Search

Information on the real-world experience of Canadians diagnosed with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is limited. This study was conducted to report treatment patterns and outcomes of CLL using Ontario administrative data. A retrospective cohort study was conducted in patients diagnosed with CLL between 1 January 2010 and 31 December 2017 identified in the Ontario Cancer Registry (OCR). Data were accessed using the Institute of Clinical Evaluative Sciences (ICES), which collects various population-level health information. In the Ontario Cancer Registry, 2887 CLL patients receiving treatment and diagnosed between 2010-2017 were identified. Fludarabine, cyclophosphamide and rituximab (FCR) chemoimmunotherapy was most frequently used as a first line, but use declined since ibrutinib and obinutuzumab combinations were funded in 2015. In patients treated with frontline FCR, survival at year one was 89% pre-2015 and 96% post-2015; at year four, survival was 73% and 87%, respectively. Survival in patients treated with frontline chlorambucil was 76% pre-2015 and 75% post-2015 in year 1, and 45% and 56% in year 3. Our analysis shows that, as the treatment landscape for CLL has shifted, use of newer and novel agents as a first line or earlier in the relapsed/refractory setting has resulted in improved survival outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Limited evidence for optimal sequencing of systemic therapies in prostate cancer. • In Ontario (between 2010-2018), ARATs were the most common treatment for mCRPC. • After ARAT failure, sequential ARAT or taxane use provide similar survival outcomes. • Data may inform optimal oral and IV therapy sequencing, useful for COVID pandemic. We sought to quantify mCRPC patient treatment patterns and survival across multiple lines of therapy after prior androgen-receptor-axis-targeted therapy (ARAT) failure. Individuals diagnosed with prostate cancer between 2010 and 2018 were identified in the Ontario Cancer Registry (OCR). An algorithm was created to identify patients with mCRPC that was aligned to Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Working Group 3 criteria (PCWG3) and validated with Canadian clinical experts. In the mCRPC setting, treatment patterns were assessed by line of therapy, and survival was calculated from treatment initiation until death or lost to follow-up. 64,484 men were diagnosed withprostate cancer in Ontario between 2010 and 2018with 5,588 men assessed to have mCRPC and 2,970 (53%) of those received first-line systemic treatment. Across the first-, second- and third-line of therapy, ARATs (abiraterone and enzalutamide) were the most used therapies. Survival for mCRPC patients treated with ARATs in first-, second- and third-line were 13.0 (95% CI, 11.6 – 14.5), 11.5 (95% CI, 10.1 – 13.4) and 8.9 (95% CI, 7.4 – 10.2) months, respectively. Survival for mCRPC patients treated with taxanes in first, second- and third-line were 16.7 (95% CI, 14.8 – 18.0), 11.3 (95% CI, 10.1 – 12.5) and 7.8 (95% CI, 6.5 – 10.6) months, respectively. No statistical difference in overall survival was found between taxanes and ARATs. In this analysis of a large retrospective cohort of Canadian men with mCRPC, we found that survival in patients treated with ARATs and taxanes was fairly similar across all lines of therapy. Importantly, this trend was maintained in ARAT-exposed patients, where sequential ARAT and taxanes offered similar survival. These data may help inform optimal sequencing of therapies in mCRPC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]