Differences in real-world (RW) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treatment patterns among people living with HIV/AIDS (PLWHA) compared to those without HIV/AIDS (PWoHA).

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 7070-7070
Author(s):  
Andrew J. Klink ◽  
Angelica Falkenstein ◽  
Ajeet Gajra

7070 Background: NSCLC is the most common non-AIDS-defining cancer in PLWHA with an estimated prevalence 2-5 times that of PWoHA. Guidelines now support treatment of NSCLC among PLWHA to follow those for PWoHA. However, PLWHA have been often excluded from cancer clinical trials that test novel agents including immunotherapy (IO). This study aimed to assess differences in systemic therapy patterns for advanced NSCLC among PLWHA and PWoHA in the RW. Methods: Adult patients with ≥2 claims for NSCLC between 1/1/13-12/31/18 (earliest claim = index date), ≥3 months data pre/post index date, and no evidence of clinical trial participation, pregnancy or other malignancy prior to index date were identified from Symphony Health longitudinal prescription and medical claims. Patient characteristics and treatment patterns were summarized by descriptive statistics and comparisons by HIV status made on univariate analyses. Times to discontinuation were estimated by Kaplan-Meier method and compared by log-rank tests. Results: There were 60,278 NSCLC PWoHA who received systemic therapy. Of 1,344 PLWHA with NSCLC, 239 (18%) received systemic therapy. PLWHA differed significantly from PWoHA: median age at diagnosis (58 v 68 years), male preponderance (66% v 47%), payer mix (Medicare 26% v 42%; Medicaid 21% v 7%), Charlson Comorbidity Score (median 6 v 1), depression (13% v 5%) and liver disease (8% v 2%), respectively (all P< 0.01). Differences in common systemic therapies among PLWHA v PWoHA include use of first line (1L) carboplatin + paclitaxel (28% v 19%; P< 0.01), 1L erlotinib (6% v 11%, P= 0.02) and 2L gemcitabine (10% v 4%, P< 0.01). IOs were used in 1L among 43 (18%) and 7,149 (12%) of PLWHA v PWoHA, respectively ( P< 0.01). RW surrogates for PFS: median duration of 1L therapy was shorter among PLWHA (1.8 v 2.3 months, P< 0.01); median times from 1L initiation to 2L were similar (5.4 v 4.9 months; P= 0.48). Similar proportion of patients continued onto 2L (32% and 30%) and 3L (10% and 9%) among PLWHA and PWoHA, respectively (all P> 0.05). Total time from diagnosis to last follow-up (RW surrogate for overall survival) was 12.8 v 15.5 months in PLWHA and PWoHA ( P= 0 .07). Conclusions: PLWHA are younger at diagnosis of NSCLC and have higher comorbidity. Important differences in regimen selection and IO utilization exist across PLWHA and PWoHA. PLWHA have shorter 1L than PWoHA. Given higher risk and younger age at diagnosis, additional research is needed to establish screening and treatment guidelines for NSCLC in PLWHA.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e19010-e19010
Author(s):  
Angelica Falkenstein ◽  
Andrew J. Klink ◽  
Ajeet Gajra

e19010 Background: Antiretroviral therapy (ART) has brought life expectancy among PLWHA on par with PWoHA, but the disparity in cancer incidence and mortality among PLWHA remains high. Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is 4 times more common in PLWHA and an important cause of mortality. Guidelines now support treatment and management of cancer among PLWHA to follow those for PWoHA, but PLWHA have been excluded from registrational trials of novel agents. This study aimed to assess real-word differences in demographics and systemic therapy patterns for HCC among PLWHA and PWoHA. Methods: Adult patients with ≥2 claims for HCC between 1/1/13-12/31/18 (earliest claim = index date), ≥3 months data pre/post index date, and no evidence of clinical trial participation, pregnancy or other malignancy prior to index date were identified from Symphony Health longitudinal prescription and medical claims. Patient characteristics and treatment patterns were summarized by descriptive statistics, and comparisons across HIV status were made on univariate analyses. Times to discontinuation were estimated by Kaplan-Meier method and compared by log-rank tests. Results: There were 9,904 HCC PWoHA who received systemic therapy. Of 862 PLWHA with HCC, 162 (19%) received systemic therapy. PLWHA differed significantly from PwoHA: median age at diagnosis (60 v 63 years), male preponderance (84% v 71%), geography (Northeast, 41% v 19%; West, 22% v 45%), Charlson Comorbidity Score (median 7 v 1), depression (11% v 6%), chronic pulmonary disease (20% v 12%), liver disease (66% v 52%) and kidney disease (17% v 7%, all P< 0.05), respectively. First line (1L) therapy differed among PLWHA and PWoHA: sorafenib (34% v 25%), everolimus (1% v 4%), and doxorubicin-based regimens (42% v 33%; all P< 0.05). IOs were used in 1L and 2L among 584 (6%) and 223 (15%) of PWoHA and among 8 (5%) and 6 (19%) PLWHA, respectively (all P> 0.05). Median times from 1L start to 2L were numerically shorter among PLWHA and PWoHA (4.7 v 5.5 months; P= 0.77). The minority of patients among PLWHA and PWoHA continued onto 2L (20% and 15%, P> 0.05) and 3L (7% and 3%, P< 0.01), respectively. Conclusions: HCC is diagnosed at younger age among PLWHA v PWoHA. Important differences in comorbid disease burden in addition to HIV can impact clinical decision making in PLWHA. Future real-world research is needed to understand disparities in outcomes of PLWHA and develop guidelines specific to this group.


Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 4234-4234 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aaron Galaznik ◽  
Nate Way

Abstract Introduction: Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) and follicular lymphoma (FL) are hematologic malignancies with poor prognosis for patients who do not respond well to therapy. As current treatment options may be suboptimal for many patients, it is important to better understand the current treatment landscape for DLBCL and FL. Here we provide recent real-world evidence on patient characteristics and treatment patterns in relapsed/refractory (R/R) DLBCL and R/R FL across the United Kingdom (UK), France (FRA), and Germany (DE). Methods: Hematologists and oncologists (N=140) from the UK, FRA, or DE retrospectively identified patients diagnosed with R/R DLBCL or R/R FL who received at least two lines of therapy and had radiographically or clinically measurable disease with at least one target lesion per International Working Group criteria for malignant lymphoma. Descriptive statistics examined patient characteristics and treatment patterns in first-line (1L) and second-line (2L) therapy. Results: Mean (SD) age at initial diagnosis was 59.9 (10.9) years for the aggregate DLBCL patient sample (N=272). DLBCL patients were primarily male (69.1%), distributed across the UK (29.0%), FRA (36.8%), and DE (34.2%), and had various Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance statuses at initial diagnosis (0 ECOG 28.7%, 1 ECOG 48.9%, 2 ECOG 14.3%, ≥3 ECOG 5.9%, unknown ECOG 2.2%). Mean (SD) age at initial diagnosis was 61.0 (10.2) years for the aggregate FL patient sample (N=282). FL patients were primarily male (53.9%), distributed across the UK (29.4%), FRA (36.9%), and DE (33.7%), and had various ECOG performance statuses at initial diagnosis (0 ECOG 30.5%, 1 ECOG 50.7%, 2 ECOG 13.5%, ≥3 ECOG 4.2%, unknown ECOG 1.1%). DLCBL and FL patient characteristics by country are presented in Table 1. DLCBL patients in 1L and 2L received combination regimens (93.8% and 82.7%, respectively) or monotherapy regimens (6.2% and 17.3%, respectively). DLCBL patients in 1L received treatment largely consistent with current guidelines, consisting mainly of systemic therapy only (86.8%) and treatment with rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin hydrochloride, vincristine, and prednisolone (R-CHOP, 68.0%). DLCBL patients in 2L completed multiple therapy cycles (median 3 cycles) and were treated with systemic therapy only (79.4%), systemic therapy and radiation (4.0%), systemic therapy and stem cell transplantation (SCT, 16.2%), or systemic therapy, radiation, and SCT (0.4%). The most common 2L DLCBL regimens were: rituximab, dexamethasone, high-dose cytosine arabinoside, and cisplatin (R-DHAP, 19.5%); bendamustine plus rituximab (12.9%); rituximab, dexamethasone, cytarabine, and oxaliplatin (R-DHAX, 12.5%). FL patients in 1L and 2L received combination regimens (86.5% and 78.4%, respectively) or monotherapy regimens (13.5% and 21.6%, respectively). FL patients in 1L received treatment largely consistent with current guidelines, consisting mainly of systemic therapy only (90.8%) and treatment with R-CHOP (35.1%). FL patients in 2L completed multiple therapy cycles (median 4 cycles) and were treated with systemic therapy only (90.1%), systemic therapy and radiation (2.1%), systemic therapy and SCT (6.0%), or systemic therapy, radiation, and SCT (1.8%). The most common 2L FL regimens were: bendamustine plus rituximab (33.3%); R-CHOP (9.6%); R-DHAP (8.5%). DLCBL and FL 2L treatment patterns by country are presented in Table 2. Conclusion/Summary: Given the rapid evolution of therapies used to treat FL and DLBCL, these findings fill a crucial data gap in real-world evidence on patient characteristics and treatment patterns in R/R DLCBL and R/R FL in the UK, FRA, and DE. There is an unmet need in DLBCL and FL. As novel treatments for patients with DLBCL and FL are currently in development, it is important to better understand the patients being treated for these conditions and the current treatment landscape. Disclosures Galaznik: Takeda Pharmaceuticals International Co.: Employment. Way:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Kantar Health: Employment.


2020 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. 251581632091399
Author(s):  
David Kudrow ◽  
Sagar Munjal ◽  
Leah Bensimon ◽  
Tasneem Lokhandwala ◽  
Binglin Yue ◽  
...  

Objective: To describe patient characteristics, treatment patterns, and health care costs among patients diagnosed with major headache disorders overall and by type (tension-type headache [TTH], migraine, cluster headache [CH], or >1 primary headache type), and secondarily to evaluate drug treatment patterns among triptan initiators with a major headache diagnosis. Methods: Using US claims data from January 2012 through December 2017, we identified adults with evidence of a major headache disorder: TTH, migraine, or CH; the first diagnosis date was deemed the index date. To evaluate triptan use specifically, patients who initiated triptans were identified; the first triptan claim date was deemed the index date. Patient characteristics, treatment patterns (concomitant treatments, adherence, number of fills), and annual health care costs data were obtained. Results: Of the 418,779 patients diagnosed with major headache disorders, the following 4 cohorts were created: TTH (8%), migraine (87%), CH (1%), and >1 primary headache type (4%). The majority used analgesic (54–73%) and psychotropic (57–81%) drugs, primarily opioids (36–53%). Headache-related costs accounted for one-fifth of all-cause costs. Of the 229,946 patients who initiated triptans, the following 7 study cohorts were analyzed: sumatriptan (68%), rizatriptan (21%), eletriptan (5%), zolmitriptan (3%), naratriptan (2%), frovatriptan (1%), and almotriptan (<1%). The major concomitant analgesic medication classes were opioids (41%) and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (34%). Conclusion: The primary headache disorder treatment paradigm is complex, with significant variability. Predominant concomitant use of opioids and switching to opioids is of concern, necessitating solutions to minimize opioid use. Switching to non-oral/fast-acting or targeted preventive therapies should be considered.


2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (8_suppl) ◽  
pp. 139-139
Author(s):  
Ying Zheng ◽  
Shivani Pandya ◽  
Ting Yu ◽  
Mairead Kearney ◽  
Sulena Shrestha ◽  
...  

139 Background: MCC is a rare and aggressive skin cancer with annual incidence of 2,500 in the U.S. Checkpoint inhibitors (CPIs) demonstrated durable disease response historically not seen with chemotherapy among MCC patients in clinical trials. Avelumab, a PD-L1 antibody, became the first and only approved treatment for metastatic MCC by the U.S. FDA in March 2017. This study evaluated emerging treatment patterns among MCC patients using the US Veterans Health Administration (VHA) database. Methods: This retrospective study identified newly-diagnosed MCC patients who initiated ≥1 systemic therapy from Oct. 2013 to Jan. 2018 and had continuous enrollment from ≥6 months pre-initial MCC diagnosis date until ≥2 months post-index date with follow-up until the earliest of death, disenrollment, or study end. The index date was defined as the start date of first-line (1L) systemic therapy. A subsequent line of therapy (2L) was defined by the earliest of new therapy addition, regimen switch, or a new/existing regimen after a >60-day gap from the prior cycle end. Duration of 1L therapy was evaluated among patients treated with CPIs, National Cancer Comprehensive Network (NCCN)-recommended chemotherapy (recCTs), and other chemotherapy (oCTs). The median duration of therapy was estimated using the Kaplan Meier method. Results: Of the 120 MCC patients (72% pre-2017) with 1L systemic therapy, 17%, 45%, and 38% were treated with CPIs, recCTs and oCTs, respectively. More than 75% were white men aged ≥65 years with mean baseline Charlson comorbidity index scores ≥5. Carboplatin-etoposide (56%) and cisplatin-etoposide (26%) were the most commonly-used recCTs. The median duration of 1L therapy in patients treated with CPI, recCTs and oCTs was 300, 91, and 21 days, respectively. 2L therapy was initiated in 33% of all 1L patients. Conclusions: Among 1L MCC patients, CPIs treated patients appear to be on treatment longer than both recCTs and oCTs patients. These descriptive findings provide important insights into the emerging real-world treatment patterns amongst MCC patients in the VHA population.


Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 2268-2268
Author(s):  
Joseph Feliciano ◽  
Nate Way ◽  
Gerald Engley ◽  
Nilanjan Ghosh

Abstract Introduction: Treatment of relapsed or refractory classical Hodgkin lymphoma (R/R cHL) in patients considered ineligible for stem cell transplant (SCT) in the United States (US) has evolved since 2011. It is important to understand the current treatment landscape and the outcomes associated with current standards of care as new treatment options have been introduced. This analysis provides recent real-world evidence on patient characteristics, treatment patterns, and outcomes in R/R cHL patients in the US who are initially considered ineligible for SCT and are treated with or without brentuximab vedotin (BV). Methods: Hematologists and oncologists (N=205) from the US retrospectively identified patients diagnosed with R/R cHL who received at least two lines of therapy and received their most recent line of therapy between January 2014 and May 2018. The physicians were responsible for abstracting data and completing response forms for variables of interest. The current analysis focused on patients who were considered ineligible for SCT by their physician: descriptive statistics on patient demographics/clinical characteristics, treatment patterns, and outcomes by line of therapy; bivariate analyses (chi-square) comparing treatment modalities by line of therapy. Results: Physicians retrospectively identified 297 patients that they considered ineligible for SCT. Mean (SD) age at initial cHL diagnosis was 53.0 (18.5), most patients were male (69.4%) and Caucasian (61.3%). The most common cHL subtype at diagnosis was nodular sclerosis HL (40.4%), and patients had either Stage I/II (45.8%) or Stage III/IV (54.2%) cHL at initial diagnosis. Median follow-up time for the cohort included here was 15.96 months from initiation of 1L treatment. The majority of the cohort (N = 297) received systemic therapy alone (84.5%) compared to those who received systemic therapy in combination with radiation therapy (RT) (15.5%) in 1L. 1L systemic regimens included regimens that contained ABVD alone or ABVD in combination with other regimens (69.4%). Of those who used ABVD alone or in combination with another regimen (N = 206), 24.8% used a PET adapted approach and deescalated to AVD (N = 51) and 11% escalated to be BEACOPP (N = 18). Other systemic regimens included AVD (10.1%), BEACOPP (7.4%) and ICE (5.7 %). The majority of patients achieved a complete response (CR) or partial remission (PR) after 1L therapy (41.4%, 38% respectively) while 34.1% (N = 61) failed to achieve remission or progressed while on therapy. The most common systemic regimens in 2L (N = 293) were BV monotherapy or in combination with bendamustine (34.6%), salvage regimens [including ICE, DHAP, ESHAP or gemcitabine based combinations] (33%), re-challenge with a previous 1L regimen (19.5%), and PD-1 inhibitors (10.8%). Very few patients received systemic therapy in combination with RT (6.7%) in 2L.The most common systemic regimens used in 3L (N = 21) for the selected cohort of patients not eligible for SCT were BV monotherapy (28.6%) and PD-1 inhibitors (33.3%). Median (range) number of cycles in 2L and 3L was four (1-18) and two (1-14), respectively. Treatment outcomes were variable for patients in 2L and 3L. In 2L, 27.6% achieved a CR, 25.6% achieved a PR, while 24.2% and 15.8% were refractory or progressed on treatment. There were no CRs reported in 3L (N = 21). 26 patients died in 2L and 3L combined. Conclusion/Summary: Given the rapid evolution of therapies used to treat R/R cHL, these findings fill a crucial data gap in real-world evidence on patient characteristics, treatment patterns, and outcomes of patients deemed SCT ineligible in the US. Disclosures Feliciano: Seattle Genetics: Employment. Way:Kantar Health: Employment; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Engley:Seattle Genetics: Employment. Ghosh:Juno: Consultancy, Research Funding; SGN: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; PCYC: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy; Spectrum: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics, an Abbvie Company: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Genentech: Research Funding; F. Hoffman-La Roche Ltd: Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Forty seven Inc: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Honoraria, Research Funding.


2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S47-S47
Author(s):  
Misti Paudel ◽  
Girish Prajapati ◽  
Erin K Buysman ◽  
Swarnali Goswami ◽  
Jianbin Mao ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Advances in antiretroviral therapies (ART) have resulted in people living with HIV (PLWH) living longer with higher risk for age-related comorbid conditions and polypharmacy. The aim of this study was to describe trends in comorbidity and comedication burden in PLWH over a 5-year time period. Methods A retrospective analysis of commercial and Medicare Advantage enrollees from the Optum Research Database was conducted. Annual cohorts of PLWH were constructed for each calendar year from 2014-2018 and included adults (≥ 18 years) with ≥ 1 pharmacy claim for an ART or medical claim with an HIV/AIDS diagnosis code (index date=earliest claim date in each calendar year). Continuous health plan enrollment of 12 months prior to (baseline), and 30 days after index date was required for each annual cohort. Comorbidities were identified using ICD-9/10 diagnosis codes from medical claims during baseline period and comedications from pharmacy/medical claims in the 90-days prior to index using National Drug Codes. Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) was computed excluding HIV/AIDS. P-for-trend values accounting for clustering by patients across calendar years were assessed. Results Overall, 14,222 - 20,249 PLWH who were enrolled in commercial (80.7%-65.4%) or Medicare Advantage (19.3%-34.6%) plans were identified in 2014 - 2018 calendar years. Notable trends in demographics of PLWH were observed across years, including increases in mean age (48.9 to 52.4 years), proportion of females (17.2% to 20.3%) and Black race (25.9% to 29.0%), all p-trend&lt; 0.001. Mean CCI scores increased across years (0.72 to 0.93), p-trend&lt; 0.001. Multimorbidity (≥2 non-HIV conditions) and polypharmacy (≥ 5 non-ART medications) prevalence increased over 5 years (Figure 1). Hypertension, hyperlipidemia, neuropsychiatric conditions and Type 2 diabetes mellitus were the most prevalent comorbid conditions with statistically significant upward trends in prevalence across years (Figure 1). Conclusion Multimorbidity and polypharmacy are common in PLWH and have been increasing in prevalence over the past 5 years. Study findings highlight the importance of an individualized approach to care for a diverse PLWH population, in order to minimize drug-drug interactions and adverse events and thereby improve patient outcomes. Figure 1. Comorbidity and Comedication Trends by Index Year among People Living with HIV Disclosures Misti Paudel, PhD, Merck (Other Financial or Material Support, This study was funded by Merck & Co.) Girish Prajapati, M.B.B.S., MPH , Merck & Co., Inc. (Employee, Shareholder) Erin K. Buysman, MS, Merck & Co., Inc. (Other Financial or Material Support, I am an employee of Optum, which was contracted by Merck to complete the research described in this abstract) Jianbin Mao, PhD, Merck & Co. (Employee, Shareholder) Kimberly McNiff, MPH, Merck (Other Financial or Material Support, Merck funded the research project) Princy N. Kumar, MD, Amgen (Consultant)Eli Lilly (Grant/Research Support)Gilead (Consultant, Grant/Research Support, Shareholder)GSK (Consultant, Grant/Research Support, Shareholder)Merck (Consultant, Grant/Research Support, Shareholder, Honoraria)


Author(s):  
Lisa Morkramer ◽  
Maren Geitner ◽  
Daniel Boeger ◽  
Jens Buentzel ◽  
Holger Kaftan ◽  
...  

Abstract Purpose Systemic therapy choice for patients with recurrent and/or metastatic head and neck cancer (R/M HNC) is a challenge. Not much is known about systemic therapies used in daily clinical routine and their outcome. Methods Data of all 283 patients with R/M HNC (89.4% male, median age: 60 years) registered for first-line systemic therapy between 2015 and 2018 in the cancer registries of Thuringia, a federal state in Germany, were included. Patient characteristics and treatment patterns were summarized. Exploratory univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted on select of systemic therapy and prognostic factors for overall survival. Results The most frequent first-line regimens were platinum-based combinations (71.4%), mainly cetuximab + platinum + 5-fluorouracil (32.5%). 32.5, 13.1, 4.9, and 1.1%, respectively, received, a second, third, fourth, and fifth line of systemic therapy. Median follow-up was 5.5 months. Median real-world overall survival was 16.8 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 11.1–22.6]. Alcohol drinking [hazard ratio (HR) 2.375, CI 1.471–3.831; p < 0.001], no second-line therapy (HR 3.425, CI 2.082–5.635, p < 0.001), and application of three agents compared to one agent in first-line therapy (HR 2.798, CI 1.374–5.697; p = 0.005) were associated to decreased overall survival after start of first-line systemic therapy. Termination of second-line treatment because of deterioration of the general condition was the only independent negative prognostic factor (HR 4.202, CI 1.091–16.129; p = 0.037) after start of second-line systemic therapy. Conclusions This study offers useful information, mainly prior to the availability of immunotherapy, on patient characteristics, treatment patterns, and survival in a German real-world population.


Blood ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 138 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 1965-1965
Author(s):  
Shebli Atrash ◽  
Philippe Thompson-Leduc ◽  
Ming-Hui Tai ◽  
Shuchita Kaila ◽  
Kathleen Gray ◽  
...  

Abstract Background and Objective: Daratumumab, a CD38 monoclonal antibody, was approved for the treatment of multiple myeloma (MM) among previously treated patients in 2015, and among newly diagnosed patients in 2018. While the safety and efficacy of daratumumab has been well documented in clinical trials, there is limited real world information on the use and outcomes of daratumumab in patients of different races. This is of particular relevance for potential health care disparities, as evidence suggests that African American patients with MM receive new therapies later in their disease and may experience different outcomes than White patients (Blood Adv. 2019;3:2986-94, Cancer Med. 2017;6: 2876-85). Therefore, we sought to describe patient characteristics, treatment patterns and outcomes of patients with MM who received daratumumab. Results were stratified by race (i.e., Black vs. White). Methods: We conducted a retrospective chart review of patients with MM initiating daratumumab between 1/2018 and 5/2020. De-identified data were retrieved from two U.S. clinical sites, Levine Cancer Institute (Atrium Health) and Weill Cornell Medicine. Patients were included if they had a confirmed diagnosis of MM and were at least 18 years old at the time of daratumumab initiation (index date). Patients who accessed daratumumab through interventional clinical trials were excluded. Patients were followed from the index date until death, loss to follow-up, or date of chart abstraction, whichever occurred first. Patient characteristics included age, sex, body mass index, MM stage at diagnosis, cytogenetic profile as of the index date, and number of prior regimens. Treatment patterns included type and duration of daratumumab-based regimen. Treatment outcomes included treatment response (as per physician notes and guided by the International Myeloma Working Group consensus criteria) and time to next line of therapy (TTNT; the time between the index date and the initiation of the following line of therapy, censoring at the end of follow-up). All analyses were descriptive and stratified by race. Results: A total of 252 patient charts were extracted: 89 Black (35.3%) and 163 White (64.7%). Black patients were, on average, younger at diagnosis (61.7 years old vs. 67.0) and at the index date (Table 1). The proportion of females was similar across both races (Black: 44.9%, White: 46.6%), and mean body mass index was slightly higher in Black patients (28.7 vs. 26.8). Black patients had longer time between initial MM diagnosis and initiation of daratumumab (43.2 vs. 34.1 months). MM stage at diagnosis, cytogenetic profile at index, and prior regimens were similar between White and Black patients (Table 1). While unknown cytogenetics were most common for both White (45.4%) and Black (59.6%) patients, White patients (20.2%) were twice as likely as Blacks (9.0%) to have high-risk cytogenetics. Black patients received more lines of treatment prior to the initiation of daratumumab (mean 2.9 vs. 2.3), with 55.1% of Black patients receiving 3 or more prior lines. The most common regimen was daratumumab with pomalidomide and dexamethasone (DPd) for both races (Table 1), with use of DPd being particularly common (51.7%) in Black patients. Duration of treatment with daratumumab was similar across races (Table 1). Treatment response was similar across races: among patients initiating daratumumab in first, second and third line or after, respectively, overall response rate was 100.0%, 90.9% and 67.6% for Black patients and 100.0%, 82.9% and 65.4% for White patients. Among patients initiating daratumumab in third line or after, median TTNT was 12.3 months among Black patients and 10.4 months among White patients. Conclusions: Black and White patients had similar overall response rate and comparable TTNT. However, Black patients initiated daratumumab later in their treatment, with more than half of Black patients initiating daratumumab in fourth or later line of therapy, and a lower percentage of Black patients had high-risk cytogenetics, suggesting a potential discrepancy in access to new therapies for MM. These findings were observed in a relatively modest sample size, and therefore interpretation warrants caution. Future studies should investigate whether such a discrepancy in treatment access exists, potential reasons for this discrepancy, and strategies to mitigate the effect of race on access to new therapies in MM. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Atrash: GSK: Research Funding; AMGEN: Research Funding; Jansen: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Thompson-Leduc: Biogen: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Shire/Takeda: Consultancy; Regeneron: Consultancy; Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC: Consultancy; BioMerieux: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy; BioFire Diagnostics: Consultancy. Tai: Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC: Current Employment. Kaila: Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC: Current Employment. Gray: Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC: Current Employment, Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company. Ghelerter: Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC: Consultancy; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy; Regeneron: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy. Lafeuille: Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC: Consultancy; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy. Lefebvre: Regeneron: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Otsuka: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC: Consultancy; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy. Rossi: Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.


Blood ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 138 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 4657-4657
Author(s):  
Kristin M. Zimmerman Savill ◽  
Ajeet Gajra ◽  
Kwanza Price ◽  
Jonathan K. Kish ◽  
Cherrishe Brown-Bickerstaff ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction: Myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) comprise a group of clonal hematopoietic disorders characterized by ineffective hematopoiesis, cytopenias, dysplasia in ≥ 1 cell line, cytogenetic and molecular abnormalities, and variable risk of progression to acute myeloid leukemia. Treatment goals for MDS classified as lower-risk (LR-MDS) include transfusion independence, improvement in hemoglobin (Hb) levels, and maintenance of or improvement in quality of life. Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) are the first-line (1L) treatment for anemia in most patients with LR-MDS lacking del(5q), but a proportion of patients do not respond to ESA treatment, or experience progression of anemia despite ESA treatment. The objective of this real-world analysis was to describe patient characteristics, treatment patterns (including ESA use), and outcomes in patients with LR-MDS. Methods: A retrospective, observational, US multisite, cohort study was conducted among adult patients initially diagnosed with LR-MDS between January 1, 2017 and June 25, 2020. Eligible patients had ≥ 1 year of follow-up after diagnosis (unless the patient died during this time) and did not receive luspatercept or any MDS treatment as part of a randomized, controlled trial. Community oncologists abstracted data from medical records, and descriptive statistics were used to summarize patient characteristics, treatment patterns, and outcomes. Data presented are from an interim analysis of an ongoing study; the last date of data collection for this analysis was July 6, 2021. Results: Among 125 eligible patients with LR-MDS, median follow-up time was 16 months, and 83% of patients were still alive at the time of data collection. In the 8 weeks prior to diagnosis, 54% of patients did not receive any red blood cell (RBC) or platelet transfusions, while 42% and 4% had low or moderate transfusion burden, respectively. Overall, 75% of patients were negative for del(5q), and 80% of patients were negative for ring sideroblasts (RS). At diagnosis of LR-MDS, serum erythropoietin levels were &lt; 200 U/L in 49% of patients, ≥ 200 U/L in 25%, and unknown in 26%. In terms of disease management, 35% of patients did not receive any systemic therapy or transfusions, 14% received RBC and/or platelet transfusions, but no systemic therapy for MDS, and 50% were reported to have received ≤ 2 lines of systemic therapy following LR-MDS diagnosis (Table). Of the 42% of patients who received an ESA, 70% received an ESA for MDS as a single agent (SA) only, 15% as combination therapy only, and 8% as both SA and combination therapy. A further 8% received SA ESA followed by a non-ESA-based regimen. Among 45 patients who received SA ESA as 1L treatment, 18% went on to receive a hypomethylating agent (HMA) or immunomodulatory imide drug as an SA, or ESA combined with HMA or a granulocyte or granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF/GM-CSF) in a subsequent line. Among patients who received an ESA, 72% were still on ESA-based therapy at the time of data collection. Abstracting physicians reported that 17% of patients who received an ESA failed ESA treatment. Among these patients, physicians' determination of ESA failure was based on the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines/International Working Group 2006 response criteria for 78% of patients, and on physicians' own clinical judgement for 22%. At data collection, ESA was still being administered to 22% of patients considered to have failed ESA treatment. Finally, 34% of those who received an ESA also received RBC transfusion(s) during ESA-based treatment and therefore were not transfusion independent for the entire duration of ESA-based treatment (Table). Conclusions: Results from this real-world cohort study indicate that over a third of patients with LR-MDS have been managed using watchful waiting only, with no systemic treatment or transfusions received; among those patients who received treatment, most received an ESA. Nearly one-fifth of patients in this study treated with an ESA were considered to have failed ESA treatment by abstracting physicians, though this proportion is likely to be higher with extended follow-up; 2 of 9 patients who failed ESA treatment were still receiving an ESA. Further research including longer follow-up is warranted to understand how patients with LR-MDS respond to different treatment regimens. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Zimmerman Savill: Cardinal Health: Current Employment; Roche/Genentech: Ended employment in the past 24 months. Gajra: Cardinal Health: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Price: Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Kish: Cardinal Health: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Research Funding. Brown-Bickerstaff: Cardinal Health: Current Employment. Falkenstein: Cardinal Health: Current Employment. Miller: Cardinal Health: Current Employment. Laney: Cardinal Health: Current Employment. Mukherjee: Acceleron: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Research/Independent Contractor, Research Funding; McGraw Hill: Honoraria, Other: Editor of Hematology Oncology Board Review (ongoing); Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Research/Independent Contractor, Research Funding; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Genentech: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AAMDS in Joint Partnership with Cleveland Clinic Taussig Cancer Institute: Honoraria; Eusa Pharma: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Teaching and Speaking; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb Co.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BioPharm: Consultancy; Partnership for Health Analytic Research: Honoraria; Blueprint Medicines: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.


2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 286-286
Author(s):  
Saby George ◽  
Jillian Faccone ◽  
Stephen Huo ◽  
Ying Zhang ◽  
Brian Stwalley ◽  
...  

286 Background: RCC accounts for ~80%‒90% of all kidney cancers worldwide. The mRCC treatment landscape is rapidly changing with the approval of new therapies; data describing real-world (RW) treatment patterns and sequencing are limited. This study investigates the characteristics, treatment patterns, and sequencing for mRCC patients in the RW (December 2015‒May 2020) and post-dual immuno-oncology therapy (IO-IO) approval in the United States (April 2018‒May 2020). Methods: Adults diagnosed with mRCC between December 2015 and May 2020 were selected from the Flatiron electronic medical record database for this retrospective study. The study cohort was required to have ≥ 1 month of medical data from the initial mRCC diagnosis date (index date). We used descriptive statistics to analyze baseline patient characteristics, treatment patterns, and sequencing. Results: Of 3,524 patients with mRCC (overall cohort, December 2015–May 2020), most were male (68.5%) and had clear cell histology (68.2%). The median age at metastatic diagnosis was 68 years (range, 23–85) and the median follow-up from index date was 328 days. Based on IMDC risk score, 75.8% of patients were categorized as intermediate/poor risk and 23.2% as favorable risk (1% missing). Systemic therapy for RCC was initiated in 79.1% (N = 2788) of patients. The most common treatments for first-line (1L) therapy were tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) monotherapy (mono; 56.4%), IO-IO (19.1%), IO-TKI (9.5%), IO mono (6.9%), and others (8.1%). Second-line (2L) therapy was received by 1303 patients; treatment sequences are presented in the table below. Among patients who received IO-based therapy in the 1L (N = 990), 11% were retreated with IO on any subsequent line. When stratified by clear cell and non-clear cell histology, similar treatment patterns and sequences were observed. Among patients who initiated 1L treatment post-April 2018 (N = 1395), the most common treatments for 1L therapy were IO-IO (36.9%) and TKI mono (32.7%). Among patients who received 2L treatment after initiating 1L post-April 2018 (N = 486), TKI mono followed by IO mono, and IO-IO followed by TKI mono were the most prescribed sequences (Table). Conclusions: Following approval of IO-based therapies for 1L, RW treatment patterns for mRCC are evolving; IO-IO has become the most common 1L therapy received by all patients initiating treatment for mRCC. [Table: see text]


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document