National Comprehensive Cancer Network Guideline Recommendations of Cancer Drugs With Accelerated Approval.

Importance: Many cancer drugs are approved under the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) accelerated approval pathway based on preliminary evidence. It is unclear how this limited evidence is integrated into the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines, which are common references for clinicians and are used by public and private payers to determine reimbursement for oncology treatments. Objective: To analyze the NCCN guidelines' assessments for cancer drug indications that received FDA accelerated approval compared with cancer drug indications that received FDA regular approval. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study analyzes FDA-approved indications for cancer drugs that were granted accelerated approval from program inception in 1992 to June 30, 2022. For each drug, the FDA-approved labeling was reviewed to identify all indications. All analyses were performed at the drug-indication level. Exposure: The exposure was FDA regulatory status as of October 2022, including regular approval, accelerated approval, accelerated approval converted to regular approval, and withdrawn accelerated approval. Main Outcomes and Measures: The level of evidence and consensus (category 1, 2A, 2B, and 3) and treatment preference (preferred, alternative preferred, other recommended, and useful in certain circumstances) ratings assigned by NCCN committees as of February 2023. Results: A total of 315 oncology indications for 100 drugs were analyzed. These indications included 156 (50%) with regular approval, 60 (38%) with accelerated approval, 78 (49%) with accelerated approval that was converted to regular approval, and 21 (13%) with withdrawn accelerated approvals. Among all indications, 105 (33%) were rated by the NCCN as having category 1 evidence, 185 (59%) with category 2A, 6 (2%) with category 2B, and 2 (1%) with category 3 evidence. Compared with indications with regular approval, those with accelerated approval were less frequently assigned category 1 evidence (47% vs 3%; P < .001) and were less often listed as preferred treatment options (58% vs 40%; P = .008). Among the 21 withdrawn accelerated approval indications, 8 (38%) remained in the NCCN guidelines, with most having level 2A evidence ratings. Conclusions and Relevance: This study found that cancer drug indications with accelerated approval were less likely to be assigned high-level evidence ratings and preferred status in the NCCN guidelines compared with indications with regular approval; most accelerated and regular approval drugs had low-quality evidence ratings but high levels of consensus among oncologists on NCCN committees. Greater clarity on the thresholds and definitions of evidence levels would make the NCCN guidelines more useful to clinicians, patients, and payers.

Mechanisms of Hypercalcemia in Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma and Associated Outcomes: A Retrospective Review.

INTRODUCTION: The etiology of hypercalcemia in non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) has been most often attributed to either elevated serum levels of 1,25-dihydroxycholecalciferol (calcitriol) or parathyroid-related protein (PTHrP). In a single-center retrospective review, we evaluated the incidence of, and outcomes associated with, hypercalcemia in NHL. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The medical records of patients with a histologically confirmed diagnosis of NHL and ≥ 1 episode of hypercalcemia were evaluated for demographic and lymphoma-specific factors, including the response to therapy and overall survival. RESULTS: Fifty-four patients with NHL met the inclusion criteria. Most patients (57.4%) had diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, of which, 70% were the nongerminal center subtype. Approximately one half (42.6%) of the included patients had undergone serologic investigation into the etiology of hypercalcemia; however, only 17 patients (31.5%) had both a serum PTHrP and a calcitriol level properly collected. Of the 17 cases for which both a serum calcitriol and a PTHrP were collected, most (61.1%) were found to have neither an elevation of serum calcitriol nor an elevation of PTHrP. The degree of calcitriol elevation correlated with worse progression-free survival (P = .04) but not overall survival. CONCLUSION: The major mechanism by which NHL patients develop hypercalcemia is not mediated by calcitriol or PTHrP. Hypercalcemia is most prevalent in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma of the nongerminal cell subtype. Patients with calcitriol-mediated hypercalcemia showed a trend toward worse outcomes, suggesting that calcitriol might be a marker of high-grade lymphoma, transformation to such, or a surrogate for more advanced disease.