Biomarker testing patterns and actionability in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (aNSCLC) at OneOncology (OneOnc).

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (28_suppl) ◽  
pp. 287-287
Author(s):  
Ari M. Vanderwalde ◽  
Esprit Ma ◽  
Elaine Yu ◽  
Tania Szado ◽  
Richard Price ◽  
...  

287 Background: Recent approvals of targeted treatments (tx) have improved personalized care in aNSCLC. Biomarker testing is crucial for patients (pts) to receive optimal tx expeditiously. This study examined aNSCLC biomarker testing and tx patterns at OneOnc. Methods: Pts diagnosed with aNSCLC (stage ≥ IIIb) from 1/1/2015 to 5/31/2020, aged ≥ 18 years, and with ≥ 1 visit ≤ 90 days of advanced (Adv) diagnosis (Dx) were retrospectively evaluated using the nationwide Flatiron Health electronic health record derived de-identified database from selected OneOnc sites. Descriptive analyses were conducted to evaluate testing patterns for ALK, BRAF, EGFR, KRAS, PD-L1, and ROS-1 biomarkers and actionable mutation tx pattern. Results: Overall 3,860 aNSCLC pts were included, median age was 69 years, 47% females, 66% non-squamous, 29% squamous, 4% histology NOS, and 23% with ECOG performance status 0-1. Of the 3,152 (82%) pts tested for any biomarker, 64% received next-generation sequencing (NGS) vs. 36% received other biomarker tests only. Testing rates varied by biomarker: EGFR (74%), ALK (72%), ROS-1 (66%), PD-L1 (57%), BRAF (56%), KRAS (54%). Pts who received all 6 biomarker tests increased from 12% (2015), 23% (2016), 40% (2017), 41% (2018), 48% (2019) to 56% (2020). Among the tested pts, the median time from Adv Dx to the first test result was 20 days (d) and from specimen collection after Adv Dx to the first test result was 12 d. Pts tested and treated before test result available declined from 28% (2015) to 16% (2020). Of 1,207 pts with actionable mutations, 390 (32%) received tx before the test result: 35% chemotherapy (chemo) only, 28% chemo + cancer immunotherapy (CIT), and 15% CIT only. After the test result, 26% to 81% of pts received no or other tx not specific to actionable mutations [Table]. Conclusions: Findings from this study demonstrated an increase in aNSCLC biomarker testing at OneOnc over time, while 44% pts in 2020 did not receive testing on all 6 biomarkers. Some pts had tx prior to the test result, but this trend appeared to decline. Further studies are warranted to better understand the reasons for pts receiving tx that were not specific to their actionable mutations.[Table: see text]

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 9016-9016
Author(s):  
Luis G. Paz-Ares ◽  
Tudor-Eliade Ciuleanu ◽  
Jong-Seok Lee ◽  
Laszlo Urban ◽  
Reyes Bernabe Caro ◽  
...  

9016 Background: 1L NIVO + IPI was shown to provide durable long-term overall survival (OS) benefit vs chemo regardless of tumor programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression in patients (pts) with advanced NSCLC in CheckMate 227 Part 1 (NCT02477826); 3-year OS rates were 33% vs 22% in pts with PD-L1 ≥ 1% (HR, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.67–0.93]) and 34% vs 15% in pts with PD-L1 < 1% (HR, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.51–0.81]). Here we report updated results from the study with 4 years’ minimum follow-up. Methods: Adults with previously untreated stage IV / recurrent NSCLC, no known EGFR/ ALK alterations , and ECOG performance status ≤ 1 were enrolled; pts were stratified by squamous (SQ) and non-squamous (NSQ) histology. Pts with PD-L1 ≥ 1% (n = 1189) were randomized 1:1:1 to receive NIVO (3 mg/kg Q2W) + IPI (1 mg/kg Q6W), NIVO alone (240 mg Q2W), or chemo. Pts with PD-L1 < 1% (n = 550) were randomized 1:1:1 to receive NIVO + IPI, NIVO (360 mg Q3W) + chemo, or chemo. OS with NIVO + IPI vs chemo in pts with PD-L1 ≥ 1% was the primary endpoint. Results: With minimum follow-up of 49.4 months (database lock, Feb 18, 2021), pts were at least 2 years beyond the protocol-specified end of immunotherapy treatment. Pts with PD-L1 ≥ 1% continued to show durable benefit with NIVO + IPI vs chemo (HR, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.65–0.90]); 4-year OS rates were 29% (NIVO + IPI), 21% (NIVO), and 18% (chemo). At 4 years, 14% (NIVO + IPI), 10% (NIVO), and 4% (chemo) remained progression free. Among responders, 34%, 30%, and 7% remained in response, respectively. In an exploratory analysis in pts with PD-L1 ≥ 50%, 4-year OS rates were 37% (NIVO + IPI), 26% (NIVO), and 20% (chemo). In pts with PD-L1 < 1%, OS HR for NIVO + IPI vs chemo was 0.64 (95% CI, 0.51–0.81); 4-year OS rates were 24% (NIVO + IPI), 13% (NIVO + chemo) and 10% (chemo). At 4 years, 12% (NIVO + IPI), 7% (NIVO + chemo), and 0% (chemo) remained progression free. Among responders, 31%, 13%, and 0% remained in response, respectively. Among pts who progressed on NIVO + IPI vs chemo, 7% vs 40% (PD-L1 ≥ 1%), and 9% vs 33% (PD-L1 < 1%), received subsequent immunotherapy. Benefit with NIVO + IPI vs chemo was observed for both SQ and NSQ histology (Table). With long-term follow-up, no new safety signals were identified. Conclusions: With 4 years’ minimum follow-up, 1L NIVO + IPI continued to provide durable, long-term OS benefit vs chemo in pts with advanced NSCLC regardless of PD-L1 expression or histology. Clinical trial information: NCT02477826. [Table: see text]


2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 1057-1057
Author(s):  
G. Somlo ◽  
M. Koczywas ◽  
T. Luu ◽  
M. McNamara ◽  
V. Bedell ◽  
...  

1057 Background: Interference with both HER2 and epidermal growth factor (EGFR) dependent pathways may improve therapeutic efficacy of docetaxel (doc) in pts with HER2 overexpressing (+) BC. Methods: Patients (pts) without prior chemotherapy (Rx) exposure for stage IV HER-2 + BC were enrolled. Prior hormonal or adjuvant Rx inclusive of taxane or trastuzumab (tras) were allowed. A left ventricular ejection fraction of > 45% and ECOG performance status of ≥ 2 were required. Pts were to receive doc 75 m2, tras every 3 weeks, and gefitinib (gef) 250 mg daily. BC samples from 12 pts were analyzed by FISH for HER2 and EGFR amplification (amp), and topoisomerase II (topo II) amp or loss. IHC was to be performed to examine p-Src, p-STAT3, Ki67 and survivin expression. Results: The median age was 49 (range, 34–67) and ECOG performance status 0.5 (0–1). The first 9 patients received gef 250 mg daily; 2 pts received dox 75 mg/m2 and developed grade 3 febrile neutropenia (neu), hence, additional pts received doc at 60 mg/m2: 3 more episodes of grade 3 neu were seen. Gef was held due to grade 3 dermatitis (2 pts) and diarrhea (2 pts). Pts received a median of 6 cycles (3–10). Gef schedule then was changed, and was prescribed on days 2–14, only. Three of the next 9 pts experienced grades 3 or 4 neu, and we observed 3 cases of grade 3 gastrointestinal toxicities; pts were able to receive 11 + (range; 5–25+) cycles on this schedule (p<0.04). There were 4 complete (CR)and 6 partial R (23 % CR, 59 % overall R), and 3 pts had stable disease (SD; all R and SD confirmed); 3 pts progressed at 4, 4, and 5 mos, 1 pt was inevaluable. The median time to progression is 12 + mos. Samples from 3 pts revealed topo II amplification and one pt sample showed loss of one topo II allele; none were amplified for EGFR. Outcome will be correlated with IHC defined signal trasduction status and proliferation rates. Conclusions: The combination of doc, tras, and short course of gef is feasible, with encouraging R and SD rates and time to progression. Further exploration of simultaneous blockage of multiple signal transduction pathways is indicated in combination with chemoRx. Supported by NCI CA33572 and by a grant from AstraZeneca. No significant financial relationships to disclose.


2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e20536-e20536 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. M. Navari ◽  
S. E. Gray

e20536 Background: Patients may experience breakthrough nausea and vomiting (BNV) despite adequate prophylaxis for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). BNV presents a difficult situation as treatment of ongoing nausea and vomiting is challenging. We investigated three different drug classes for the treatment of BNV: phenothiazines (prochlorperazine)(Pro), dopamine-serotonin receptor antagonists (metoclopramide) (Meto), and a corticosteroid-thiobenzodiazepine combination (dexamethasone plus atypical antipsychotic olanzapine) (Dex-Olan). Methods: Adult patients, receiving moderately emetogenic chemotherapy and CINV prophylaxis with a 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonist and Dex pre-chemotherapy and Dex post-chemotherapy according to ASCO guidelines, who experienced BNV during the five days post-chemotherapy were randomized to receive Pro, 10 mg IV, and 10 mg, po, bid for three days; Meto, 20 mg IV, and 10 mg, po, bid for 3 days; or Dex, 20 mg IV and Olan, 5 mg, po, bid for three days. All patients also received at least one liter of IV fluids during the IV phase of their treatment. Patients were excluded if they had undergone rescue therapy with any of the study agents. Beginning with the first day of treatment for BNV (day 1) and daily through day 5, patients recorded episodes of vomiting/retching, nausea, other symptoms utilizing the M.D. Anderson Symptom Inventory, and the utilization of any additional rescue therapy. One hundred six patients (median age 61, range 37 - 85, 60 males, ECOG performance status ≤ 2) consented to the protocol and 100 were evaluable. Results: A complete response (no emesis, no additional rescue) for the five days post-initiation of BNV treatment was recorded for 7 of 35 patients (20%) in the Pro regimen, 12 of 33 patients (36%) receiving the Meto regimen, and 21 of 32 patients (66%) receiving the Dex-Olan regimen. There were no Grade III or IV treatment related toxicities. Conclusion: The combination of Dex-Olan was an effective treatment for BNV and was significantly more effective than Pro or Meto alone. No significant financial relationships to disclose.


2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e20587-e20587 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. T. Satheesh ◽  
S. Tejinder ◽  
J. Ankit ◽  
K. V. Sajeevan ◽  
K. C. Lakshmaiah ◽  
...  

e20587 Background: We evaluated the safety and efficacy of a single fixed 6 mg dose of pegfilgrastim (a pegylated version of filgrastim) per cycle of chemotherapy, compared with daily administration of filgrastim, in the provision of neutrophil support. Methods: Patients with carcinoma of breast, less than 65 yrs with ECOG performance status 0 or 1 treated at our institution were randomized to receive either a single 6 mg subcutaneous (s.c.) injection of pegfilgrastim or daily 5 mg/kg s.c. injections of filgrastim, after adjuvant or neoadjuvant chemotherapy with doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide and docetaxel (60 mg/m, 600 mg/m2 and 75 mg/m2, respectively)q3 wk. Duration of grade 4 neutropenia (DSN), incidence of febrile neutropenia (FN), grade 4 neutropenia (SN), IV anti-infective use (IV), hospitalization and adverse events like bony pain (BP), anemia & thrombocytopenias were assessed as safety endpoints. Results: 71 patients were analyzed from Aug 2007 to Dec 2008. The median age in pegfilgrastim group is 58 years and filgrastim is 57 years respectively. Results are shown ( Table ). The mean duration of grade 4 neutropenia (DSN) in cycle 1 was 2.0 and 1.7 days for the pegfilgrastim and filgrastim groups, respectively. Results for all efficacy end points in cycles 2–6 were consistent with the results from cycle 1. A trend towards a lower incidence of febrile neutropenia was noted across all cycles with pegfilgrastim compared with filgrastim (10.7% versus 18.6%, respectively). Conclusions: A single fixed dose of pegfilgrastim administered once per cycle of chemotherapy was comparable to multiple daily injections of filgrastim. [Table: see text] No significant financial relationships to disclose.


2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 63-63 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark T. Fleming ◽  
Dana E. Rathkopf ◽  
Jackie Gibbons ◽  
Amy C. Peterson ◽  
Alison Hannah ◽  
...  

63 Background: Enzalutamide (ENZA), a novel oral androgen receptor (AR) inhibitor, inhibits AR signaling via inhibition of androgen binding to the AR, AR nuclear translocation, and nuclear AR-DNA binding. ENZA demonstrated a survival benefit in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) who had received prior docetaxel (Scher et al, NEJM 2012; 367:1187). A Phase III study in men with progressive chemotherapy-naïve disease (PREVAIL), is ongoing. Docetaxel (DOC) is the current standard first-line chemotherapy for mCRPC. CYP3A4, which plays a role in DOC clearance, is induced by ENZA. Patients (pts) eligible to receive DOC may benefit from continued AR inhibition with ENZA, provided the combination is well tolerated with no unacceptable drug-drug interactions. Methods: This study evaluated the safety and pharmacokinetics (PK) of DOC co-administered with ENZA in men with mCRPC on androgen deprivation therapy. Pts received DOC (75 mg/m2) by 1-h infusion every 3 weeks, with corticosteroids. ENZA (160 mg/d) was started 24 h after the first DOC infusion. Plasma PK samples were collected for 24 h after Cycle (C) 1 and C2 DOC infusions to enable within-subject comparisons of DOC PK ± ENZA. A sample size of 18 pts able to receive ≥ 2 full doses of DOC was specified for PK analyses. Results: As of 21 Sept. 2012, 22 pts have been enrolled, 3 did not complete both C1 and C2; PK and C1 and C2 safety data are currently available from 15 pts reported here. The median age was 65 (range 46-80 yrs); 11 had ECOG performance status 1 (vs 0). Prior primary therapy included surgery (n=2), radiation (n=4) or both (n=5); median PSA was 44.7ng/mL (1.9-585). ANC<1000mm3 was reported in 14 pts (1 febrile neutropenia), other adverse events in ≥4 pts included fatigue (11), dyspnea (6), alopecia (5), peripheral neuropathy (5), anemia (4) and dysgueusia (4). No seizures were reported. Preliminary PK data (n=15) show similar DOC exposure (within 20%) for DOC in combination with ENZA vs. DOC alone. Conclusions: This is the first evaluation of ENZA given in combination with DOC.In mCRPC pts ENZA does not appear to affect tolerability of DOC or have a clinically meaningful impact on DOC PK. Clinical trial information: NCT01565928.


2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e17021-e17021 ◽  
Author(s):  
William Paul Skelton ◽  
Merry Jennifer Markham

e17021 Background: Bevacizumab (BEV) is approved for use in combination with chemotherapy for metastatic/recurrent cervical cancer (CC) based on the GOG 240 trial, which showed increased survival and response rates (RR). However, because of its contraindications, use of BEV is not always feasible or safe. The purpose of this study was to identify the percentage of metastatic/recurrent CC patients at our institution who would have been eligible to receive BEV according to eligibility criteria from GOG 240. Methods: A retrospective study was conducted to identify metastatic CC patients treated at UFHealth between 2006-2016. Chart review was performed to determine their kidney, liver, and bone marrow function, ECOG performance status (PS), presence of an active bleeding condition or nonhealing wound, or inadequately treated venous thromboembolism. Data analysis was performed to determine if the patient would have been eligible to receive BEV based on eligibility criteria from GOG 240. Results: We identified 62 patients with metastatic CC treated at UFHealth between 2006-2016: 1 patient was excluded due to insufficient data. 55 patients (90.2%) would have been ineligible to receive BEV based on the GOG 240 exclusion criteria, and 6 patients (9.8%) would have been eligible. The most common reason for exclusion from BEV use was active bleeding (45 of 61 pts: 73.8%); 42 of the 45 with bleeding (93.3%) had vaginal bleeding. 18 of 61 (29.5%) would be excluded due to poor PS, 17 of 61 (27.9%) due to poor renal function, and 13 of 61 (21.3%) due to an inadequately anticoagulated thromboembolism. Conclusions: Despite the improved survival and higher RR associated with BEV use in combination with chemotherapy, only 9.8% of metastatic CC patients treated at UFHealth over a ten year period would have been eligible to receive BEV. Most patients would have been excluded due to active bleeding, most commonly vaginal bleeding. Though clinical trial data supports the use of BEV with chemo, many patients are simply not eligible due to complications from their disease. Identifying novel therapies for metastatic/recurrent CC patients with improved safety profiles that would allow for their use in this challenging population is critical.


2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS8573-TPS8573 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey D. Bradley ◽  
Makoto Nishio ◽  
Isamu Okamoto ◽  
Michael David Newton ◽  
Leonardo Trani ◽  
...  

TPS8573 Background: Durvalumab, a selective, high-affinity, engineered human IgG1 mAb that blocks PD-L1 binding to PD-1 and CD80, is approved in the US, Japan and several other countries, for the treatment of patients (pts) with unresectable, stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) whose disease has not progressed following concurrent chemoradiotherapy (cCRT). These approvals were based on results from the phase 3 PACIFIC study, in which durvalumab was given 1–42 days after completion of definitive cCRT and significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) vs placebo (median 16.8 vs 5.6 months; HR 0.52, 95% CI 0.42– 0.65; p<0.001) and overall survival (OS) vs placebo (stratified HR 0.68; 99.73% CI 0.47–0.997; p=0.0025). Increasing evidence suggests additional benefit when anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapies are administered alongside cCRT. The PACIFIC 2 study therefore aims to assess whether durvalumab plus cCRT provides additional benefit, in terms of PFS and objective response rate (ORR), compared with cCRT alone. Methods: PACIFIC 2 is a phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter, international study. Approximately 300 pts with unresectable stage III NSCLC will be randomized (2:1) to receive either durvalumab (intravenous 1500 mg) every 4 weeks (q4w) + cCRT, or placebo q4w + cCRT. Eligible pts must have histologically or cytologically confirmed stage III disease; ECOG performance status 0 or 1; and life expectancy >12 weeks at randomization. Pts who discontinue treatment will be followed for safety and OS. Primary endpoints are PFS and ORR (RECIST v1.1) assessed via blinded independent central review. Secondary endpoints include OS; OS at month 24; complete response (CR) rate; duration of response; disease control rate; time to death/distant metastases; time from randomization to second progression; safety; and symptoms, functioning and global health status. Pts with a CR, partial response or stable disease will continue to receive durvalumab or placebo until clinical or RECIST v1.1-defined disease progression, or until another discontinuation criterion is met. Study enrollment began in March 2018 and recruitment is ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT03519971.


2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 519-519 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marc Peeters ◽  
Tae Won Kim ◽  
Jin Li ◽  
Stefano Cascinu ◽  
Paul Ruff ◽  
...  

519 Background: The phase 3 ASPECCT trial of pts with chemorefractory WT KRAS exon 2 mCRC demonstrated that pmab was noninferior to cmab for overall survival (OS). A previous subgroup analysis of hazard ratios (HRs) suggested that pts who had received prior bev (any line, at any point before study start) in the pmab arm may have had better outcomes vs pts in the cmab arm (Price, 2014). Methods: Pts were randomized 1:1 to receive pmab or cmab. The subset of pts who had received prior bev were analyzed based on the final analysis of ASPECCT. Results: 999 pts were randomized and treated: 499 pmab and 500 cmab. The prior bev subset included 126 pts in the pmab arm (25%) and 132 pts in the cmab arm (26%). Pts in the pmab arm had longer median OS and progression-free survival (PFS) and higher objective response rates (ORR) compared with pts in the cmab arm. Results are shown (table). After adjustment for baseline covariates including ECOG performance status, number of metastatic sites, and baseline LDH, OS HR was 0.65 (95%CI=0.49-0.85) with pmab vs cmab in pts who had received prior bev. Pts in the pmab and cmab arms who did not receive prior bev had similar OS, PFS, and ORR. Post-progression antitumor therapy was similar between the pmab (47%) and cmab arms (52%) in pts who received prior bev. Conclusions: In ASPECCT, pts with WT KRASexon 2 mCRC who received prior bev-containing regimens may have derived greater benefit with pmab versus cmab monotherapy. Clinical trial information: NCT01001377. [Table: see text]


2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS3618-TPS3618 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luis A. Diaz ◽  
Dung T. Le ◽  
Takayuki Yoshino ◽  
Thierry Andre ◽  
Johanna C. Bendell ◽  
...  

TPS3618 Background: About 5% of mCRCs are dMMR, leading to high levels of MSI. CRCs with MSI-H have abundant lymphocyte infiltrates and strong expression of immune checkpoints. In the phase 2 KEYNOTE-016 study, the anti-programmed death 1 (PD-1) antibody pembro provided an ORR of 40% in patients (pts) with progressive dMMR mCRC vs 0% in pts with MMR-proficient mCRC. KEYNOTE-177 (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02563002) is an international, randomized, open-label, phase 3 study designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of pembro vs standard-of-care (SOC) chemotherapy in the first-line setting for dMMR or MSI-H mCRC. Methods: Key eligibility criteria include age ≥ 18 years, locally confirmed dMMR or MSI-H stage IV CRC, measurable disease per RECIST v1.1 by local site assessment, ECOG performance status 0-1, no active autoimmune disease or brain metastases, and no prior therapy for mCRC. Pts are to be randomized 1:1 to receive either pembro 200 mg Q3W or investigator’s choice of SOC chemotherapy, which must be chosen prior to randomization; options include mFOLFOX6 or FOLFIRI alone or in combination with bevacizumab or cetuximab. Treatment is to continue until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, pt/investigator decision, or completion of 35 cycles (pembro only). Response is to be evaluated Q9W per RECIST v1.1 by central imaging vendor review and per RECIST adapted for immunotherapy response patterns. Pts in the SOC arm who have disease progression and meet crossover criteria may be eligible to receive pembro for up to 17 treatment cycles. Eligible pts may continue pembro beyond initial RECIST-defined progression. AEs are to be assessed throughout treatment and for 30 days thereafter (90 days for serious AEs) and graded per NCI CTCAE v4.0. Pts are to be followed for survival Q9W. Primary end point is PFS per RECIST v1.1 by central imaging vendor review. Secondary end points include ORR per RECIST v1.1 by central imaging vendor review, OS, and safety and tolerability. Other end points include DOR and HRQoL. Planned enrollment in KEYNOTE-177 is 270 pts across 21 countries. Clinical trial information: NCT02563002.


2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 9004-9004
Author(s):  
Nicholas J. Robert ◽  
Esmond D. Nwokeji ◽  
Janet L. Espirito ◽  
Liwei Chen ◽  
Mandar Karhade ◽  
...  

9004 Background: Given the importance of molecular testing and targeted therapy for mNSCLC, the MYLUNG (Molecularly Informed Lung Cancer Treatment in a Community Cancer Network) consortium pragmatic study assessed real-world biomarker testing rates and turnaround times (TAT) within The US Oncology Network of over 1,000 providers across the United States. Methods: This was a retrospective observational chart review study of pts with mNSCLC initiating first-line (1L) systemic therapy between 04/01/2018 and 03/31/2020. iKnowMed electronic health records were used to examine timing of biomarker testing: before 1L therapy (cohort 1), after 1L therapy (cohort 2) or no testing (cohort 3). We assessed testing rates for ALK, BRAF, EGFR, ROS1, and PD-L1; use of full next-generation sequencing panel (NGS); time from mNSCLC diagnosis (dx) to 1L therapy; TAT from biomarker orders to results; and time from mNSCLC dx to test results. Results: We identified 3474 adults. Median age was 69 years (range 23-90), 51% female, 74% with adenocarcinoma and 76% with a documented ECOG performance status of 0 or 1. Testing rates are shown in table: 90% of pts had at least one biomarker test and 46% received all 5 biomarker tests. Changes in testing rates from 2018 to 2020 were 51% to 59% for BRAF, 71% to 71% for EGFR, 71% to 70% for ALK, 69% to 67% for ROS1, 82% to 84% for PD-L1, and 42% to 49% for pts tested for all 5 biomarkers. NGS testing increased from 33% to 44% (p<0.0001). The median (interquartile range [IQR]) time from mNSCLC dx to 1L therapy for all pts was 35 (22, 55) days. Median (IQR) TAT from biomarker testing orders to results ranged from 10 (6, 17) to 15 (10, 22) days for the individual biomarkers; and time from mNSCLC dx to biomarker results ranged from 14 (7, 26) to 21 (12, 36) days by biomarker. Conclusions: This real-world study showed that most pts received at least one biomarker test prior to 1L, but <50% received all 5 tests. NGS testing occurred in <50% of pts but increased over the periods examined. Median time from dx to 1L therapy was about 5 weeks and TAT from orders to results about 2 weeks. Analyses by histology and other trends will be reported. These data will be compared to the next phase of the MYLUNG study, which will evaluate contemporary ordering practices and TATs prospectively[Table: see text]


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document