Treatment patterns of patients with HR+/HER2- metastatic breast cancer receiving CDK4/6 inhibitor-based regimens: a cohort study in the French nationwide healthcare database.

PURPOSE: To assess real-world treatment patterns in patients diagnosed with hormone receptor positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 negative (HER2-) metastatic breast cancer (mBC) who received cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 (CDK4/6) inhibitors in combination with an aromatase inhibitor (AI) or fulvestrant at first line. METHODS: Patient characteristics, treatment history, and outcomes data were extracted from the French 'Système National des Données de Santé' (SNDS) database for patients diagnosed with HR+/HER2- mBC between January 2014 and June 2019 and who received combination therapy with a CDK4/6 inhibitor and endocrine therapy. Kaplan-Meier methodology was used to assess time to next treatment (TTNT) and time to treatment discontinuation (TTTD). RESULTS: The cohort comprised 6061 patients including 4032 patients who received CDK4/6 inhibitors + AIs and 2029 patients who received CDK4/6 inhibitors + fulvestrant. Median follow-up was 13.5 months (IQR 9.5-18.1). The median TTTD of first line treatment with CDK4/6 inhibitors + AIs and CDK4/6 inhibitors + fulvestrant was 17.3 months (95% CI 16.8-17.9) and 9.7 months (95% CI 9.0-10.2), respectively. Chemotherapy was the most common second line therapy. Median TTTD of subsequent treatment lines was progressively shorter following first line treatment with CDK4/6 inhibitors + AIs (2nd line: 4.6 months (95% CI 4.4-4.9) and with CDK4/6 inhibitors + fulvestrant (2nd line: 4.7 months (95% CI 4.3-5.1). TTNT was longer than TTTD across lines of therapy. CONCLUSION: This real-world analysis confirms the effectiveness of CDK4/6 inhibitor-based regimens in French patients and highlights the frequent use of chemotherapy as second line therapy.

Critical Comments by Food and Drug Administration Reviewers on Patient-Reported Outcomes in Food and Drug Administration Regulatory Submissions (2018-2021).

OBJECTIVES: This article examined the inclusion of patient-reported outcome (PRO) data in new drug applications (NDAs) submitted to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and approved from 2018 to 2021. The importance of assessing PROs, which capture patients' perspectives on the disease and treatment experience, has been underscored by many stakeholders, including regulatory authorities. Despite the increasing inclusion of PRO assessments in registration trials, inclusion of language related to PRO results in approved product labeling varies widely. METHODS: This study examined FDA submission packages for NDAs approved by the FDA from 2018 to 2021 to identify critical reviewer comments related to PROs. Comments were identified and categorized by the type of criticism. Reviewers considered both oncology and nononcology indications. RESULTS: Assessment of PROs was included in 66.2% of the 210 submissions reviewed. Critical comments were identified in 45.3% of these applications; comments most commonly related to statistical analysis considerations, fit for purpose, and study design. Other categories of critical comment included data quality, lack of treatment benefit, administrative considerations, and miscellaneous issues. Differences were observed between oncology and nononcology NDAs with regard to the number and type of comments included in each of these categories. The findings highlight the importance of planning statistical analyses, establishing content validity, carefully considering study design, maximizing data quality, and demonstrating treatment benefit, among other issues. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, this study offers insight into the landscape of PRO data included in recently approved NDAs, along with recommendations for improving the quality and reporting of PROs in clinical trials.

Clinical and economic burden of medicare beneficiaries with multiple myeloma and renal impairment: An observational study.

Evidence on real-world clinical and economic outcomes in patients with multiple myeloma (MM) and renal impairment (RI) is limited in the United States. This retrospective study aimed to generate an updated comprehensive assessment of the clinical and economic outcomes of MM patients with RI using the Medicare research identifiable files data with Part D linkage, which might assist in assessing the total clinical and socioeconomic burden of these high-risk and challenging-to-treat patients. Treatment patterns and clinical and economic outcomes in first line (1L) to fourth line (4L) therapy were described in Medicare beneficiaries (2012 to 2018) for MM patients with RI (RI MM cohort). For reference purposes, information on a general cohort of MM patients was generated and reported to highlight the clinical and economic burden of RI. Since the goal was to describe the burden of these patients, this study was not designed as a comparison between the 2 cohorts. Compared with the general MM cohort (n = 13,573), RI MM patients (24.9%) presented high MM-associated comorbidities. In the RI MM cohort, bortezomib-dexamethasone (45.7%), bortezomib-lenalidomide (18.6%), lenalidomide (12.3%), and bortezomib-cyclophosphamide (12.1%) were the most prevalent regimens in 1L; carfilzomib and pomalidomide were mostly received in 3L to 4L; and daratumumab in 4L. Across 1L to 4L, the RI MM cohort presented shorter median real-world progression-free survival (1L: 12.9 and 16.4 months) and overall survival (1L: 31.1 and 46.8 months) and higher all-cause healthcare resource utilization (1L incidence rate of inpatient days: 12.1 and 7.8 per person per year) than the general MM cohort. In the RI MM cohort, the mean all-cause total cost increased from 1L to 4L ($14,549-$18,667 per person per month) and was higher than that of the general MM cohort. RI MM patients presented higher clinical and economic burdens across 1L to 4L than the general MM patients in real-world clinical practice.