Use of "Real-World" data to describe adverse events during the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma in routine clinical practice

Real-World Outcomes in Patients With Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Treated With First-Line Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab in the United States

PURPOSE

Nivolumab plus ipilimumab (NIVO + IPI) is a first-in-class combination immunotherapy for the treatment of intermediate- or poor (I/P)-risk advanced or metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Currently, there are limited real-world data regarding clinical effectiveness beyond 12-24 months from treatment initiation. In this real-world study, treatment patterns and clinical outcomes were evaluated for NIVO + IPI in a community oncology setting.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis using electronic medical record data from The US Oncology Network examined patients with I/P-risk clear cell mRCC who initiated first-line (1L) NIVO + IPI between January 4, 2018, and December 31, 2019, with follow-up until June 30, 2022. Baseline demographics, clinical characteristics, treatment patterns, clinical effectiveness, and safety outcomes were assessed descriptively. Overall survival (OS) and real-world progression-free survival (rwPFS) were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier methods.

RESULTS

Among 187 patients identified (median follow-up, 22.4 months), with median age 63 (range, 30-89) years, 74 (39.6%) patients had poor risk and 37 (19.8%) patients had Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score ≥2. Of 86 patients who received second-line therapy, 54.7% received cabozantinib and 10.5% received pazopanib. The median (95% CI) OS and rwPFS were 38.4 (24.7-46.1) months and 11.1 (7.5-15.0) months, respectively. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were reported in 89 (47.6%) patients, including fatigue (n = 25, 13.4%) and rash (n = 19, 10.2%).

CONCLUSION

This study provides data to support the understanding of the real-world utilization and long-term effectiveness of 1L NIVO + IPI in patients with I/P-risk mRCC. TRAE rates were low relative to clinical trials.

Targeted Toxicities: Protocols for Monitoring the Adverse Events of Targeted Therapies Used in the Treatment of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

Targeted therapies have revolutionized the treatment for many patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Multiple new oral targeted therapies have been approved in the last decade; however, their overall efficacy may be reduced by poor adherence, treatment interruptions, or dose reductions due to adverse events. Most institutions lack standard monitoring protocols for toxicities from these targeted agents. This review describes important adverse events observed in clinical trials and reported by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for both currently approved and upcoming promising therapies in the treatment of NSCLC. These agents cause a range of toxicities, including dermatologic, gastroenteric, pulmonary, and cardiac toxicities. This review proposes protocols for routine monitoring of these adverse events, both prior to initiation of therapy and while on treatment.

Eligibility for phase 3 clinical trials of systemic therapy in real-world patients with metastatic renal cell cancer managed in a rural region

Previous research has identified disparities between urban and rural cancer care, including clinical trial access. Therefore, we addressed three different questions in patients with metastatic renal cell cancer managed according to national guidelines in a rural Norwegian standard practice setting. (1) How many patients would have been eligible for three recent landmark randomized clinical trials? (2) Is survival different between eligible and non-eligible patients receiving first-line systemic therapy? (3) Is survival different between eligible patients and published trial results? We performed a retrospective analysis of 101 consecutive patients (2006-2016). Only 52% of the patients were eligible for the first-line study of pazopanib versus sunitinib. The main reasons for violating inclusion or exclusion criteria were presence of brain metastases, absence of clear cell histology, and poor performance status. Even fewer patients were eligible for trials of nivolumab and cabozantinib in pre-treated patients. Eligible patients had significantly better survival than non-eligible patients, median 29.2 versus 8.5 months (p = 0.0001). These results confirm that many patients from rural practices do not fulfill all mandatory trial eligibility criteria. However, eligible patients managed according to national guidelines had survival outcomes in line with published first-line trial results.

Real-World Axitinib Use in the United States: A Retrospective Study Using Linked Datasets

BACKGROUND

Axitinib is approved by the FDA for the treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) after failure of 1 previous systemic therapy and is distributed primarily through specialty pharmacies. Although the efficacy and safety of axitinib have been established in clinical trials, information from real-world populations will help to elucidate patients' clinical profiles and utilization patterns. Prescription records alone provide limited information on patient characteristics and other treatment experiences. Expansion of these data with information from medical claims databases should yield observational real-world data that may help to optimize therapy for patients with advanced RCC.

OBJECTIVE

To link information from a specialty pharmacy database with information from medical and pharmacy claims databases to characterize real-world treatment patterns of axitinib as subsequent systemic therapy in patients with RCC in the United States.

METHODS

This retrospective, observational, cohort study linked de-identified patient-level data from 22 specialty pharmacies that dispense axitinib with databases of longitudinal medical and pharmacy claims. Eligible patients had a diagnosis of RCC (> 1 claim for RCC defined as ICD-9-CM code 189.0), previously received > 1 systemic therapy, had the first prescription for axitinib dispensed between May 2012 and April 2013 (index), and had consistent claims reporting by pharmacies and physicians. All treatment data were used to calculate cycle, line of therapy, and duration of therapy; prescription data were used to determine axitinib dose modifications. Multivariate and logistic regression analyses were conducted to assess the effect of patient/prescriber characteristics on duration of axitinib therapy and dose modifications, respectively.

RESULTS

In all, 1,175 patients met the study inclusion criteria and had data present in specialty pharmacy and claims databases. Most patients (74%) were male, and 68% were aged 55-74 years. Mean (SD) Charlson Comorbidity Index score was 2.7 (± 1.1); the most common comorbidity was hypertension (in 199 patients, 17%). Based on Rx-Risk-V, the most frequent concomitant conditions were pain (40%) and ischemic heart disease/hypertension (30%); the most frequent concomitant medications were antihypertensive medications (46%) and opiates (40%). Most prescribers (63%) were affiliated with an academic center, and all U.S. geographic regions were represented. In all, 847 patients (72%) had commercial insurance. Axitinib was prescribed as second-line therapy in 659 patients (56%), as third-line therapy in 326 patients (28%), and as fourth-line or later therapy in 190 patients (16%). In the overall population, mean (SD) duration of axitinib therapy was 168.6 (± 148.4) days. Axitinib treatment duration was 21 days longer in males than females (P = 0.013); 28 days longer in patients in the Northeast than in the Midwest or West (P = 0.010 and P = 0.016, respectively); and 26 days longer in patients receiving baseline hypothyroidism treatment (P = 0.004). In patients receiving second-line axitinib, the most common first-line therapy was sunitinib (56%), followed by pazopanib (16%) and everolimus (12%). Mean (SD) duration of second-line axitinib treatment was 172.3 (± 150.6) days and ranged from 127 days in patients who previously received temsirolimus to 196 days in those who previously received sorafenib. Of 1,025 patients who initiated axitinib at the standard 5 mg twice daily starting dose, 70% remained at this dose throughout treatment, whereas 10% had a dose increase. Younger age and gender (male) were associated with dose increases (OR = 0.958, 95% CI = 0.941-0.975 and OR = 0.573, 95% CI = 0.364-0.903, respectively). Baseline hypothyroidism treatment was associated with dose decreases and increases (OR = 1.662, 95% CI = 1.088-2.539 and OR = 2.149, 95% CI = 1.353-3.413, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis demonstrates the feasibility and utility of linking specialty pharmacy data to other longitudinal databases to better understand patient, provider, and reimbursement characteristics. These data provide insight into routine clinical use of axitinib as subsequent RCC therapy in the United States in the period following FDA approval, as well as additional information on sequencing of targeted agents in patients with advanced RCC.

DISCLOSURES

This study was sponsored by Pfizer. MacLean and Cisar are employees of and hold stock in Pfizer. At the time of this analysis, Mehle, Eremina, and Quigley were employees of IMS Health who were paid consultants to Pfizer during the conduct of this study and in connection with the development of this manuscript. MacLean and Cisar contributed to study design and manuscript development. Mehle, Eremina, and Quigley contributed to study design, analysis, and manuscript development.

Sequential Therapy in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma

The treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) has changed dramatically in the past decade. As the number of available agents, and related volume of research, has grown, it is increasingly complex to know how to optimally treat patients. The authors are practicing medical oncologists at the US Oncology Network, the largest community-based network of oncology providers in the country, and represent the leadership of the Network's Genitourinary Research Committee. We outline our thought process in approaching sequential therapy of mRCC and the use of real-world data to inform our approach. We also highlight the evolving literature that will impact practicing oncologists in the near future.

Pazopanib in the treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma

Pazopanib is an orally available multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor (a class of targeted therapies) that inhibits tumor angiogenesis and cell proliferation. The safety and efficacy of pazopanib (noninferior to sunitinib for progression-free survival) in patients with advanced or metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) have been demonstrated in several clinical trials. However, in addition to therapeutic efficacy, treatment choices should also take into account health-related quality of life (HRQoL) aspects of cancer therapy. Here, we summarize the HRQoL findings related to pazopanib use, based on patient-reported outcome measures; pazopanib has been shown to be superior to sunitinib on several HRQoL domains (including patient preference). A further consideration for treatment choice is how well the findings from clinical trials correlate with evidence from general clinical practice. This review therefore includes descriptions of real-world experience of pazopanib use in the treatment of patients with mRCC, following its approval by medical regulatory authorities in a number of countries. Naturalistic observational studies demonstrate that the efficacy of pazopanib in patients with mRCC is consistent with clinical trial findings. Similarly, consistent results were observed for the safety profile of pazopanib between observational studies and clinical trials, with most treatment-associated adverse events being mild to moderate in severity, and manageable.