Search

Introduction: The global treatment landscape for metastatic urothelial cancer (mUC) is evolving, with the recent approval of several new therapeutics. To enable informed treatment decisions, a need exists to understand both treatment patterns and how physicians determine platinum-based treatment eligibility status. This study investigated physicians' current approaches to first-line (1L) chemotherapy, treatment patterns, and assessment of platinum-based treatment eligibility of patients with mUC in real-world clinical practice., Patients and Methods: Data were derived from the Adelphi mUC Disease Specific Programme™, a large, independent, multinational, cross-sectional survey of physicians and their consulting patients with mUC presenting in a real-world clinical setting, conducted in France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the United Kingdom between November 2020 and April 2021. Physicians completed record forms for their next 8 consecutively consulting patients (≤3 1L, ≤2 second-line, and ≤3 third-line) with a physician-confirmed diagnosis of mUC, reporting data on demographics, clinical characteristics, eligibility for platinum-based chemotherapy, and treatments received., Results: Overall, 232 physicians provided data for 1922 patients. Renal function impairment (72%), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (59%), and age (38%) were the most commonly reported criteria physicians used to determine eligibility for platinum-based chemotherapy. At 1L, 82% of patients received platinum-based chemotherapy (cisplatin, 51%; carboplatin, 31%) and 10% received immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy. At second-line, 12% received platinum-based chemotherapy, 63% ICI therapy, and 21% non-platinum-based chemotherapy. At third-line, 4% received platinum-based chemotherapy, 41% best supportive care only, and 36% other non-platinum-based chemotherapy., Conclusions: The results of this real-world study indicate that in accordance with European guidelines, the majority of patients with mUC received standard-of-care 1L platinum-based chemotherapy and use of ICIs was limited. Future research should assess how physicians' perceptions toward determining platinum eligibility status evolve with newer guideline recommendations and the introduction of new therapy options for mUC., Competing Interests: Disclosure M Kirker and J Chang are employees of Pfizer and have stocks/shares in Pfizer. M Kearney is an employee of the healthcare business of Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany, and has stock/shares in Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany, Novartis Pharma, and UCB Biopharma SPRL. N Milloy, R Montgomery, C Kluth, and M Unsworth, who conducted the survey, are employees of Adelphi Real World., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose of Review: Although the survival rate of patients with ovarian cancer (OC) has significantly improved, OC is still one of the most common causes of gynecologic cancer death in women worldwide. The current advances in primary treatment are based on recent regulatory approvals and recurrency of such treatments, challenging the development of a unified approach to care. Herein, we examine how integration of these new approaches is applied to patient's treatment., Recent Findings: We and others have recently reported clinical trials using bevacizumab and/or inhibitors of Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP), which have greatly affected the change in first-line treatments for OC. As first-line therapy has evolved, therapeutic agents once designated for recurrent disease are increasingly being incorporated, changing our standard of care following previously indexed trials. Here, we provide an overview of the current treatment for OC patients, and we highlight practice patterns in Europe and in the USA with corresponding opinions on current and future treatments for platinum-sensitive recurrent OC., (© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Objectives: The JAVELIN Lung 200 phase 3 trial did not meet its primary endpoint of improving overall survival (OS) with avelumab vs docetaxel in patients with platinum-treated PD-L1+ NSCLC. We report post hoc analyses assessing the effects of subsequent immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) treatment on OS., Material and Methods: Patients with stage IIIB/IV NSCLC progressed following platinum-doublet therapy were randomized to receive avelumab or docetaxel. OS was analyzed in the PD-L1+ population (≥1% of tumor cells) and full analysis set (PD-L1+ or PD-L1-). Effects of subsequent ICI (after permanent discontinuation of study treatment) on OS were analyzed using a preplanned naive sensitivity analysis and post hoc inverse probability of censoring weighting (IPCW) analysis. Subgroups with or without subsequent ICI treatment were analyzed using descriptive statistics., Results: In the avelumab and docetaxel arms, a subsequent ICI was received by 16/396 (4.0 %) and 104/396 (26.3 %) after a median of 10.5 months (range, 3.9-20.4) and 5.7 months (range, 0.1-24.4), respectively. Some subgroups showed trends for higher subsequent ICI treatment, including patients with non-squamous NSCLC (avelumab arm, 4.3 % vs docetaxel arm, 32.1 %) or with a baseline ECOG performance status of 0 (6.3 % vs 31.3 %); those enrolled in the early recruitment wave (11.6 % vs 54.3 %), or enrolled in the US/Western Europe (2.8 % vs 45.5 %) or Asia (11.0 % vs 35.4 %); and non-white patients (10.1 % vs 35.0 %). The hazard ratio for OS with avelumab vs docetaxel was lower in the IPCW analysis than in the naive sensitivity analysis (PD-L1+ population: 0.80 [95 % CI, 0.62-1.04] vs 0.86 [95 % CI, 0.68-1.09], respectively)., Conclusion: In the JAVELIN Lung 200 trial, avelumab showed clinical activity as second-line treatment for patients with advanced NSCLC. Post hoc analyses suggest that the primary OS analysis may have been confounded by subsequent ICI use in the docetaxel arm. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02395172., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: The use of cetuximab in combination with platinum (P) plus 5-fluorouracil (F) has previously been demonstrated to be effective in the treatment of metastatic squamous cell cancer of head and neck (SCCHN). We investigated the efficacy and outcome of this protocol as a first-line treatment for patients with recurrent or metastatic disease. We evaluated overall-survival (OS), progression-free-survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR) and the treatment toxicity profile in a retrospective cohort., Patients and Methods: This study enrolled 121 patients with untreated recurrent or metastatic SCCHN. The patients received PF+ cetuximab every 3 weeks for a maximum of 6 cycles. Patients with stable disease who received PF+ cetuximab continued to receive cetuximab until disease progressed or unacceptable toxic effects were experienced, whichever occurred first., Results: The median patient age was 53 (37-78) years. The patient cohort was 86.8% male. The addition of cetuximab to PF in the recurrent or metastatic setting provided an OS of 11 months (Confidential Interval, CI, 95%, 8.684-13.316) and PFS of 8 months (CI 95%, 6.051-9.949). The disease control rate was 48.9%, and the ORR was 23.91%. The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events in the PF+ cetuximab regimen were febrile neutropenia (5.7%), skin rash (3.8%) and mucosistis (3.8%)., Conclusions: The results of this study suggest that cetuximab plus platinum-fluorouracil chemotherapy is a good option for systemic treatment in advanced SSCHN patients. This regimen has a well-tolerated toxicity profile.