Search

Purpose: To characterize treatment patterns and real-world clinical outcomes of patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (mNSCLC) who developed progression on an anti-PD-1/anti-PD-L1, herein referred to as anti-PD-(L)1, and platinum-doublet chemotherapy., Methods: Eligible oncologists/pulmonologists in the United States, Europe (France, Germany, and United Kingdom), and Japan completed electronic case report forms for patients with mNSCLC (no evidence of EGFR/ALK/ROS1 alterations). Eligible patients had disease progression on/after an anti-PD-(L)1 and platinum-doublet chemotherapy (received concurrently or sequentially), initiated a subsequent line of therapy (LOT) between 2017 and 2021, and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status 0-2 at this subsequent LOT initiation (index date). Overall survival (OS), time to treatment discontinuation (TTD), and real-world progression-free survival (rwPFS) after index were assessed using Kaplan-Meier analysis., Results: Overall, 160 physicians (academic, 54.4%; community, 45.6%) provided deidentified data from 487 patient charts (United States, 141; Europe, 218; Japan, 128; at mNSCLC diagnosis: median age 66 years, 64.7% male, 81.3% nonsquamous, 86.2% de novo mNSCLC; at line of interest initiation: 86.0% ECOG 0-1, 39.6% liver metastases, 18.9% brain metastases, 79.1% smoking history). The most common treatment regimens upon progression after anti-PD-(L)1/platinum-doublet chemotherapy were nonplatinum chemotherapy (50.5%), nonplatinum chemotherapy plus vascular endothelial growth factor receptor inhibitor (12.9%), and platinum-doublet chemotherapy (6.6%). Median OS was 8.8 months (squamous, 7.8 months; nonsquamous, 9.5 months). Median TTD was 4.3 months (squamous, 4.1 months; nonsquamous, 4.3 months). Median rwPFS was 5.1 months (squamous, 4.6 months; nonsquamous, 5.4 months)., Conclusion: In this multiregional, real-world analysis of pooled patient chart data, patients with mNSCLC who had disease progression after anti-PD-(L)1/platinum-doublet chemotherapy had poor clinical outcomes with various treatment regimens, demonstrating an unmet clinical need for effective options after failure on anti-PD-(L)1 and platinum-doublet chemotherapy treatments.

Purpose: Many patients with actionable driver oncogenes (ADOs) are never identified and thus never receive targeted treatment. This study evaluated the economic impact and the potential life-years gained (LYG) that can be attributed to the extent of next-generation sequencing (NGS) testing in the United States compared with single-gene testing (SGT) in patients with metastatic nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer in the United States., Methods: A model was developed to evaluate incremental rates of SGT or NSG testing on the basis of LYG and cost per LYG. ADOs included for NGS included EGFR , ALK , ROS1 , BRAF , RET , MET , and NTRK . SGT included EGFR and ALK . Assumptions were made for expected incidence of ADOs. Survival distributions were fit to published trial averages of median and 5-year overall survival. Treatment costs were estimated from drug cost averages. Reimbursement costs were based on data from the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services., Results: Each incremental 10% increase in NGS testing produces an average of 2,627.4 additional LYG, with an average cost savings per LYG of $75 US dollars (USD). Replacing SGT at the current rate of 80% with NGS testing would result in an average additional 21,09.6 LYG and reduce cost per LYG by an average of $599 USD. If 100% of eligible patients were tested with NGS and each identified patient had matched treatment, the total average cost per LYG would be $16,641.57 USD., Conclusion: On the basis of current evidence, population-level simulations demonstrate that clinically relevant gains in survival with non-negligible reduction in costs are obtainable from widespread adoption of NGS testing and appropriate treatment matching for patients with advanced nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer.

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., (Copyright © 2021 International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)