Only modest cancer-specific survival differences are evident for blacks and whites treated comparably for similar-stage cancer. Therefore, differences in cancer biology between racial groups are unlikely to be responsible for a substantial portion of the survival discrepancy. Differences in treatment, stage at presentation, and mortality from other diseases should represent the primary targets of research and interventions designed to reduce disparities in cancer outcomes.

SUMMARY Aims With self-reporting of erectile dysfunction (ED) in population-based surveys, men with ED may not represent men who are bothered sufficiently to seek an ED diagnosis and treatment. We used real-world observational data to assess: 1) the prevalence of ED diagnosis or treatment by age subgroups; and 2) the relationship of age with ED diagnosis or treatment after controlling for ED-related comorbidities in the United States. Methods This cross-sectional study used de-identified claims data (MarketScan® databases; primary analysis). Sensitivity analysis was conducted using electronic health records (Humedica® database). Inclusion criteria were men aged ≥18 years with a 360-day continuous enrollment before the index date. We assessed the prevalence of ED diagnosis or phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitor (PDE5I) prescription by age and the risk for ED diagnosis or treatment by age after controlling for comorbidities (hypertension, other cardiovascular disease, diabetes mellitus, depression, and benign prostatic hyperplasia). Results Of 19,833,939 men meeting inclusion criteria in the primary analysis, only 1,108,842 (5.6%) had an ED diagnosis or PDE5I prescription (mean [SD] age: 55.2 [11.2] years). Prevalence of ED diagnosis or treatment increased from age 18–29 years (0.4%) to 60–69 years (11.5%), then decreased in the 7th (11.0%), 8th (4.6%), and 9th (0.9%) decades. Men with ED diagnosis or treatment had a higher prevalence of any comorbidity (63.1% vs 29.3% for men without ED) and of each comorbid condition. In multivariate analyses, age was an independent risk factor for ED diagnosis or treatment. Sensitivity analysis provided consistent results. Conclusions In a real-world setting in the United States, the prevalence of ED diagnosis or PDE5I treatment is generally low, increases with age, decreases in very old men, and is associated with increased prevalence of comorbidities. Age is an independent risk factor for ED diagnosis or treatment after controlling for comorbidities.

BACKGROUND: Varenicline, a selective α4β2 nicotinic acetylcholine recep-

To evaluate treatment patterns of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Patients & methods: Firstline and relapsed/refractory treatment patterns and survival outcomes following first-line therapy in adult patients newly diagnosed with DLBCL were evaluated. Results: A total of 1436 DLBCL patients initiated treatment and mainly received a combination regimen versus monotherapy (92.1 vs 7.9%). Patients who received monotherapy were older with more comorbidities and had shorter progression-free survival than patients receiving combination therapy (median: 31.3 vs 55.8 months). In the second-line setting (n = 164), rituximab-based combination regimens were most common; 25% underwent stem cell transplantation, and were younger with fewer comorbidities. Conclusion: These results illustrate the need for new treatment options for patients unable to tolerate initial combination therapy and transplant-ineligible patients who require salvage therapy.

The economic burden of treated DLBCL and FL is considerable, especially in the first year following diagnosis.

Use of varenicline while trying to quit smoking reduces and does not increase neuropsychiatric symptoms such as depressed mood and irritability measured on the MNWS in smokers without current psychiatric disorders. It is associated with increases in sleep disturbance and appetite although the latter appears due to enabling more subjects to abstain from smoking.

Few studies have evaluated real-world treatment patterns and survival in follicular lymphoma (FL). This study assessed these outcomes in newly diagnosed patients with FL and patients with FL with early disease progression. Rituximab-based regimens predominated across lines of therapy; however, utilization of rituximabbased regimens was lower among early versus non-early progressors. Early progressors also had worse overall survival compared with non-early progressors. Background: Few studies have evaluated real-world treatment patterns and survival in follicular lymphoma (FL). This study evaluated these outcomes among newly diagnosed patients with FL in routine clinical care. Patients and Methods: A retrospective study was conducted in newly diagnosed patients with FL from Humedica, a large United States electronic medical record database, from January 1, 2008 to July 31, 2015. Patients were followed from treatment initiation until death, loss to follow-up, or end of study (September 30, 2015). Treatment patterns were assessed in the follow-up period. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) at 2 years were evaluated in the overall population using Kaplan-Meier analyses. OS was also compared between patients with and without evidence of disease progression within 2 years following first-line therapy (ie, early progressors vs. non-early progressors). Results: A total of 1346 patients were included in the study, with most patients receiving rituximabbased regimens. Fewer early progressors received rituximab-based regimens. Across all lines, combination therapies predominated, particularly bendamustine þ rituximab. Following first-line therapy, OS was 86.9% at 2 years, and median OS was not reached. Two-year PFS after first-line therapy was 64.6%, and median PFS was 48.1 months (95% confidence interval, 39.4-58.4 months). OS at 2 years was 76.8% among early progressors versus 90.4% among non-early progressors (P < .001); the median OS was not reached in both groups. Conclusion: In routine clinical practice, rituximab-based regimens predominated; however, utilization of these regimens differed among early and non-early progressors. The assessment of survival outcomes also highlights the negative impact of early progression on OS in the rituximab-era.

No abstract