Search

Background: Current clinical guidelines recommend epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutational testing in patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) to predict the benefit of the tyrosine kinase inhibitor erlotinib as first-line treatment. Proteomic (VeriStrat) testing is recommended for patients with EGFR negative or unknown status when erlotinib is being considered. Departure from this clinical algorithm can increase costs and may result in worse outcomes. We examined EGFR and proteomic testing among patients with NSCLC within the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). We explored adherence to guidelines and the impact of test results on treatment decisions and cost of care.Methods: Proteomic and EGFR test results from 2013 to 2015 were merged with VA electronic health records and pharmacy data. Chart reviews were conducted. Cases were categorized based on the appropriateness of testing and treatment.Results: Of the 69 patients with NSCLC who underwent proteomic testing, 33 (48%) were EGFR-negative and 36 (52%) did not have documented EGFR status. We analyzed 138 clinical decisions surrounding EGFR/proteomic testing and erlotinib treatment. Most decisions (105, or 76%) were concordant with clinical practice guidelines. However, for 24 (17%) decisions documentation of testing or justification of treatment was inadequate, and 9 (7%) decisions represented clear departures from guidelines.Conclusion: EGFR testing, the least expensive clinical intervention analyzed in this study, was significantly underutilized or undocumented. The records of more than half of the patients lacked information on EGFR status. Our analysis illustrated several clinical scenarios where the timing of proteomic testing and erlotinib diverged from the recommended algorithm, resulting in excessive costs of care with no documented improvements in health outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Src pathway in activated in about one-third of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) tumors. Dasatinib has Src-inhibitor activity. We examined the activity of dasatinib in 37 patients with advanced, previously treated NSCLC. Among the 29 patients who underwent pre-treatment biopsy for RNA biomarker analysis, 25 were treated with dasatinib 70 mg twice daily. There were no responses. Five patients discontinued treatment due to toxicity. Three patients had minor biopsy-related pneumothoraces. Given the lack of responses, no biomarkers were analyzed. Dasatinib 70 mg twice daily does not have activity nor is it well tolerated in unselected patients with advanced stage, previously treated NSCLC. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

BACKGROUND Adjuvant chemotherapy after surgical resection improves outcomes for patients with early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). To the authors' knowledge, there are no published prospective trials to date of adjuvant chemotherapy after surgical resection administered exclusively in older patients. In the current study, the authors sought to evaluate the efficacy of adjuvant chemotherapy in older patients in a Veterans Health Administration cohort. METHODS Patients who underwent surgical resection for American Joint Committee on Cancer stages IB to III NSCLC between 2001 and 2011 were analyzed. Data regarding patient demographics and comorbidities, tumor characteristics, and primary treatment were collected. Patients were divided into 2 groups based on age at diagnosis: those aged <70 years and those aged ≥70 years. The primary exposure was use of adjuvant chemotherapy. A Cox proportional hazards model was used to estimate the significance of patient characteristics. Survival curves were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and group comparisons were performed using the log-rank test. RESULTS The analysis included 7593 patients who underwent surgical resection for stage IB to stage III NSCLC. Among these, 2897 patients (38%) were aged ≥70 years. The percentage of older patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy was approximately one-half that of younger patients who did so (15.3% vs 31.6%; P<.0001). Carboplatin-based doublets were used most often in all patients (64.6%). Both younger patients (hazard ratio, 0.79; 95% confidence interval, 0.72-0.86) and older patients (hazard ratio, 0.81; 95% confidence interval, 0.71-0.92) were found to have a lower risk of death with receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS Older patients derive a similar magnitude of benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy as younger patients and therefore adjuvant chemotherapy should not be withheld based on age alone. Cancer 2015;121:2578-2585. © 2015 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND Despite clinical trials demonstrating improved survival with adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) for patients with American Joint Committee on Cancer stages I to III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), it is unclear whether this survival benefit extends to broader populations. The current study evaluated patterns of AC use and examined the impact of AC on survival. METHODS A retrospective analysis was conducted of patients in the Veterans Affairs Central Cancer Registry diagnosed with stages IB to IIIA NSCLC between 2001 and 2008. Descriptive statistics were used to examine patterns of AC use over an 8-year time period. Cox proportional hazards regression analyses were used to estimate hazards ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) to compare mortality risk among patients treated with and without AC. RESULTS Among 14,306 patients with stages IB to IIIA NSCLC, 4929 underwent surgery and 22% of these received AC. The percentages of patients diagnosed in 2001 through 2003, 2004 through 2005, and 2006 through 2008 receiving AC were 7.0%, 29.8%, and 29.5%, respectively. There was no survival benefit with AC noted for patients diagnosed between 2001 and 2003, but AC was associated with improved survival for the period between 2004 and 2005 (HR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.67-0.91) and 2006 through 2008 (HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.69-0.91). Of those patients receiving AC, 89% received platinum-doublet chemotherapy. Carboplatin remained the most common agent, although cisplatin use reached 43% in the period between 2006 and 2008. The HR for cisplatin relative to carboplatin was 0.96 (95% CI, 0.80-1.15). CONCLUSIONS There was a significant increase in the use of AC between 2001 and 2008 and AC was associated with an improvement in overall survival. Cancer 2014;120:1939-1947. © 2014 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

One year of adjuvant durvalumab following concurrent chemoradiotherapy significantly improves progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for patients with stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, the optimal length of adjuvant therapy has not been determined. We identified patients with stage III NSCLC treated with definitive chemoradiation and adjuvant durvalumab from November 2017 to April 2021 from the United States Veterans Affairs system. Predictors of early durvalumab discontinuation were evaluated with Cox proportional hazards regression. The effect of differing durations of durvalumab treatment (up to 6, 9, and 12 months) on PFS and OS were compared with a marginal structural model and time-dependent Cox modelling. We included 1006 patients with stage III non-small cell lung cancer who received concurrent chemoradiotherapy and at least one dose of adjuvant durvalumab. The median duration of durvalumab treatment was 7 months (interquartile range 2.8–11.5) and 31% completed the intended durvalumab course. The most common reasons for early discontinuation were tumour progression (22%), immune-related adverse events (15%), and non-immune-related toxicity (6.0%), Marginal structural models suggested similar PFS for 9 months versus 12 months of durvalumab treatment and inferior PFS for 6 months versus 12 months. A substantial proportion of patients undergoing adjuvant durvalumab discontinue therapy early due to toxicity, and shorter durvalumab treatment durations may provide similar disease control to 12 months of therapy. Prospective randomised controlled studies are needed to characterise the optimal durvalumab treatment duration in locally advanced NSCLC patients. • Real-world patients have higher durvalumab toxicity than in clinical trials. • Real-world patients receive fewer durvalumab cycles than in clinical trials. • Shorter adjuvant durvalumab durations may be equivalent to the current standard. • Shorter durvalumab durations may decrease cost and improve toxicity. • Prospective study of shorter durvalumab durations is warranted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: A cost-effectiveness analysis comparing comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) of 10 oncogenes, targeted gene panel testing (TGPT) of 4 oncogenes, and no tumor profiling over the lifetime for patients with metastatic lung adenocarcinoma from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services' perspective was conducted.Methods: A decision analytic model used 10 000 hypothetical Medicare beneficiaries with metastatic lung adenocarcinoma to simulate outcomes associated with CGP (ALK, BRAF, EGFR, ERBB2, MET, NTRK1, NTRK2, NTRK3, RET, ROS1), TGPT (ALK, BRAF, EGFR, ROS1), and no tumor profiling (no genes tested). First-line targeted cancer-directed therapies were assigned if actionable gene variants were detected; otherwise, nontargeted cancer-directed therapies were assigned. Model inputs were derived from randomized trials (progression-free survival, adverse events), the Veterans Health Administration and Medicare (drug costs), published studies (nondrug cancer-related management costs, health state utilities), and published databases (actionable variant prevalences). Costs (2019 US$) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were discounted at 3% per year. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses used 1000 Monte Carlo simulations.Results: No tumor profiling was the least costly/person ($122 613 vs $184 063 for TGPT and $188 425 for CGP) and yielded the least QALYs/person (0.53 vs 0.73 for TGPT and 0.74 for CGP). The costs per QALY gained and corresponding 95% confidence interval were $310 735 ($278 323-$347 952) for TGPT vs no tumor profiling and $445 545 ($322 297-$572 084) for CGP vs TGPT. All probabilistic sensitivity analysis simulations for both comparisons surpassed the willingness-to-pay threshold ($150 000 per QALY gained).Conclusion: Compared with no tumor profiling in patients with metastatic lung adenocarcinoma, tumor profiling (TGPT, CGP) improves quality-adjusted survival but is not cost-effective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]