The aim of this multinational retrospective cohort study, conducted at academic and community oncology centres, was to describe real‐world treatment patterns for patients with a confirmed diagnosis of advanced/metastatic (stage IIIB/IV) non‐small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who initiated first‐line systemic therapy from January 2011 through June 2014. The study included 1265 patients in Italy, Spain, Germany, Australia, Korea, Taiwan and Brazil. The proportion of patients with squamous versus non‐squamous NSCLC was approximately 20% versus 75%, and associated patient demographic characteristics were similar in all countries, excepting race. Patients with squamous NSCLC were predominantly male and current/ex‐smokers. Biomarker tests were performed for the majority of patients with non‐squamous NSCLC, ranging from 54% (Brazil) to 91% in Taiwan, where, of those tested, 68% with non‐squamous NSCLC had positive epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)‐mutation status; in other countries the EGFR‐positive percentages ranged from 17% (Spain/Brazil) to 40% (Korea). Platinum‐based regimens were the most common first‐line therapy in all countries except Taiwan, where gefitinib was the most common first‐line agent. Median overall survival ranged from 9.3 months (Brazil) to 25.5 months (Taiwan). The diagnostic and treatment patterns recorded in this study were heterogeneous but largely in line with NSCLC guidelines during the study period.

IVI can be administered preoperatively in the outpatient clinic to colorectal cancer patients with anaemia, with associated reduction in ARBT use and increase in Hb levels.

Febrile neutropenia (FN) is a potentially fatal complication of chemotherapy. This prospective, observational study describes physicians' approaches toward assessing FN risk in patients receiving chemotherapy regimens with an intermediate (10-20 %) FN risk. In the baseline investigator assessment, physicians selected factors considered important when assessing overall FN risk and deciding on granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) primary prophylaxis (PP). Physicians then completed patient assessments using the same lists of factors. The final FN risk scores and whether G-CSF PP was planned were reported. The final analysis included 165 physicians and 944 patients. The most frequently considered factor in both assessments was chemotherapy agents in the backbone (88 % of investigator and 93 % of patient assessments). History of FN (83 %), baseline laboratory values (76 %) and age (73 %) were commonly selected at baseline, whereas tumor type (72 %), guidelines (62 %) and tumor stage (43 %) were selected most during patient assessments. Median investigator-reported FN risk threshold for G-CSF PP was 20 % (range 10-85 %). G-CSF PP was planned in 82 % of patients with an FN risk at or above this threshold; therefore, almost one-fifth of qualifying patients would not receive G-CSF PP. Physicians generally follow guidelines, but also consider individual patient characteristics when assessing FN risk and deciding on G-CSF PP. A standardized FN risk assessment may optimize the use of G-CSF PP, which may minimize the incidence of FN in patients undergoing chemotherapy with an intermediate FN risk. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01813721.

Acceptable chemotherapy RDI was delivered for most patients in the adjuvant setting but not in the neoadjuvant setting. G-CSF treatment contributed to the optimization of dose intensity in the adjuvant setting only. Dose intensity in the metastatic setting was considered satisfactory where quality of life is the primary focus. Other factors can be modified to improve RDI.

The median OS of our patients is similar to published randomized trials. A CEA response of ≥50% at 3 months and good ECOG were independent predictors of OS of patients with mCRC treated with oxaliplatin-based chemotherapies.