pain severity or interference. Patients on chemotherapy reported significantly higher proportions of moderate/extreme levels of anxiety/depression (66.7%) and significantly lower general health status (60.7) compared with those on endocrine therapy (53.1% and 64.4, respectively). Pain severity and interference, all EQ-5D-3L items except self-care and the EQ-5D-3L health utility index were also significantly associated with sites of metastases, with greater impact in patients with visceral and bone metastases than those with bone only or visceral only metastases. Significant associations were observed between pain and health status, with increased pain severity and pain interference associated with worse health utility and general health status. CONCLUSION: There is a clear unmet need for treatments that can reduce pain and preserve health status in patients with HR+/HER2- ABC/MBC.

PALOMA-3: Phase III Trial of Fulvestrant With or Without Palbociclib in Premenopausal and Postmenopausal Women With Hormone Receptor-Positive, Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-Negative Metastatic Breast Cancer That Progressed on Prior Endocrine Therapy-Safety and Efficacy in Asian Patients.

PURPOSE: To assess efficacy and safety of palbociclib plus fulvestrant in Asians with endocrine therapy-resistant metastatic breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The Palbociclib Ongoing Trials in the Management of Breast Cancer 3 (PALOMA-3) trial, a double-blind phase III study, included 521 patients with hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative metastatic breast cancer with disease progression on endocrine therapy. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were assessed on study treatment and at the end of treatment. RESULTS: This preplanned subgroup analysis of the PALOMA-3 study included premenopausal and postmenopausal Asians taking palbociclib plus fulvestrant (n = 71) or placebo plus fulvestrant (n = 31). Palbociclib plus fulvestrant improved progression-free survival (PFS) compared with fulvestrant alone. Median PFS was not reached with palbociclib plus fulvestrant (95% CI, 9.2 months to not reached) but was 5.8 months with placebo plus fulvestrant (95% CI, 3.5 to 9.2 months; hazard ratio, 0.485; 95% CI, 0.270 to 0.869; P = .0065). The most common all-cause grade 3 or 4 adverse events in the palbociclib arm were neutropenia (92%) and leukopenia (29%); febrile neutropenia occurred in 4.1% of patients. Within-patient mean trough concentration comparisons across subgroups indicated similar palbociclib exposure between Asians and non-Asians. Global quality of life was maintained; no statistically significant changes from baseline were observed for patient-reported outcome scores with palbociclib plus fulvestrant. CONCLUSION: This is the first report, to our knowledge, showing that palbociclib plus fulvestrant improves PFS in asian patients. Palbociclib plus fulvestrant was well tolerated in this study.

Systematic review and network meta-analysis comparing palbociclib with chemotherapy agents for the treatment of postmenopausal women with HR-positive and HER2-negative advanced/metastatic breast cancer.

PURPOSE: To compare palbociclib + letrozole and palbociclib + fulvestrant with chemotherapy agents in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive (HR+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) advanced/metastatic breast cancer (ABC/MBC) who had no prior systemic treatment for advanced disease (first line) or whose disease progressed after prior endocrine therapy or chemotherapy (second line). METHODS: A systematic search identified randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published from January 2000 to January 2016 that compared endocrine-based therapies, chemotherapy agents, and/or chemotherapy agents + biological therapies in the first- and second-line treatment of postmenopausal women with HR+/HER2- ABC/MBC. The main outcome of interest was progression-free survival (PFS)/time to progression (TTP). Bayesian network meta-analyses (NMAs) and pairwise meta-analyses were conducted. Heterogeneity and inconsistency were assessed. RESULTS: Sixty RCTs met eligibility criteria and were stratified by line of therapy. In the first line, palbociclib + letrozole showed statistically significant improvements in PFS/TTP versus capecitabine [intermittent: HR 0.28 (95% CrI 0.11-0.72)] and mitoxantrone [HR 0.28 (0.13-0.61)], and trended toward improvements versus paclitaxel [HR 0.59 (0.19-1.96)], docetaxel [HR 0.51 (0.14-2.03)] and other monotherapy or combination agents (HRs ranging from 0.24 to 0.99). In the second line, palbociclib + fulvestrant showed statistically significant improvements in PFS/TTP versus capecitabine [intermittent: HR 0.28 (0.13-0.65)], mitoxantrone [HR 0.26 (0.12-0.53)], and pegylated liposomal doxorubicin [HR 0.19 (0.07-0.50)], and trended toward improvements versus paclitaxel [HR 0.48 (0.16-1.44)], docetaxel [HR 0.71 (0.24-2.13)] and other monotherapy or combination agents (HRs ranging from 0.23-0.89). NMA findings aligned with direct evidence and were robust to sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Palbociclib + letrozole and palbociclib + fulvestrant demonstrate trends in incremental efficacy compared with chemotherapy agents for the first- and second-line treatment of HR +/HER2- ABC/MBC.

Patient-reported Quality of Life and Treatment Satisfaction in Patients With HR+/HER2- Advanced/Metastatic Breast Cancer.

PURPOSE: Globally, around 1.67 million new cases of breast cancer are diagnosed each year, with advanced breast cancer (ABC-Stage III) and metastatic breast cancer (MBC-Stage IV) together accounting for up to 22% of incident cases. Hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HR+/HER2-) breast cancer comprises 66% of ABC/MBC. Understanding disease-specific health-related quality of life and patient satisfaction with treatments currently available for HR+/HER2- ABC/MBC in clinical practice is essential for assessing potential unmet need in this patient population. METHODS: Data on treatment patterns in patients with HR+/HER2- ABC/MBC were collected from oncology practices across the United States and Europe in a cross-sectional study in a clinical practice setting, the Adelphi Real World Advanced Breast Cancer Disease Specific Programme. A subset of patients included in the study completed several self-reported tools, including the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast and the Cancer Therapy Satisfaction Questionnaire. Analyses were conducted using data from the overall cohort and stratified by current treatment, metastatic sites, and number of prior therapy lines. FINDINGS: Overall, 739 patients were recruited by 173 oncologists; 83% of patients had MBC, with the balance having ABC. The majority of patients with MBC had visceral metastases without bone metastases, and similar percentages of the total study population (≈40%) were receiving chemotherapy and endocrine therapy. Patients receiving only endocrine therapy had significantly better cancer-specific quality of life than did those receiving chemotherapy. Endocrine therapy also associated with fewer concerns about side effects and higher treatment satisfaction than chemotherapy. Statistically lower scores, indicating poorer well-being, were observed in patients with both bone and visceral metastases compared with those with either bone-only or visceral-only metastases for all but the Social/Family Well-Being and Functional Well-Being domains of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast. Patients with bone and visceral metastases had significantly greater concerns about treatment side effects than those with metastases at other sites. Receipt of a greater number of prior lines of therapy was associated with poorer well-being scores. There was a significant negative association between number of lines of treatment and treatment expectations. IMPLICATIONS: Findings from this study from clinical practice suggest that treatment outcomes in HR+/HER2- ABC/MBC could be optimized through improved understanding of the impact that components of patient care have on health-related quality of life and treatment satisfaction.

Comparison of palbociclib in combination with letrozole or fulvestrant with endocrine therapies for advanced/metastatic breast cancer: network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Palbociclib is the first cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor approved in the United States for HR+/HER2- advanced/metastatic breast cancer, in combination with letrozole as initial endocrine-based therapy in postmenopausal women or with fulvestrant in women with disease progression following endocrine therapy. We compared progression-free survival (PFS) and discontinuations due to adverse events for palbociclib combinations against other endocrine therapies using a mixed-treatment comparison meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials. METHODS: A systematic literature review identified relevant trials. Separate analyses were conducted for each palbociclib combination using a Bayesian approach. Treatment rankings were established using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA). RESULTS: Sixty-five unique studies met inclusion criteria. Palbociclib plus letrozole had the highest SUCRA value (99.9%) and was associated with significantly longer PFS than all comparators in treatment-naïve patients (hazard ratios [HRs] ranged from 0.41 to 0.58). Palbociclib plus fulvestrant had the second highest SUCRA value (93.9%) and, in previously treated patients, yielded significantly longer PFS than most comparators (HRs ranged from 0.26 to 0.46); the exception was everolimus plus exemestane, with similar PFS (HR, 1.04; 95% credible interval [CrI], 0.58-1.76). Palbociclib plus fulvestrant was associated with significantly lower odds of discontinuation due to adverse events than everolimus plus exemestane (odds ratio, 0.14; 95% CrI, 0.05-0.39). CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that the two palbociclib combinations yielded significantly greater PFS than endocrine therapy in treatment-naïve and previously treated patients with advanced/metastatic breast cancer. Palbociclib plus fulvestrant was associated with significantly less toxicity than everolimus plus exemestane.

Treatment patterns and prognostic indicators of response to therapy among patients with chronic myeloid leukemia in Australia, Canada, and South Korea.

OBJECTIVE: Given the multiple options for treatment of chronic-phase chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) with tyrosine kinase inhibitors, our objective was to understand treatment patterns in routine practice and prognostic indicators of response. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective medical record review of 681 patients with CML in Australia, Canada, and South Korea. Eligible patients had a diagnosis of chronic-phase CML, were Philadelphia chromosome and/or BCR-ABL positive, were aged 18 years or older, and had been treated with first-line imatinib therapy between January 2005 and September 2010. Data on patient demographics, medical history (e.g., comorbidities, Sokal score), and treatment characteristics (e.g., time to initiation, therapy duration) were abstracted. Descriptive analyses were stratified by country and therapy line. Prognostic indicators of response to imatinib were evaluated using multivariable logistic regression, adjusting for country, patient demographics, medical history, treatment characteristics, and side effects. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Hematologic, cytogenetic, and molecular responses at 3, 6, 12, and 18 months following initiation of each therapy line. RESULTS: Patients' average age was 57 years, and 59% were male. Overall, imatinib was initiated approximately 4 months following CML diagnosis. Complete or major molecular response (C/MMR) at 6 months following imatinib initiation was 54% in Australia, 22% in Canada, and 38% in South Korea. At 18 months, over 60% of patients achieved C/MMR. Approximately 30% of patients discontinued imatinib primarily due to intolerance and lack of response. Among patients who received second-line treatment, dasatinib was used more frequently than nilotinib. Multivariable regression results indicated Sokal score was identified as a prognostic indicator of response to imatinib therapy at several time points. LIMITATIONS: There are several limitations to this study. First, we selected a convenience sample of patients and physicians and therefore results may not be representative of the true population of patients with chronic-phase CML. Second, data were entered by the selected physician and could be subject to data entry errors or inaccuracies. Third, limited information was collected from the patient records, and it is possible that we did not capture additional prognostic or confounding factors related to the measured outcomes. Next, because this was an analysis of previously documented data (i.e., retrospective), we were unable to provide a priori definitions of response. Finally, multivariable analyses were limited to imatinib-related outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment patterns and prognostic indicators differed by country. Health care providers, payers, and patients can utilize these results to inform treatment and policies aimed at improving the effectiveness of care for patients with chronic-phase CML.

First-line crizotinib versus chemotherapy in ALK-positive lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy of the ALK inhibitor crizotinib as compared with standard chemotherapy as first-line treatment for advanced ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is unknown. METHODS: We conducted an open-label, phase 3 trial comparing crizotinib with chemotherapy in 343 patients with advanced ALK-positive nonsquamous NSCLC who had received no previous systemic treatment for advanced disease. Patients were randomly assigned to receive oral crizotinib at a dose of 250 mg twice daily or to receive intravenous chemotherapy (pemetrexed, 500 mg per square meter of body-surface area, plus either cisplatin, 75 mg per square meter, or carboplatin, target area under the curve of 5 to 6 mg per milliliter per minute) every 3 weeks for up to six cycles. Crossover to crizotinib treatment after disease progression was permitted for patients receiving chemotherapy. The primary end point was progression-free survival as assessed by independent radiologic review. RESULTS: Progression-free survival was significantly longer with crizotinib than with chemotherapy (median, 10.9 months vs. 7.0 months; hazard ratio for progression or death with crizotinib, 0.45; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.35 to 0.60; P<0.001). Objective response rates were 74% and 45%, respectively (P<0.001). Median overall survival was not reached in either group (hazard ratio for death with crizotinib, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.54 to 1.26; P=0.36); the probability of 1-year survival was 84% with crizotinib and 79% with chemotherapy. The most common adverse events with crizotinib were vision disorders, diarrhea, nausea, and edema, and the most common events with chemotherapy were nausea, fatigue, vomiting, and decreased appetite. As compared with chemotherapy, crizotinib was associated with greater reduction in lung cancer symptoms and greater improvement in quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: Crizotinib was superior to standard first-line pemetrexed-plus-platinum chemotherapy in patients with previously untreated advanced ALK-positive NSCLC. (Funded by Pfizer; PROFILE 1014 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01154140.).

Patient-reported outcomes and quality of life in PROFILE 1007: a randomized trial of crizotinib compared with chemotherapy in previously treated patients with ALK-positive advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

INTRODUCTION: The main objective of the current post hoc analysis was to compare patient-reported outcomes between crizotinib (N = 172) and chemotherapy subgroups (pemetrexed [N = 99] and docetaxel [N = 72]) in previously treated patients with advanced ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer, in PROFILE 1007 study (Pfizer; NCT0093283). METHODS: Patient-reported outcomes were assessed at baseline, day 1 of each cycle, and end of treatment. General health status was measured using the EuroQol-5D visual analog scale and health utility index scores were assessed using the EuroQol-5D descriptive system. Functioning, lung cancer symptoms, and global quality of life (QOL) were assessed using European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 and the QLQ-LC13 lung cancer module. Repeated measures mixed-effects analyses compared overall scores and change from baseline scores, controlling for baseline scores. RESULTS: The overall mean EQ-5D health utility index scores (95% CI) on treatment were significantly greater (p < 0.05) for crizotinib (0.82 [0.79-0.85]) than for chemotherapy (0.73 [0.70-0.77]; 0.74 [0.70-0.79] for pemetrexed and 0.66 [0.58-0.74] for docetaxel). A significantly greater improvement from baseline was observed with crizotinib versus pemetrexed and versus docetaxel treatment groups for general health status, physical functioning, global QOL, dyspnea, fatigue, and pain. Improvement rates for fatigue, cough, pain, dyspnea, and global QOL were significantly greater on crizotinib compared with pemetrexed and docetaxel, respectively. Worsening rates for diarrhea and constipation were higher with crizotinib. CONCLUSION: The benefits of crizotinib in improving symptoms and QOL are demonstrated regardless of whether the comparator is pemetrexed or docetaxel.