Search

The modified docetaxel, cisplatin, and fluorouracil (mDCF) regimen has shown efficacy and safety as first-line treatment for advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the anus, making it a standard regimen. Inhibitors of programmed cell death protein 1 and its ligand, such as pembrolizumab, nivolumab, retifanlimab, avelumab, and atezolizumab, have shown some antitumour activity as monotherapy in advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the anus that is refractory to chemotherapy. This phase 2 study evaluated the combination of mDCF and atezolizumab as first-line treatment in advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the anus. In this randomised, open-label, non-comparative, phase 2 study, participants from 21 centres (academic, private, and community hospitals and cancer research centres) across France with chemo-naive, metastatic, or unresectable locally advanced recurrent squamous cell carcinoma of the anus, aged 18 years or older, and with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, were randomly allocated (2:1) to receive either atezolizumab (800 mg intravenously every 2 weeks up to 1 year) plus mDCF (eight cycles of 40 mg per m2 docetaxel and 40 mg per m2 cisplatin on day 1 and 1200 mg per m2 per day of fluorouracil for 2 days, every 2 weeks intravenously; group A) or mDCF alone (group B). Randomisation was done centrally using a minimisation technique and was stratified by age (<65 years vs ≥65 years) and disease status. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed 12-month progression-free survival in the modified intention-to-treat population in group A (35% for the null hypothesis and 50% for the alternative hypothesis). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT03519295 , and is closed to new participants. 97 evaluable participants (64 in group A and 33 in group B) were enrolled between July 3, 2018, and Aug 19, 2020. The median follow-up was 26·5 months (95% CI 24·8–28·4). The median age of participants was 64·1 years (IQR 56·2–71·6), and 71 (73%) were female. 12-month progression-free survival was 45% (90% CI 35–55) in group A and 43% (29–58) in group B. In participants with a PD-L1 combined positive score of 5 or greater, 12-month progression-free survival was 70% (95% CI 47–100) in group A and 40% (19–85) in group B (interaction p=0·051) Both groups showed high compliance. Adverse events of grade 3 or higher were observed in 39 (61%) participants in group A and 14 (42%) in group B. The most common grade 3–4 adverse events were neutropenia (nine [14%] participants in group A vs five [15%] in group B), anaemia (nine [14%] vs one [3%]), fatigue (three [5%] vs four [12%]), and diarrhoea (seven [11%] vs one [3%]). Serious adverse events occurred in 16 (25%) participants in group A and four (12%) in group B, and these were mDCF-related in seven (11%) participants in group A and four (12%) in group B. Atezolizumab-related serious adverse events occurred in nine (14%) participants in group A, including grade 2 infusion-related reaction in three (5%), grade 3 infection in two (3%), and grade 2 colitis, grade 3 acute kidney injury, grade 3 sarcoidosis, and a grade 4 platelet count decrease each in one participant (2%). There were no treatment-related deaths. Despite a higher incidence of adverse events, combining atezolizumab with mDCF is feasible, with similar dose intensity in both groups, although the primary efficacy endpoint was not met. The predictive value of a PD-L1 combined positive score of 5 or greater now needs to be confirmed in future studies. GERCOR, Roche. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Following the results of the IMpassion130 trial, an early access program (EAP) was opened in France, allowing patients with PD-L1-positive advanced triple negative breast cancer (aTNBC) to receive a combination of paclitaxel and atezolizumab as first line therapy. This EAP was later discontinued when the IMpassion131 trial read out with negative results. We performed a retrospective multicentric analysis in patients who were prospectively enrolled in the French EAP. Efficacy and toxicity data were obtained on 64 patients treated from August 2019 to August 2020 in 10 French cancer centers. Median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 4.1 months (95% CI [3.0–5.8]) and 17.9 months (95% CI [12.4–NR]), respectively. The 6-months PFS rate was 28% (95% CI [16–40%]) (N = 18/64), while N = 33/64 patients (52%, 95% CI [38–63%]) experienced a tumor response. Exploratory subgroup analyses retrieved that corticosteroid use at inclusion in the EAP, before treatment initiation, was the only independent unfavorable prognostic factor for PFS (HR 2.7, 95% CI [1.3–5.6]). No new safety signal was observed. This real-life study, unique by its setting (EAP granted by anticipation and later withdrawn), suggests atezolizumab and paclitaxel has a limited efficacy in PD-L1-positive aTNBC, especially in patients receiving corticosteroids as comedication before treatment start. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Tumor genomic profiling and PD-L1 testing mean lung cancer management can be tackled through a personalized approach. Targeted therapies and immunotherapy are necessary to improve survival and preserve the patients' quality of life. Early access to innovation before marketing authorization (MA) is possible in France through clinical trials and an early-access program called a Temporary Authorization for Use (ATU), which is a unique regulatory system in Europe. This study aims to assess the impact of early access to innovation through clinical trials and ATUs in thoracic oncology. Methods: Data from clinical trials between 2018 and 2021 and ATUs between 2005 and 2019 were collected internally and assessed for drugs in thoracic oncology, with specific focus on 2 ATUs, respectively, atezolizumab and durvalumab. Results: From 2018 to 2021, the National Agency for the Safety of Medicines and Health Products authorized 145 clinical trials in lung cancer. Between 2005 and 2019, 19 drugs obtained an EU MA or an MA extension for a therapeutic indication in lung cancer. During this period, 11 of these drugs were granted an ATU, corresponding to 6851 patients treated. Of this total number of patients, data were collected for 33.1% and 71.2%, who received durvalumab and atezolizumab, respectively. Real-life efficacy data were consistent with the clinical trial data. Conclusion: Over the past 15 years, clinical trials and the French early access program have allowed considerable early access to therapeutic innovation in real life for patients, especially in thoracic oncology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and aims: The IMbrave150 clinical trial assessed the efficacy and safety of atezolizumab in combination with bevacizumab (ATZ+BVA) versus sorafenib in adults with advanced/unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma, who have not received prior systemic treatment. Our aim was to assess the cost-effectiveness of ATZ+BVA versus sorafenib in France based on an updated prices and considering French National real-world data, to confirm the initial recommendations from the Heath Technology Assessment submission published in 2021, and provide additional visibility to decision-makers reflecting current clinical practice. Methods: A partition survival model was developed to project clinical outcomes, quality of life, and costs of patients with HCC treated with ATZ+BVA versus sorafenib over a lifetime horizon. Survival outcomes were extrapolated via parametric functions for both treatment strategies. Quality of life (EQ-5D-5L, French tariffs) were sourced from IMbrave150. The Guyot method was considered as a scenario analysis by integrating retrospective real-world data extracted from the French Health Insurance Database to refine long term survival extrapolations. Results: In the reference case, ATZ+BVA was associated with 0.61 additional Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) compared to sorafenib (1.95 vs 1.35), and an incremental cost of €92,704. The incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) was 152,974 €/QALY gained. Adjusting the survival curves with French external evidence led to a 14% ICUR reduction (131,163 €/QALY). Conclusions: ATZ+BVA is a cost-effective strategy based on the range recently published for the value of a QALY in France and offers better chances of survival to patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is a highly aggressive type of lung cancer. • Atezolizumab plus chemotherapy improves overall survival in 1st-line treatment of extensive SCLC. • IFCT-1905 CLINATEZO studied consecutive patients receiving this regimen in France. • Our study reproduced in a real life setting the key survival outcomes of the landmark trial. Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) has a tendency towards recurrence and limited survival. Standard-of-care in 1st-line is platinum-etoposide chemotherapy plus atezolizumab or durvalumab, based on landmark clinical trials. IFCT-1905 CLINATEZO is a nationwide, non-interventional, retrospective study of patients with extensive-SCLC receiving atezolizumab plus chemotherapy as part of French Early Access Program. Objectives were to analyse effectiveness, safety and subsequent treatments. The population analyzed included 518 patients who received atezolizumab in 65 participating centers. There were 66.2% male, mean age was 65.7 years; 89.1% had a performance status (PS) 0/1 and 26.6% brain metastases. Almost all (95.9%) were smokers. Fifty-five (10.6%) received at least 1 previous treatment. Median number of atezolizumab injections was 7.0 (range [1.0–48.0]) for a median duration of 4.9 months (95% CI 4.5–5.1). Atezolizumab was continued beyond progression in 122 patients (23.6%) for a median duration of 1.9 months (95% CI: [1.4–2.3]). Best objective response was complete and partial in 19 (3.9%) and 378 (77.1%) patients. Stable disease was observed in 50 patients (10.2%). Median follow-up was 30.8 months (95% CI: [29.9–31.5]). Median overall survival (OS), 12-, 24-month OS rates were 11.3 months (95% CI: [10.1–12.4]), 46.7% (95% CI [42.3–50.9]) and 21.2% (95% CI [17.7–24.8]). Median real-world progression-free survival, 6-, 12-month rates were 5.2 months (95% CI [5.0–5.4]), 37.5% (95% CI [33.3–41.7]) and 15.2% (95% CI [12.2–18.6]). For patients with PS 0/1, median OS was 12.2 months (95% CI [11.0–13.5]). For patients with previous treatment, median OS was 14.9 months (95% CI [10.1–21.5]). Three-hundred-and-twenty-six patients (66.4%) received subsequent treatment and 27 (5.2%) were still under atezolizumab at date of last news. IFCT-1905 CLINATEZO shows reproductibility, in real-life, of IMpower-133 survival outcomes, possibly attributed to selection of patients fit for this regimen, adoption of pragmatic approaches, including concurrent radiotherapy and treatment beyond progression. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Cost-effectiveness of atezolizumab was assessed in an NSCLC adjuvant setting. • Atezolizumab significantly increased 3-year DFS in resected II-IIIA NSCLC patients. • ICER of atezolizumab vs BSC was estimated to be €21,348/QALY gained. • The ICER was consistent with other drugs in an adjuvant setting in France. • The ICER is usually above €100,000/QALY for drugs in a metastatic setting. The objective of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of atezolizumab versus best supportive care (BSC) as adjuvant treatment following resection and platinum-based chemotherapy for patients with stage II-IIIA non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) whose tumours have a programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression ≥ 50% of tumour cells and excluding those with ALK/EGFR mutations, from a French collective perspective. A five state Markov model over a 20-year time horizon was considered, including disease-free survival (DFS 1 1 Abbreviations: AE: adverse event; ALK: anaplastic lymphoma kinase; BSC: best supportive care; DFS: disease-free survival; DSA: deterministic sensitivity analyses; EFGR: epidermal growth factor receptor; EQ-5D: EuroQol-5 dimension; HAS: Haute Autorité de Santé; ICs: immune cells; ICER: incremental cost-effectiveness ratio; IgG1: immunoglobulin G1; IV: intravenous; KM: Kaplan-Meier; LY: life-year; NSCLC: non-small cell lung cancer; OS: overall survival; PD-L1: programmed death-ligand 1; PSA: probabilistic sensitivity analysis; QALY: quality-adjusted life-year; QoL: quality of life; TCs: tumor cells.) from IMpower010 trial, three progression states (locoregional recurrence, first and second-line metastatic recurrence) and death. Utilities, quality-adjusted life year (QALY) decrements associated to adverse events, costs, resource use, and transition probabilities were considered in the model. These inputs were sourced from IMpower010 trial, literature, and clinical experts' opinion. Model uncertainty was assessed through deterministic, probabilistic sensitivity analyses and scenario analyses. Atezolizumab was associated with a QALY gain of 1.662, mainly driven by additional time spent in the DFS state, and a life-year gain of 2.112 years. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for atezolizumab versus BSC was €21,348/QALY gained. The sensitivity analyses highlighted that uncertainty within the model had limited impact on results. Changing the DFS survival curves to other plausible distributions produced ICERs below €20,000/QALY. Introducing an increasing proportion of cured patients (91.5%) from year two to year five reduced the ICER to €13,083/QALY, while including a loss of efficacy at year two in the atezolizumab treatment arm increased the ICER to €33,755/QALY. Atezolizumab as adjuvant treatment in stage II-IIIA NSCLC resected patients with PDL1 ≥ 50% and without ALK/EGFR mutations has a lower ICER than other oncology drugs in France and a similar ICER to other adjuvant treatment in oncology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of atezolizumab compared with docetaxel and nivolumab for the treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), as a second-line treatment, in a French setting. Materials and methods: A three-state partitioned-survival model was developed (progression-free survival, post-progression survival, death) based on the phase IIIOAK trial on a 10-year time horizon. The comparison between nivolumab and atezolizumab came from a network meta-analysis. Utilities were estimated from the OAK trial EQ-5D applying the French utility tariffs. Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and treatment duration were estimated using parametric models selected using Akaike and Bayesian information criterion. Extrapolation beyond the trial duration followed NICE DSU TSD 14. Economic perspective was the one of all payers, discount rate fixed at 4% on benefits and costs. This analysis was aligned with French Haute Autorité de Santé recommendations. Results were expressed in total cost (2019) and €/QALY (Quality Adjusted Life Year). Model robustness was checked through sensitivity analyses, and a probabilistic sensitivity analysis was conducted. Results: In comparison to docetaxel, atezolizumab costs 49,429€ more and increased life expectancy by 8 months, generating 0.47 QALY. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was estimated at 104,835€/QALY. When comparing nivolumab to atezolizumab, a cost minimization analysis was conducted since no clear evidence supporting a difference in terms of survival benefit was reported. Using list price, and the Market Access Authorization regimens, atezolizumab saved approximately 6,000€, 9.5% of its total costs. Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of our findings. Conclusion: Atezolizumab is more efficient and more costly than docetaxel in the second-line treatment of NSCLC of stage IIIB or IV, in France, with results consistent to previous French authorities' evaluation of immunotherapies in similar indication. Lastly, atezolizumab is a cost saving alternative to nivolumab, based on list price.