Abstract 3817: Real-world clinical outcomes in patients with advanced ROS1+non-small cell lung cancer in the US
Rattachement africain : us. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
Abstract Introduction: ROS1 rearrangements define a rare molecular subtype of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), occurring in 1-2% of patients (pts) with advanced NSCLC (aNSCLC). Crizotinib and entrectinib received US approval for ROS1+ aNSCLC in March 2016 and August 2019, respectively. Few studies have addressed temporal trends in first-line (1L) utilization since these drugs’ approval. This study describes treatment patterns and clinical outcomes in pts with ROS1+ aNSCLC in the US. Methods: This retrospective study used the nationwide Flatiron Health (FH) electronic health record-derived de-identified database and included adult pts with ROS1+ aNSCLC who received 1L (index) therapy between March 2015 and December 2022. Pts were followed until March 31, 2023, and had ≥ 3 months of follow-up post-index date. Treatment-related (sequence, time to treatment discontinuation [TTD], time to next treatment [TTNT]) and clinical (real-world progression-free survival [rwPFS], overall survival [OS]) outcomes of 1L therapy were assessed using descriptive statistics and Kaplan-Meier methods. Results: In the FH database, 87,784 pts had aNSCLC, and 242 were ROS1+. The median age was 65 years; most were female (64%), White (67%), non-squamous (91%) and had a history of smoking (52%), with most pts having ECOG performance status 0 (31%) or 1 (35%). 19% had brain metastases prior to or up to 30 days post-index. Median follow-up time was 14.2 months. In 1L treatment, only 59% received ROS1-sensitive TKI monotherapy (i.e. crizotinib, entrectinib, ceritinib), with 97 (40%) and 40 (17%) treated with crizotinib and entrectinib monotherapy, respectively. Median TTD and TTNT for 1L was 6.4 (95% CI: 5.0, 7.6) and 7.6 (95% CI: 6.5, 9.4) months, respectively. Among 1L crizotinib pts, 51% had 2L treatments and 57% of those initiated another ROS1-sensitive TKI (16% entrectinib). Among 1L entrectinib pts, 43% had 2L therapy; of these, 82% initiated another ROS1-sensitive TKI. Median rwPFS was 7.5 (95% CI: 6.2, 9.3) months (1L crizotinib, 8.6 [95% CI: 5.3, 13.0] months; 1L entrectinib, 8.0 [95% CI: 5.3, 13.6] months). Median OS was 29.0 (95% CI: 19.4, 35.9) months (1L crizotinib, 31 [95% CI: 19.4, not estimable [NE]] months; 1L entrectinib, NE). Patients initiated ROS1-sensitive TKIs (crizotinib, entrectinib or ceritinib) in 1L across each year of the study (2015: 67%, 2016: 58%, 2017: 51%, 2018: 47%, 2019: 63%, 2020: 81%, 2021: 52%, 2022: 68%). Overall, 5% received checkpoint-inhibitor (CPI) only, 17% chemotherapy alone, and 7% a chemotherapy/CPI combination. Conclusion: Compared to relevant clinical trials, ROS1+ aNSCLC pts in this real-world study were older, had greater smoking exposure, and worse overall survival. Only 59% of pts initiated 1L ROS1-sensitive TKI monotherapy. These results highlight potential disparities in the diagnosis and treatment of ROS1+ NSCLC and opportunities for improving clinical outcomes. Citation Format: Reginald Villacorta, Saurabh Ray, Yong Yuan, Sushupta Vijapur, Sonia Kim, Haiyan Sun, Sky Myers, Vincent Lam. Real-world clinical outcomes in patients with advanced ROS1+non-small cell lung cancer in the US [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2024; Part 1 (Regular Abstracts); 2024 Apr 5-10; San Diego, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2024;84(6_Suppl):Abstract nr 3817.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Abstract 3817: Real-world clinical outcomes in patients with advanced ROS1+non-small cell lung cancer in the US
- Date Crossref
- 22/03/2024
- Éditeur
- American Association for Cancer Research (AACR)
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Les institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.