This study examined real-world clinical outcomes such as progression-free survival (PFS), time to metastasis (TTM), overall survival (OS), and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in patients with unresected stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated in the community setting. A retrospective review of medical records extracted from 10 US community oncology practices was conducted. Eligible patients were adults diagnosed with stage III NSCLC from 1/1/2011 to 3/1/2016 without evidence of surgical resection within 6 months after stage III NSCLC diagnosis (index date). PFS, OS, and TTM were assessed from the index date, and were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses. HRQOL was assessed for a subset of patients using a patient-reported measure, the 86-item Patient Care Monitor (PCM). Linear mixed models (LMM) were used to assess the impact of patient characteristics and change in PCM scores associated with progression. Among the sample of 478 patients, median PFS (95% confidence interval) was 10 months (9-11), median OS was 20 months (17-22), and median TTM was 30 months (23-45). Most patients (58.2%) experienced disease progression, which the LMM showed to be associated with significant worsening of physical symptoms and psychological states (p < 0.001). This study documented PFS and OS consistent with published literature. The majority of patients experienced disease progression, which was associated with worsening of HRQOL. These findings highlighted the need for better therapeutic options in patients with unresected stage III NSCLC with potential to improve patient outcomes and HRQOL.

Aim: Little is known about recent treatment patterns among patients with unresected stage III NSCLC in the real world. This retrospective study used medical records from USA community oncology practices to address this knowledge gap. Materials & methods: Eligible patients were stage III NSCLC adults diagnosed between 1 January 2011 and 1 March 2016 without surgical resection. Treatment patterns were assessed across three progression intervals, from stage III diagnosis through third progression. Results: The most common regimen in interval 1 was platinum doublet chemotherapy + radiation therapy, in interval 2 was chemotherapy only, and in interval 3 was non-platinum chemotherapy monotherapy. Conclusion: Most patients were treated following national guidelines, but important unmet needs remain.

Aims: To assess healthcare costs during treatment with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and following disease progression in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Methods: A retrospective analysis of medical records of US community oncology practices was conducted. Eligible patients had advanced NSCLC (stage IIIB/IV) diagnosed between January 1, 2008 and January 1, 2015, initiated treatment with erlotinib or afatinib (first-line or second-line), and had disease progression. Monthly Medicare-paid costs were evaluated during the TKI therapy period and following progression. Results: The study included 364 patients. The total mean monthly cost during TKI therapy was $20,106 (95% confidence interval [CI] ¼ $16,836-$23,376), of which 47.0% and 42.4% represented hospitalization costs and anti-cancer therapy costs, respectively. Following progression on TKI therapy (data available for 316 patients), total mean monthly cost was $19,274 (95% CI ¼ $15,329-$23,218), and was higher in the 76.3% of patients who received anti-cancer therapy following progression than in the 23.7% of those who did not ($20,490 vs $15,364; p < .001). Among patients who received it, anticancer therapy ($11,198; 95% CI ¼ $7,102-$15,295) represented 54.7% of total mean monthly cost. Among patients who did not receive anti-cancer therapy, hospitalization ($13,829; 95% CI ¼ $4,922-$22,736) represented 90.0% of total mean monthly cost. Impaired performance status and brain metastases were significant predictors of increased cost during TKI therapy. Limitations: The study design may limit the generalizability of findings. Conclusions: Healthcare costs during TKI treatment and following progression appeared to be similar and were largely attributed to hospitalization and anti-cancer therapy. Notably, almost one-quarter of patients did not receive anti-cancer therapy following progression, potentially indicating an unmet need; hospitalization was the largest cost contributor for these patients. Additional effective targeted therapies are needed that could prolong progression-free survival, leading to fewer hospitalizations for EGFR mutation-positive patients.ARTICLE HISTORY

Aim: This study examined treatment patterns and effectiveness outcomes of patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC) from US community oncology centers. Materials & methods: Eligible patients were females, aged ≥18 years, diagnosed with mTNBC between 1 January 2010 and 31 January 2016. Kaplan–Meier and Cox regression methods were used. Results: Sample comprised 608 patients with average age of 57.5 years and 505/608 patients (83.1%) received systemic treatment. Overall survival (OS) from first-line treatment found that African–American patients had shorter OS than White (9.3 vs 13.7 months; hazard ratio: 1.35; p = 0.006). Conclusion: More than 15% of women with mTNBC were not treated, indicating a high unmet need. Overall prognosis remains poor, which highlights the opportunity for newer therapies to improve progression-free survival and OS.

Aim: Evaluation of monthly cost during metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC) treatment. Patients & methods: Retrospective electronic medical record review of US females aged ≥18 years diagnosed with mTNBC between 1 January 2010 and 31 January 2016. Mean monthly costs per patient were evaluated from start of mTNBC treatment until transfer to hospice, end of record or 3 months prior to death. Results: The mean monthly cost of first line was $21,908 for 505 treated patients; 50.2% of cost was attributable to hospitalization and emergency department visits, and 32.7% to anticancer therapy. Similar patterns were observed for subsequent lines of therapy. Conclusion: The majority of costs were attributable to hospitalization and emergency department services, suggesting a need for effective interventions to reduce utilization of costly services.

Fulvestrant monotherapy is approved for postmenopausal women with hormone receptor‐positive, metastatic breast cancer (MBC) who progressed following antiendocrine therapy, or those with hormone receptor‐positive, human epidermal receptor 2‐negative advanced breast cancer (BC) not previously treated with endocrine therapy (ET). However, real‐world data are lacking. Retrospective reviews of 10 United States community oncology practices identified patients diagnosed with MBC between 1 January 2011 and 31 December 2015 who received fulvestrant as the first ET, either as initial therapy for metastatic disease or after progression following one line of chemotherapy. Endpoints were progression‐free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Patients were classified as ET‐naïve or by relapse status following adjuvant ET (“early” recurrence during or ≤12 months of completing adjuvant ET, or “late” >12 months after completing adjuvant ET). Outcomes were evaluated using Kaplan‐Meier methods. Among 121 patients, median PFS (95% confidence interval) was 8.3 months (4.8‐12.3) for early relapse, 15.4 months (10.2‐21.2) for late relapse, and 18.7 months (10.1‐20.8) among ET‐naïve patients (P = .018). Median OS was 39.8 months (25.0‐55.1) for early relapse and 61.4 months (47.1‐61.4) for late relapse, but was not reached (NR; 55.6–NR) for ET‐naïve patients (P = .002). Fulvestrant monotherapy as the first ET after MBC diagnosis demonstrates PFS comparable to clinical study results; outcomes appeared better in patients without prior ET exposure and in patients with disease recurrence >12 months following adjuvant ET. These findings support fulvestrant monotherapy in patients with hormone receptor‐positive MBC.

Background: This retrospective, observational study examined real-world treatment patterns and effectiveness outcomes in 450 patients with stage II–IIIB early-stage triple-negative breast cancer treated in the community oncology setting. Methods: Kaplan–Meier methods were used to evaluate event-free survival (EFS), time to recurrence and overall survival (OS). Cox regression models were used to evaluate predictors of EFS and OS by pathological complete response (pCR) status. Results: Among patients receiving neoadjuvant systemic therapy only, pCR was a predictor of EFS and OS. Conclusion: These results highlight the unmet need for therapies that improve outcomes for patients with early-stage triple-negative breast cancer including increasing rates of pCR among patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy.

OBJECTIVES: The recent approval of novel immuno-oncology (IO) therapies has altered the standard of care for patients with metastatic MCC. The objective of this study was to evaluate treatment patterns and associated healthcare costs among patients with newly diagnosed MCC. METHODS: Patients with newly diagnosed MCC were identified by between July 2010 and December 2014 in MarketScan administrative claims databases. Per-patient per-year (PPPY) costs were estimated and adjusted to 2017 US dollars. RESULTS: 2355 patients met the selection criteria with requisite continuous plan enrolment 6 months before the index date, defined as the first occurrence of a medical claim for an eligible ICD-9 code, of whom 2177 had no enrolment gap 30 days during follow-up. The mean age at diagnosis was 68.8 years; 60.3% were male. In the post-index period, surgery alone was the most common treatment (34.5%), followed by a combination of surgery and radiation (22.0%) and triple therapy with surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy (14.7%). Overall, 27.5% received chemotherapy, and 14.5% did not receive any treatment. The highest total costs PPPY were observed in patients receiving chemotherapy alone (mean, $154,506; median, $101,487) and in those receiving chemotherapy and radiation (mean, $150,157; median, $129,041). The lowest healthcare PPPY costs were incurred by patients who only underwent surgery (mean, $56,124; median, $22,999) and by those who did not receive any treatment (mean, $28,442; median, $8998). CONCLUSIONS: These results provide useful insights into real-world treatment patterns of patients with newly diagnosed MCC. Costs of managing MCC are high irrespective of the type of treatment received. The use of chemotherapy potentially indicates greater disease severity and increasing burden on healthcare resources. Further analyses will facilitate better understanding of the value of IO therapy in treating this mainly elderly patient population and alleviating the associated economic burden.