Everolimus-Based Therapy versus Chemotherapy among Patients with HR+/HER2- Metastatic Breast Cancer: Comparative Effectiveness from a Chart Review Study

An algorithm to predict data completeness in oncology electronic medical records for comparative effectiveness research

INTRODUCTION

Electronic health record (EHR) discontinuity (missing out-of-network encounters) can lead to information bias. We sought to construct an algorithm that identifies high EHR-continuity among oncology patients.

METHODS

Using a linked Medicare-EHR database and regression, we sought to 1) measure how often Medicare claims for outpatient encounters were substantiated by visits recorded in the EHR, and 2) predict continuity ratio, defined as the yearly proportion of outpatient encounters reported to Medicare that were captured by EHR data. The prediction model...s performance was evaluated with the coefficient of determination and Spearman...s correlation. We quantified variable misclassification by decile of continuity ratio using standardized difference and sensitivity.

RESULTS

A total of 79,678 subjects met all eligibility criteria. Predicted and observed continuity was highly correlated (σ_Spearman=0.86). On average across all variables measured, MSD was reduced by a factor of 1/7^th and sensitivity was improved 35-fold comparing subjects in the highest vs. lowest decile of CR.

CONCLUSION

In the oncology population, restricting EHR-based study cohorts to subjects with high continuity may reduce misclassification without greatly impacting representativeness. Further work is needed to elucidate the best manner of implementing continuity prediction rules in cohort studies.

Ribociclib with an Aromatase Inhibitor for Previously Untreated, HR-Positive, HER2-Negative, Locally Advanced or Metastatic Breast Cancer: An Evidence Review Group Perspective of a NICE Single Technology Appraisal

The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, as part of the institute's single technology appraisal process, invited the manufacturer of ribociclib (Kisqali^®, Novartis) to submit evidence regarding the clinical and cost effectiveness of the drug in combination with an aromatase inhibitor for the treatment of previously untreated, hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative, locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer. Kleijnen Systematic Reviews Ltd and Erasmus University Rotterdam were commissioned as the Evidence Review Group for this submission. The Evidence Review Group reviewed the evidence submitted by the manufacturer, corrected and validated the manufacturer's decision analytic model, and conducted exploratory analyses to assess the robustness and validity of the presented clinical and cost-effectiveness results. This article describes the company submission, the Evidence Review Group assessment and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence subsequent decisions. The main clinical effectiveness evidence was obtained from the MONALEESA-2 trial, a randomised controlled trial comparing ribociclib plus letrozole with placebo plus letrozole. Progression-free survival was significantly longer in the ribociclib group (95% confidence interval, 19.3-not reached) vs. 14.7 months (95% confidence interval 13.0-16.5) in the placebo group. To assess the cost effectiveness of ribociclib in combination with an aromatase inhibitor, the company developed an individual patient-level model using a discrete-event simulation approach in Microsoft^® Excel. In the model, simulated patients move through a series of three health states until death, i.e. first-line progression-free survival, second-line progression-free survival and progressive disease. The length of progression-free survival during the first line was informed by the MONALEESA-2 trial. The benefit in progression-free survival in the first line was transferred to a benefit in overall survival assuming full progression-free survival to overall survival surrogacy (because of the immaturity of overall survival data from the MONALEESA-2 trial). Patient-level data from the BOLERO-2 trial, evaluating the addition of everolimus to exemestane in the second-line treatment of postmenopausal HR-positive advanced breast cancer, were used to inform the length of progression-free survival during the second line. Costs included in the model were treatment costs (e.g. technology acquisition costs of first, second, third and/or later line treatments), drug administration costs, monitoring costs and health state costs (including terminal care). Additionally, the costs of adverse events associated with the first-line treatment were incorporated. The Evidence Review Group recalculated the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio using data from a different data cut-off date from the MONALEESA-2 trial and by changing some assumptions (e.g. progression-free survival to overall survival surrogacy approach and post-progression third and/or later line treatment-related costs). After two appraisal committee meetings and a revised base case submitted by the company (including a second enhanced patient access scheme discount), the committee concluded that taking into account the uncertainties in the calculation of the cost effectiveness, there were plausible cost-effectiveness estimates broadly in the range that could be considered as a cost-effective use of National Health Service resources. Therefore, ribociclib was recommended as a treatment option for the first-line treatment of hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative breast cancer, contingent on the company providing ribociclib with the discount agreed in the second enhanced patient access scheme.

An updated systematic review of the cost-effectiveness of therapies for metastatic breast cancer

PURPOSE

The goal of this systematic review is to provide an update to the review by Pouwels et al. by conducting a systematic review and an assessment of the reporting quality of the economic analyses conducted since 2014.

METHODS

This systematic review identified published articles focused on metastatic breast cancer treatment using the Medline/PubMed and Scopus databases and the following search criteria: (((cost effectiveness[MeSH Terms]) OR (cost effectiveness) OR (cost-effectiveness) OR (cost utility) OR (cost-utility) OR (economic evaluation)) AND (("metastatic breast cancer") OR ("advanced breast cancer"))). The reporting quality of the included articles was evaluated using the International Society of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist.

RESULTS

Of the 256 identified articles, 67 of the articles were published after October 2014 when the prior systematic review stopped its assessment (Pouwels et al. in Breast Cancer Res Treat 165:485-498, 2017). From the 67 articles, we narrowed down to include 17 original health economic analyses specific to metastatic or advanced breast cancer. These articles were diverse with respect to methods employed and interventions included.

CONCLUSION

Although each of the articles contributed their own analytic strengths and limitations, the overall quality of the studies was moderate. The review demonstrated that the vast majority of the reported incremental cost-effectiveness ratios exceeded the typically employed willingness to pay thresholds used in each country of analysis. Only three of the reviewed articles studied chemotherapies rather than treatments targeting either HER2 or hormone receptors, demonstrating a gap in the literature.

Outcomes research examining treatments, quality of life and costs in HER2-negative and triple-negative metastatic breast cancer: a systematic literature review

Aim: With the aggregation of real-world data in healthcare, opportunities for outcomes research are growing. In this study, we summarize published literature examining comparative effectiveness research (CER), treatment patterns, quality of life (QoL) and costs in HER2-negative and triple-negative (TN) metastatic breast cancer (mBC). Methods: PubMed (2010–January 2016) and four conferences (2013–January 2016) were searched using MeSH/keywords, including mBC, QoL, morbidity and therapeutics. Studies relating to CER, treatment patterns, QoL, costs or treatment appropriateness in US patients with HER2-negative/TN mBC were included in the review. Results: Of 1782 identified records, 33 studies met full inclusion criteria: seven related to CER, 18 to treatment patterns, one to treatment appropriateness/navigation, two to QoL and five to costs. Studies varied in objectives, designs and outcomes. Study designs included retrospective chart reviews (52%), retrospective secondary database analyses (27%), economic models (12%), physician surveys (6%) and patient surveys (3%). 25 studies reported results on HER2-negative mBC, six on TN mBC and two on both subtypes. The most common end points examined were treatment patterns, overall survival and progression-free survival. Conclusion: Outcomes research in HER2-negative mBC in the USA was limited, specifically among TN patients, indicating an opportunity for further research in this high unmet need population. Endpoints and treatment options varied, thus, it is difficult to draw summary conclusions about these studies. Outcomes research examining real-world data in mBC has increased in recent years, and may continue to grow with the implementation of new policy programs.

Treatment Patterns and Outcomes of Patients With Metastatic ER+/HER-2- Breast Cancer: A Multicountry Retrospective Medical Record Review

PURPOSE

To describe treatment patterns and clinical outcomes among postmenopausal women with metastatic ER⁺/HER-2^- breast cancer treated with ≥ 2 lines of endocrine therapy or chemotherapy in the metastatic setting.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Retrospective medical record review was conducted in Canada, the United Kingdom, Belgium, the Netherlands, Germany, Spain, and France. Baseline characteristics were assessed at the date of metastatic diagnosis. Time to progression (TTP) and overall survival (OS) were estimated by Kaplan-Meier analyses. Multivariable models were used to evaluate factors associated with disease progression.

RESULTS

Among 901 patients, the mean (standard deviation) age at metastatic diagnosis was 62.7 (9.7) years; 67.26% were initially diagnosed with metastatic disease, 66.37% had visceral disease, and 25.86% had bone metastasis only. Two-thirds of patients received endocrine therapy for first-line treatment. Fifty-nine percent received endocrine therapy, and 37.18% received chemotherapy for second-line treatment. The most common reason for stopping treatment was disease progression. Median (95% confidence interval [CI]) TTP on first-line endocrine treatment was 11.3 (10.7-12.2) months and 7.0 (6.3-7.9) months on chemotherapy. Median (95% CI) TTP on second-line endocrine therapy was 8.1 (7.5-9.1) months and 6.1 (5.4-6.8) months on chemotherapy. Median (95% CI) OS was 68.6 (52.2-83.7) months after first-line endocrine therapy and 39.7 (34.5-48.7) months after chemotherapy.

CONCLUSION

Patients prescribed endocrine therapy had longer TTP and OS than patients prescribed chemotherapy in the first- and second-line settings. Disease progression was less than a year regardless of treatment type and line of therapy, indicating a need for treatments that delay progression without affecting quality of life among these patients.

Treatment patterns and real world clinical outcomes in ER+/HER2- post-menopausal metastatic breast cancer patients in the United States

Background

With several new therapies becoming available, treatment of metastatic breast cancer (mBC) is evolving. The objective of this study is to describe patient characteristics, treatment patterns and real-world clinical outcomes in post-menopausal women with ER+, HER2- mBC and to obtain insight into patient outcomes and potential unmet needs with current therapies.

Methods

The current study is a physician survey followed by a retrospective chart review of patient medical records by physicians in the US between March and April 2015. One hundred three physicians were asked to complete an online survey aiming to understand their satisfaction and expectations with current available treatments and potential areas of unmet need for mBC patients. Medical records from 178 females were extracted for the chart review. Using these data from medical records, patient characteristics and treatment patterns were analyzed descriptively. Time to progression (TTP) on first line, and progression-free survival (PFS) on second and third line of therapy were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method.

Results

Sixty-seven percent (n = 119) of patients had metastatic disease at initial diagnosis of breast cancer. Mean age at chart data extraction was 65.8 (SD: 9.4) years. Aromatase inhibitors (AIs) were prescribed for 58% and around 13% of patients in first line and second line, respectively. Chemotherapy was prescribed to 14% in first line and 31% in second line. Median TTP on first line therapy was 12 months for patients receiving AIs as compared to 7.9 months for patients receiving chemotherapy. Across all treatment lines, bone pain and fatigue were reported as the main symptoms associated with disease progression which had an impact on patient quality of life. Physicians expressed that prolonging life was deemed the most important treatment goal, followed by preservation or improvement of quality of life.

Conclusion

In this study the majority of patients received endocrine therapy as first line treatment and current therapies still resulted in a short time to progression in first line. Results from the chart review and the physician survey highlight a quantitative unmet need for more effective treatments which delay disease progression and improve survival outcomes while maintaining quality of life.

Real-World Analysis of Medical Costs and Healthcare Resource Utilization in Elderly Women with HR+/HER2- Metastatic Breast Cancer Receiving Everolimus-Based Therapy or Chemotherapy

INTRODUCTION

The objective of this study was to analyze medical costs and healthcare resource utilization (HRU) associated with everolimus-based therapy or chemotherapy among elderly women with hormone-receptor-positive, human-epidermal-growth-factor-receptor-2-negative (HR+/HER2-) metastatic breast cancer (mBC).

METHODS

Elderly women (≥65 years) with HR+/HER2- mBC who failed a non-steroidal-aromatase-inhibitor and subsequently began a new line of treatment with everolimus-based therapy or chemotherapy for mBC (index therapy) during July 20, 2012 to March 31, 2014 were identified from two large commercial claims databases. All-cause, BC-, and adverse event (AE)-related medical costs (2014 USD), and all-cause and AE-related HRU per patient per month (PPPM) were compared between patients treated with everolimus-based therapy and chemotherapy across their first four lines of therapy for mBC. Adjusted costs and HRU differences were estimated by pooling all lines and using multivariable models adjusted for differences in patient characteristics.

RESULTS

In total, 925 elderly patients (mean age approximately 73 years) with HR+/HER2- mBC met the inclusion criteria; 230 received everolimus-based therapy (240 lines) and 737 received chemotherapy (939 lines). Compared with chemotherapy, everolimus-based therapy was associated with significantly lower total all-cause PPPM medical services costs (adjusted mean difference: $4007), driven by lower inpatient ($1994) and outpatient ($1402) costs; lower BC-related medical services costs ($3129), driven by both BC-related inpatient ($1883) and outpatient costs ($913); and lower AE-related medical services costs ($1873; all P < 0.01). Additionally, compared to patients treated with chemotherapy, patients treated with everolimus-based therapy had fewer all-cause outpatient visits (adjusted incidence rate ratio = 0.69), BC-related outpatient visits (0.66), other-medical-service visits (0.65), and AE-related HRU (0.59), which was driven by significantly fewer AE-related outpatient visits (0.56; all P < 0.01). Subgroup analyses comparing medical costs of everolimus-based therapy with capecitabine monotherapy showed consistent results overall.

CONCLUSION

This retrospective claims database analysis of elderly women with HR+/HER2- mBC in the United States showed that everolimus-based therapy was associated with significantly lower all-cause, BC-related, and AE-related medical services costs and less use of healthcare resources compared with chemotherapy.

FUNDING

Novartis.

Treatment patterns and factors associated with the use of everolimus among post-menopausal women with HR+/HER2- metastatic breast cancer: a retrospective US claims study

OBJECTIVE

To assess the real-world use of everolimus in the treatment of hormone-receptor-positive/human-epidermal-growth-factor-receptor-2-negative (HR+/HER2-) metastatic-breast-cancer (mBC).

METHODS

Postmenopausal women with HR+/HER2- mBC who initiated a new therapy for mBC between 20 July 2012 and 31 March 2014 after a non-steroidal-aromatase-inhibitor were identified from two commercial claims databases. Multivariate logistic regressions were used to identify factors associated with everolimus use versus endocrine-monotherapy or chemotherapy. Dosing patterns and adherence to everolimus were summarized.

RESULTS

A total of 940 everolimus, 6,134 endocrine-monotherapy, and 3,410 chemotherapy regimens were included across patients' first four lines of therapy. Patients with bone and visceral metastases were more likely to use everolimus versus endocrine-monotherapy. Patients with more comorbidities, visceral or central-nervous-system metastases, and prior chemotherapy use for mBC were less likely to use everolimus versus chemotherapy. Approximately 80% of patients initiated everolimus at label-recommended-dose of 10 mg daily; 60-70% of patients had a medical possession ratio >0.8 to everolimus, and consistently high adherence was observed across lines of therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

For HR+/HER2- mBC, patients treated with everolimus had more severe disease than patients treated with endocrine-monotherapy but less severe disease than patients treated with chemotherapy. Most patients used everolimus according to label-recommended dose and adherence was high across lines of therapy.

Effectiveness of Everolimus Versus Endocrine Monotherapy or Chemotherapy Among HR+/HER2- mBC Patients With Multiple Metastatic Sites

PURPOSE

This review compared the real-world effectiveness of everolimus-based therapy versus endocrine monotherapy or chemotherapy in postmenopausal hormone receptor positive (HR+)/ human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) metastatic breast cancer (mBC) patients with multiple metastatic sites.

METHODS

This retrospective chart review examined a nationwide sample of postmenopausal HR+/HER2- mBC women with ≥2 non-lymph-node metastatic sites. Patients must have initiated everolimus-based therapy (monotherapy or combination therapy including everolimus), endocrine monotherapy (any endocrine agent), or chemotherapy (monotherapy or combination with another chemotherapeutic or endocrine agent) for mBC between July 1, 2012 and August 15, 2013 after nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor failure. Progression-free survival and time on treatment were compared using Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox proportional hazard models, adjusting for line of therapy and baseline characteristics.

FINDINGS

One hundred patients received everolimus-based therapy, 79 received endocrine monotherapy, and 86 received chemotherapy. Everolimus-based therapy was associated with significantly longer progression-free survival and time on treatment than endocrine monotherapy and chemotherapy.

IMPLICATIONS

Among HR+/HER2- mBC patients with multiple metastatic sites, everolimus-based therapy was associated with better real-world effectiveness than endocrine monotherapy or chemotherapy.

Comparison of medical costs and healthcare resource utilization of post-menopausal women with HR+/HER2- metastatic breast cancer receiving everolimus-based therapy or chemotherapy: a retrospective claims database analysis

OBJECTIVE

To analyze medical costs and healthcare resource utilization (HRU) associated with everolimus-based therapy or chemotherapy among post-menopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive, human-epidermal-growth-factor-receptor-2-negative (HR+/HER2-) metastatic breast cancer (mBC).

METHODS

Patients with HR+/HER2- mBC who discontinued a non-steroidal aromatase inhibitor and began a new line of treatment with everolimus-based therapy or chemotherapy (index therapy/index date) between July 20, 2012 and April 30, 2014 were identified from two large claims databases. All-cause, BC-related, and adverse event (AE)-related medical costs (in 2014 USD) and all-cause HRU per patient per month (PPPM) were analyzed for both treatment groups across patients' first four lines of therapies for mBC. Adjusted differences in costs and HRU between the everolimus and chemotherapy treatment group were estimated pooling all lines and using multivariable generalized linear models, accounting for difference in patient characteristics.

RESULTS

A total of 3298 patients were included: 902 everolimus-treated patients and 2636 chemotherapy-treated patients. Compared to chemotherapy, everolimus was associated with significantly lower all-cause (adjusted mean difference = $3455, p < 0.01) and BC-related ($2510, p < 0.01) total medical costs, with inpatient ($1344, p < 0.01) and outpatient costs ($1048, p < 0.01) as the main drivers for cost differences. Everolimus was also associated with significantly lower AE-related medical costs ($1730, p < 0.01), as well as significantly lower HRU (emergency room incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 0.83; inpatient IRR = 0.74; inpatient days IRR = 0.65; outpatient IRR = 0.71; BC-related outpatient IRR = 0.57; all p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

This retrospective claims database analysis of commercially-insured patients with HR+/HER2- mBC in the US showed that everolimus was associated with substantial all-cause, BC-related, and AE-related medical cost savings and less utilization of healthcare resources relative to chemotherapy.

Time on treatment of everolimus and chemotherapy among postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive/human-epidermal-growth-factor-receptor-2-negative metastatic breast cancer: a retrospective claims study in the US

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to compare time on treatment (TOT) among patients treated with everolimus and chemotherapy, two commonly used treatments for hormone-receptor-positive/human-epidermal-growth-factor-receptor-2-negative (HR+/HER2-) metastatic breast cancer (mBC).

METHODS

Postmenopausal women with HR+/HER2- mBC who initiated ≥1 new line of therapy for mBC during 20 July 2012-31 March 2014 after a non-steroidal aromatase inhibitor were identified from MarketScan and PharMetrics databases (2002Q1-2014Q2) using a claims-based algorithm. Patients were classified into treatment groups by regimen and line of therapy, and were followed until discontinuation of therapy, end of insurance eligibility, or data cut-off (30 June 2014). Discontinuation was defined as a treatment gap of ≥60 days; patients who did not discontinue were censored at the end of follow-up. TOT was compared between everolimus, chemotherapy, and capecitabine monotherapy using Kaplan-Meier analyses and multivariable Cox models adjusting for line of therapy, age, insurance, de novo mBC diagnosis, prior use of chemotherapy for mBC, sites of metastases, and Charlson comorbidity index.

RESULTS

Across the first four lines of therapies for mBC, a total of 940 everolimus, 3410 chemotherapy, and 721 capecitabine monotherapy regimens were included. Based on the different lines of therapies, the median TOT ranged from 5.5 to 7.2 months for everolimus, 4.3 to 4.7 months for chemotherapy, and 3.5 to 6.0 months for capecitabine monotherapy. Pooling all lines of therapies, everolimus was associated with significantly longer TOT compared to chemotherapy (multivariable-adjusted hazard ratio [HR] = 0.69, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.62-0.76) or capecitabine monotherapy (multivariable-adjusted HR = 0.73, 95% CI: 0.64-0.83). Longer TOT was consistently observed for everolimus for each line of therapy.

LIMITATIONS

Proxies used for identifying HR + /HER2- mBC and treatment line, lack of certain clinical factors in claims data, generalizability limited to commercially insured patients in the US.

CONCLUSIONS

This study found that HR+/HER2- mBC patients receiving everolimus experienced significantly longer TOT than those receiving chemotherapy overall or capecitabine monotherapy.

Clinical outcomes among HR+/HER2- metastatic breast cancer patients with multiple metastatic sites: a chart review study in the US

Background

Hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor-2-negative (HR+/HER2−) is the most common type of metastatic breast cancer (mBC). While mBC patients generally have poor prognosis with limited progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), those with multiple metastatic sites may have even worse clinical outcomes due to multiple organ involvement. This study aimed to compare clinical outcomes including PFS, time on treatment (TOT), and OS between HR+/HER2− mBC patients with multiple metastases versus those with a single metastasis in a real-world clinical setting.

Methods

This was a retrospective chart review study of postmenopausal HR+/HER2− mBC women who had failed a non-steroidal aromatase inhibitor in the adjuvant or metastatic setting and initiated a new treatment for mBC between 07/01/2012 and 04/15/2013. Patients were classified to one of two study groups (multiple metastases or single metastasis) based on the number of non-lymph-node metastases at the initiation of the new treatment. PFS, TOT and OS were compared between the two groups using Kaplan–Meier analyses and multivariable Cox proportional hazard models adjusting for patient disease and treatment characteristics. Separate Cox models were conducted including models with an interaction term between line of therapy and study group to assess the impact of multiple metastases on clinical outcomes across different lines of therapy.

Results

A total of 699 patient charts were collected, including 291 patients with multiple metastases and 408 single metastasis patients. Worse performance status and a higher proportion of prior chemotherapy for mBC were observed among patients with multiple metastases. Overall, patients with multiple metastases had significantly shorter PFS [adjusted hazard ratio (HR) = 1.55, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.21–1.98], TOT (adjusted HR = 1.33, 95 % CI 1.05–1.67), and OS (adjusted HR = 1.77, 95 % CI 1.15–2.74) than single metastasis patients. Similar outcomes were observed in each line of therapy.

Conclusions

Among HR+/HER2− mBC patients, patients with multiple metastases had significantly shorter PFS, TOT, and OS than single metastasis patients, highlighting the substantial clinical burden and unmet need for more efficacious treatments for the former group of patients.

Everolimus use and associated factors among post-menopausal women with hormonal receptor positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 negative metastatic breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Everolimus has been shown to be an effective HR+/HER2- mBC treatment in both clinical trials and real-world practice. The current study aims at understanding factors associated with everolimus use and how it is used in the real world.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was conducted among postmenopausal HR+/HER2- mBC women who received everolimus, endocrine therapy (ET), or chemotherapy (CT) for mBC between 1 July 2012 and 15 April 2013 after an NSAI failure. Factors associated with everolimus use versus ET or CT were identified using multivariable logistic regressions. Reasons for prescribing everolimus and everolimus treatment patterns were described.

RESULTS

Liver metastasis and high tumor volume were associated with a higher likelihood of everolimus use versus ET (OR = 1.67, OR = 1.62) but a lower likelihood of everolimus use versus CT (OR = 0.43, OR = 0.30). Medicare-only insurance (OR = 0.30) as well as ECOG ≥2 (OR = 3.72) and prior CT in mBC (OR = 2.76) were associated with a lower and higher likelihood of everolimus use versus CT, respectively. The top reason for prescribing everolimus was efficacy (69-85%). About 15% and 29% of everolimus users in second line and third line or above received prior CT for mBC. Exemestane was the most common concomitant therapy with everolimus (56-87%). The majority of patients initiated everolimus at the labeled dose of 10 mg daily (>80%) and maintained this dose (>80%).

CONCLUSIONS

In the real world, everolimus was used in more severe patients than ET but less severe patients than CT based on visceral metastasis, tumor volume, and performance status. The top reason for prescribing everolimus was efficacy. A large proportion of patients received first or second line CT before everolimus initiation. The majority of patients used everolimus according to the labeled combination and dose. Future studies are needed to determine optimal sequencing of everolimus, ET, and CT for HR+/HER2- mBC.