Search

The cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor (CDK4/6i) palbociclib is administered orally and cyclically, causing medication adherence challenges. We evaluated components of adherence to palbociclib, its relationship with pharmacokinetics (PK), and drug-induced neutropenia. Patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) receiving palbociclib, delivered in electronic monitors (EM), were randomized 1:1 to an intervention and a control group. The intervention was a 12-month interprofessional medication adherence program (IMAP) along with monthly motivational interviews by a pharmacist. Implementation adherence was compared between groups using generalized estimating equation models, in which covariates were included. Model-based palbociclib PK and neutrophil profiles were simulated under real-life implementation scenarios: (1) optimal, (2) 2 doses omitted and caught up at cycle end. At 6 months, implementation was slightly higher and more stable in the intervention (n = 19) than in the control (n = 19) group, 99.2% and 97.3% (Δ1.95%, 95% CI 1.1−2.9%), respectively. The impact of the intervention was larger in patients diagnosed with MBC for >2 years (Δ3.6%, 95% CI 2.1−5.4%), patients who received >4 cycles before inclusion (Δ3.1%, 95% CI 1.7−4.8%) and patients >65 (Δ2.3%, 95% CI 0.8−3.6%). Simulations showed that 25% of patients had neutropenia grade ≥3 during the next cycle in scenario 1 versus 30% in scenario 2. Education and monitoring of patient CDK4/6i cycle management and adherence along with therapeutic drug monitoring can help clinicians improve prescription and decrease toxicity.

Combined ipilimumab and nivolumab significantly improve outcomes in metastatic melanoma patients but bear an important financial impact on the healthcare system. Here, we analyze the treatment costs, focusing on irAE. We conducted a retrospective analysis of 62 melanoma patients treated with ipilimumab-nivolumab at the Lausanne University Hospital between 1 June 2016 and 31 August 2019. The frequency of irAEs and outcomes were evaluated. All melanoma-specific costs were analyzed from the first ipilimumab-nivolumab dose until the therapy given subsequently or death. A total of 54/62 (87%) patients presented at least one irAE, and 31/62 (50%) presented a grade 3-4 irAE. The majority of patients who had a complete response 12/14 (86%) and 21/28 (75%) of overall responders presented a grade 3-4 toxicity, and there were no responses in patients without toxicity. Toxicity costs represented only 3% of the total expenses per patient. The most significant contributions were medication costs (44%) and disease costs (39%), mainly disease-related hospitalization costs, not toxicity-related. Patients with a complete response had the lowest global median cost per week of follow up (EUR 2425) and patients who had progressive disease (PD), the highest one (EUR 8325). Except for one patient who had a Grade 5 toxicity (EUR 6043/week), we observe that less severe toxicity grades (EUR 9383/week for Grade 1), or even the absence of toxicity (EUR 9922/week), are associated with higher median costs per week (vs. EUR 3266/week for Grade 4 and EUR 2850/week for Grade 3). The cost of toxicities was unexpectedly low compared to the total costs, especially medication costs. Patients with higher toxicity grades had better outcomes and lower total costs due to treatment discontinuation.

To assess the safety and efficacy of ipilimumab plus nivolumab around selective internal radiation therapy (SIRT) in patients with metastatic uveal melanoma (mUM). We present a retrospective, single center study of 32 patients with mUM divided into two groups based on the treatment received between April 2013 and April 2021. The SIRT_IpiNivo cohort was treated with Yttrium-90 microspheres and ipilimumab plus nivolumab before or after the SIRT ( n = 18). The SIRT cohort underwent SIRT but did not receive combined immunotherapy with ipilimumab plus nivolumab ( n = 14). Twelve patients (66.7%) of the SIRT_IpiNivo arm received SIRT as first-line treatment and six patients (33.3%) received ipilimumab plus nivolumab prior to SIRT. In the SIRT group, seven patients (50.0%) received single-agent immunotherapy. One patient treated with combined immunotherapy 68 months after the SIRT was included in this group. At the start of ipilimumab plus nivolumab, 94.4% ( n = 17) presented hepatic metastases and 72.2% ( n = 13) had extra liver disease. Eight patients (44.4%) of the SIRT_IpiNivo group experienced grade 3 or 4 immune related adverse events, mainly colitis and hepatitis. Median overall survival from the diagnosis of metastases was 49.6 months (95% confidence interval (CI); 24.1-not available (NA)) in the SIRT_IpiNivo group compared with 13.6 months (95% CI; 11.5-NA) in the SIRT group (log-rank p -value 0.027). The presence of extra liver metastases at the time of SIRT, largest liver lesion more than 8 cm (M1c) and liver tumor volume negatively impacted the survival. This real-world cohort suggests that a sequential treatment of ipilimumab plus nivolumab and SIRT is a well-tolerated therapeutic approach with promising survival rates.