Dataset Information

Real-World Data Analysis of Second-Line Antiangiogenic Targeted Treatments Following Anti-Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Monoclonal Antibodies and First-Line FOLFOX for Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Evidence is lacking on second-line and later treatments for patients with RAS wild-type colorectal cancer (CRC) who receive first-line anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) antibody therapy. In this study, we explored the real-world treatment sequences, treatment duration, and factors associated with treatment sequences and durations in Japanese patients with CRC.

Methods

This retrospective observational cohort study used a Japanese administrative claims database (April 2008 to July 2021). Patients with confirmed CRC (presumed RAS wild-type) who received first-line FOLFOX (leucovorin + 5-fluorouracil + oxaliplatin) plus anti-EGFR therapy in or after May 2016, followed by second-line irinotecan-based chemotherapy plus an antiangiogenic drug, were included. Treatment durations were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Cox regression analysis was used to identify factors associated with treatment duration.

Results

Analysis populations consisted of 1163 (first-line and second-line) and 645 (third-line) patients. At the start of first-line therapy, 67.8% of patients were male, the mean age was 64 years, 83.4% had left-sided CRC, and 84.3% were prescribed FOLFOX plus panitumumab. For second-line therapy, patients were prescribed bevacizumab (63%), ramucirumab (27%), or aflibercept beta (10%). Median (95% CI) treatment durations from the start of second-line therapy to the end of antitumor drug therapies were similar for bevacizumab (12.5 months [11.2, 14.0]), ramucirumab (12.5 months [11.2, 14.8]), and aflibercept beta (14.0 months [10.4, 17.0]). Treatment duration from second-line was positively associated with first-line treatment duration of 6 months or more, CRC surgery before starting first-line therapy, and liver surgery during first-line therapy, and was negatively associated with use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs before second-line therapy.

Conclusion

Real-world data revealed that all three antiangiogenic drugs were used as second-line therapy after first-line anti-EGFR antibodies and showed similar treatment durations.

SUBMITTER: Satake H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9122877 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Real-World Data Analysis of Second-Line Antiangiogenic Targeted Treatments Following Anti-Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Monoclonal Antibodies and First-Line FOLFOX for Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

Satake Hironaga H Kagawa Yoshinori Y Shinozaki Eiji E Tanizawa Yoshinori Y Jin Long L Cai Zhihong Z Makiyama Akitaka A

Advances in therapy 20220406 6

<h4>Introduction</h4>Evidence is lacking on second-line and later treatments for patients with RAS wild-type colorectal cancer (CRC) who receive first-line anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) antibody therapy. In this study, we explored the real-world treatment sequences, treatment duration, and factors associated with treatment sequences and durations in Japanese patients with CRC.<h4>Methods</h4>This retrospective observational cohort study used a Japanese administrative claims databa ...[more]

PMID: 35384550

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe efficacy of oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy combined with anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) monoclonal antibody (mAb) remains controversial in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). This meta-analysis aims to estimate the effect of adding panitumumab or cetuximab to oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy in RAS wild type mCRC patients for the first-line treatment. The primary tumor location is also considered into this meta-analysis.MethodsRCT studies were identified by a search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane library to October 2017, supplemented by manually retrieving ASCO, ESMO conference abstracts. The pooled hazard ratio (HR) for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), and pooled odds ratios (OR) for the overall response rate (ORR) were calculated by Review Manager 5.3.ResultsThe results indicated that the addition of anti-EGFR mAbs to FOLFOX regimen in RAS wild-type mCRC patients for the first-line treatment resulted in considerable improvements in PFS (HR = 0.70; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.59-0.82; P < .0001), OS (HR = 0.79; 95%CI: 0.67-0.92; P = .003), and ORR (OR = 2.56; 95% CI: 1.77-3.70; P < .00001) compared with chemotherapy alone. However, in RAS/BRAF wild patients, no significant differences were observed when anti-EGFR mAb was added to FLOX or XELOX regimen compared with chemotherapy alone with regard to OS and PFS, whereas FOLFOX+anti-EGFR mAb showed a marked superior OS and PFS (OS, HR = 0.77; 95% CI: 0.61-0.98; P = .03; PFS, HR = 0.68; 95% CI: 0.57-0.82; P < .00001). A meta-analysis including TAILOR and PRIME study suggests that primary tumor location (PTL) predicted a survival benefit when adding the EGFR antibody to FOLFOX regimen in RAS-wild mCRC patients (OS, HR for left-sided: 0.71; 95% CI: 0.59-0.85; P = .0002 and HR for right-sided: 0.90; 95% CI: 0.65-1.25; P = .53). However, the HR for PFS and ORR still suggests a benefit from the addition of anti-EGFR mAb in right-sided mCRC patients.ConclusionSo these results suggest anti-EGFR mAb and oxaliplatin are good partners in the FOLFOX regimen. The addition of EGFR antibody to FOLFOX markedly improved efficacy in RAS-wild patients with left-sided mCRC. In RAS/BRAF-wild patients, the efficacy is similar. For patients with right-sided tumor, a benefit showing a trendency in favor of anti-EGFR mAb can still seen. The molecular characteristics behind the tumor location need to be more explored urgently.

Project description:BackgroundAlthough second-line treatment for pancreatic cancer has been proven to have survival benefit, it is not clear which is the most preferred regimen. This study compared the efficacy and safety of modified FOLFIRINOX (mFOLFIRINOX) and sequential chemotherapy (FOLFIRI/FOLFOX) as a second-line treatment regimen for unresectable pancreatic cancer.MethodThis was a retrospective single-center analysis of all patients who initiated treatment with mFOLFIRINOX or sequential chemotherapy from December 2014 to May 2019 as a second-line treatment for unresectable pancreatic cancer. The sequential chemotherapy group included all patients who initiated sequential chemotherapy. For efficacy analysis, the primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) of all patients, excluding those with locally advanced pancreatic cancer. For safety analysis, we assessed the incidence of grade ≥3 adverse events in all patients.ResultsSeventy-four patients (mFOLFIRINOX group, n = 44; sequential chemotherapy group, n = 30) were included. OS tended to be slightly prolonged in the mFOLFIRINOX group than in the sequential chemotherapy group (median 10.6 [95% confidence interval {CI} 5.9-13.8] vs. 8.5 [95% CI 5.0-12.2] months; hazard ratio 1.40 [95% CI 0.71-2.71]). The objective response rate and disease control rate were 8.1% and 64.9%, respectively, in the mFOLFIRINOX group and 3.8% and 42.3%, respectively, in the sequential chemotherapy group. In safety analysis, the grade ≥3 rates of neutropenia, febrile neutropenia, and anorexia were 40.9%, 6.8%, and 18.2%, respectively, in the mFOLFIRINOX group and 3.3%, 0%, and 3.3%, respectively, in the sequential chemotherapy group.ConclusionsWhereas efficacy tended to be slightly better in the mFOLFIRINOX group than in the sequential chemotherapy group, given the higher incidence of grade ≥3 adverse events with mFOLFIRINOX than with sequential chemotherapy, sequential chemotherapy is a regimen with better risk-benefit balance than mFOLFIRINOX, and can be considered a second-line treatment option for patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer.

Project description:BackgroundIn metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (mPDAC), first line treatment options usually include combination regimens of folinic acid, 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), irinotecan, and oxaliplatin (FOLFIRINOX or mFOLFIRINOX) or gemcitabine based regimens such as in combination with albumin-bound paclitaxel (GEM + nab-PTX). After progression, multiple regimens including NALIRI + 5-FU and folinic acid, FOLFIRINOX, 5-FU-based oxaliplatin doublets (OFF, FOLFOX, or XELOX), or 5-FU-based monotherapy (FL, capecitabine, or S-1) are considered appropriate by major guidelines. This network meta-analysis (NMA) aimed to compare the efficacy of different treatment strategies tested as second-line regimens for patients with mPDAC after first-line gemcitabine-based systemic treatment.MethodsRandomized phase II and III clinical trials (RCTs) were included if they were published or presented in English. Trials of interest compared two active systemic treatments as second-line regimens until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. We performed a Bayesian NMA with published hazard ratios (HRs) and 95%confidence intervals (CIs) to evaluate the comparative effectiveness of different second-line therapies for mPDAC. The main outcomes of interest were overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS), secondary endpoints were grade 3-4 toxicities. We calculated the relative ranking of agents for each outcome as their surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA). A higher SUCRA score meant a higher ranking for efficacy outcomes.ResultsA NMA of 9 treatments was performed for OS (n = 2521 patients enrolled). Compared with 5-FU + folinic acid both irinotecan or NALIRI + fluoropyrimidines had a trend to better OS (HR = 0.76, 95%CI 0.21-2.75 and HR = 0.74, 95%CI 0.31-1.85). Fluoropyrimidines + folinic acid + oxaliplatin were no better than the combination without oxaliplatin. The analysis of treatment ranking showed that the combination of NALIRI + 5-FU + folinic acid was most likely to yield the highest OS results (SUCRA = 0.7). Furthermore, the NMA results indicated that with the highest SUCRA score (SUCRA = 0.91), NALIRI + 5-FU + folinic acid may be the optimal choice for improved PFS amongst all regimens studied.ConclusionsAccording to the NMA results, NALIRI + 5-FU, and folinic acid may represent the best second-line treatment for improved survival outcomes in mPDAC. Further evidence from prospective trials is needed to determine the best treatment option for this group of patients.

Project description:IntroductionRandomised controlled trials have shown that targeted therapies like sunitinib are effective in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Little is known about the current use of these therapies, and their associated costs and effects in daily clinical practice. We estimated the real-world cost-effectiveness of different treatment strategies comprising one or more sequentially administered drugs.MethodsAnalyses were performed using patient-level data from a Dutch population-based registry including patients diagnosed with primary mRCC from January 2008 to December 2010 (i.e., treated between 2008 and 2013). The full disease course of these patients was estimated using a patient-level simulation model based on regression analyses of the registry data. A healthcare sector perspective was adopted; total costs included healthcare costs related to mRCC. Cost-effectiveness was expressed in cost per life-year and cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was conducted to estimate the overall uncertainty surrounding cost-effectiveness.ResultsIn current daily practice, 54% (336/621) of all patients was treated with targeted therapies. Most patients (84%; 282/336) received sunitinib as first-line therapy. Of the patients receiving first-line therapy, 30% (101/336) also received second-line therapy; the majority was treated with everolimus (40%, 40/101) or sorafenib (28%, 28/101). Current treatment practice (including patients not receiving targeted therapy) led to 0.807 QALYs; mean costs were €58,912. This resulted in an additional €105,011 per QALY gained compared to not using targeted therapy at all. Forty-six percent of all patients received no targeted therapy; of these patients, 24% (69/285) was eligible for sunitinib. If these patients were treated with first-line sunitinib, mean QALYs would improve by 0.062-0.076 (where the range reflects the choice of second-line therapy). This improvement is completely driven by the health gain seen amongst patients eligible to receive sunitinib but did not receive it, who gain 0.558-0.684 QALYs from sunitinib. Since additional costs would be €7,072-9,913, incremental costs per QALY gained are €93,107-111,972 compared to current practice.DiscussionHealth can be gained if more treatment-eligible patients receive targeted therapies. Moreover, it will be just as cost-effective to treat these patients with sunitinib as current treatment practice.

Project description:BackgroundWe analyzed real-world practice of second-line treatment in hormone receptor (HR)+ human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER2)- metastatic breast cancer (MBC) following the first-line CDK4/6 inhibitor with letrozole. In addition, we evaluated the relationship between second-line treatment strategies and survival outcome.MethodsUsing the clinical data warehouse, clinical information including MBC diagnosis, treatment and survival outcomes were collected.ResultsIn total, 305 patients were treated with the first-line palbociclib plus letrozole, and we evaluated 166 patients who were treated with second-line treatment. Of the 166 patients, 28.5% were treated with capecitabine (C), followed by exemestane with everolimus (EE) (27.3%) or cytotoxic chemotherapy other than capecitabine (T) (18.8%) and fulvestrant-based treatment or endocrine monotherapy (F) (12.7%). Eighteen patients (10.9%) were enrolled in clinical trials (CT). With regard to treatment strategies, and the median progression-free survival of second-line treatment in a metastatic setting (PFS2) was 7.4 months with C, 5.2 months with EE, 4.8 months with T, 3.6 months with F, and 3.6 months with CT (p = 0.066). In patients with visceral organ disease progression, C (31.3%) or T(31.3%) was the most common second-line treatment followed by EE (21.9%). Most of the 47 patients with bone metastasis alone were treated with EE (38.2%), followed by C (23.4%) and F (21.3%) (p = 0.008). The median overall survival of second-line treatment in a metastatic setting (OS2) was 42.3 months with C, 35.7 months with F, 30.7 months with EE, and 23.1 months with T. The median OS2 for those in CT was not reached (p = 0.064). ER driven BC, disease progression site and PFS2 were associated with OS and OS2 in HR+HER2- MBC (ps < 0.05).ConclusionsWe suggested the second line treatment strategy was important to improve prognosis in patients with HR+/HER2- MBC, especially given the recent standardization of first-line treatment and the many available second-line options.

Project description:IntroductionMetastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (mPDAC) is a common cancer with poor survival outcomes. Although treatment options are limited, real-world treatment patterns and outcomes are not well understood, particularly beyond first-line treatment. This study described real-world treatment patterns and outcomes for mPDAC in the USA.MethodsThis retrospective analysis used electronic health record-derived de-identified data of patients with mPDAC diagnosed between January 1, 2014 and June 30, 2021. Treatments were classified into six groups: (1) standard combination chemotherapy; (2) nonstandard combination chemotherapy; (3) single-agent chemotherapy; (4) targeted therapy; (5) clinical study drugs; and (6) off-label therapies. Analyses were descriptive in nature. Treatment utilization and switching, and time on treatment and time to discontinuation, were described by first-line (1LOT) and second-line (2LOT) treatment groups. Median overall survival (mOS) from 1LOT and 2LOT was stratified by treatment group, and for 1LOT on the basis of whether patients received further treatment.Results1LOT included 6979 patients, 3241 (46%) of whom received further 2LOT. Standard combination chemotherapy was the most common 1LOT (70%) and 2LOT (46%). Nonstandard combination chemotherapy was used more as 2LOT (35%) than 1LOT (11%). First-line time on treatment was generally higher than second-line time on treatment, and time to discontinuation was lower than time on treatment. mOS in days (months) from 1LOT was 271 (8.9), 252 (8.3), 219 (7.2), 170 (5.6), 280 (9.2), and 182 (6.0), and mOS from 2LOT was 202 (6.6), 193 (6.3), 186 (6.1), 193 (6.3), 179 (5.9), and 97 (3.2), for groups 1-6, respectively. Within group 1, mOS from 1LOT was 318 days (10.4 months) for FOLFIRINOX and 241 days (7.9 months) for gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel.ConclusionMost patients with mPDAC received 1LOT in line with clinical practice guidelines, yet mOS remains poor. This study highlights the need for novel therapies to demonstrate improved patient survival compared with therapies in current clinical practice guidelines.

Dataset Information

Real-World Data Analysis of Second-Line Antiangiogenic Targeted Treatments Following Anti-Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Monoclonal Antibodies and First-Line FOLFOX for Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

Introduction

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Real-World Data Analysis of Second-Line Antiangiogenic Targeted Treatments Following Anti-Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Monoclonal Antibodies and First-Line FOLFOX for Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets