Persistence and compliance among U.S. patients receiving pazopanib or sunitinib as first-line therapy for advanced renal cell carcinoma: a retrospective claims analysis

Oral Anticancer Agent (OAA) Adherence and Survival in Elderly Patients With Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma (mRCC)

OBJECTIVE

To examine real-world adherence to oral anticancer agents (OAAs) and its association with outcomes among Medicare beneficiaries with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC).

METHODS

SEER-Medicare retrospective cohort study of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) who received an OAA between 2007 and 2015. We examined A) adherence and B) overall and disease-specific 2-year survival landmarked at 3 months after OAA initiation. Adherence was assessed by calculating the proportion of days covered (PDC) within 3 months of OAA initiation, with adherent use being defined as PDC > 80%.

RESULTS

A total of 905 patients met study criteria, of whom 445 patients (49.2%) were categorized as adherent to initial OAA treatment. Adjusting for clinical and demographic factors revealed decreased odds of adherence associated with living within an impoverished neighborhood (OR 0.49, CI 0.0.33 - 0.74) and out-of-pocket costs > $200 (OR 0.68, CI 0.47-.98). Adherence was associated with improved 2-year survival in univariate analysis (logrank test, P = .01) and a non-significant trend toward an association with decreased all-cause (HR 0.87, CI 0.72 - 1.05) and RCC-specific survival (HR 0.84, CI 0.69 - 1.03) in multivariable analysis.

CONCLUSION

Local poverty levels and high out-of-pocket costs are associated with poor initial adherence to OAA therapy in Medicare beneficiaries with mRCC, which in turn, suggests a trend toward poor overall and disease-specific survival. Efforts to improve outcomes in the broader mRCC population should incorporate OAA adherence and economic factors.

Association between cognitive impairment and oral anticancer agent use in older patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Kidney cancer is the fastest-growing cancer diagnosis in the developed world. About 16% of new cases are stage IV, which has a low five-year survival rate. Many patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) are older and may have mild cognitive impairment or dementia (MCI/D). Given prior reports of patients with dementia initiating less cancer therapy and the importance of oral anticancer agents (OAAs) in mRCC treatment, we investigated the prevalence of preexisting MCI/D in patients with mRCC and their OAA use.

METHODS

SEER-Medicare patients were analyzed who were ≥65 years, diagnosed with mRCC between 2007 and 2015, and had Medicare part D coverage. Patterns and predictors of (a) OAA utilization within the 12 months following mRCC diagnosis and (b) adherence (percent of days covered [PDC] ≥ 80%) during the first 90 days following treatment initiation were assessed.

RESULTS

Of the 2792 eligible patients, 268 had preexisting MCI/D, and 907 initiated OAA treatment within 12 months of mRCC diagnosis. Patients with preexisting MCI/D were less likely to begin an OAA than those without MCI/D (fully-adjusted HR 0.53, 95% CI 0.38-0.76). Among OAA initiators, a preexisting MCI/D diagnosis did not alter the likelihood that a person would be adherent (adjusted RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.55-1.28).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with preexisting MCI/D were half as likely to start an OAA during the year following mRCC diagnosis than patients without comorbid MCI/D. The 90-day adherence of OAA initiators was not significantly different between those with and without preexisting MCI/D. In light of this, clinicians should assess mRCC patients for cognitive impairment and take steps to optimize OAA utilization by those with MCI/D.

Descriptive analysis of real-world medication use pattern of statins and antiplatelet agents among patients with acute coronary syndrome in Hong Kong and the USA

OBJECTIVES

The objective was to explore the differences in medication use pattern of lipid-lowering drug (LLD) and antiplatelet agents among post-percutaneous coronary intervention patients with acute coronary syndrome aged <65 in Hong Kong (HK) and the USA.

DESIGN

Retrospective study.

SETTING

This study used deidentified claims data from Clinformatics Data Mart database (OptumInsight, Eden Prairie, Minnesota, USA) and electronic health records from HK Hospital Authority Clinical Data Analysis and Reporting System database.

PARTICIPANTS

We used 1 year prescription records of LLDs and antiplatelet agents among 1013 USA patients and 270 HK Chinese patients in 2011-2013.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Continuity was investigated on the assumption that one defined daily dose represented 1 day treatment. Medication possession ratio method was used to evaluate the adherence. Multivariate-adjusted logistic regressions were constructed to compare the good continuity and adherence levels in the merged database with the cutoffs set at 80%, and Cox proportional hazard models were built using the time to discontinuation as the dependent variable, to assess the persistence level.

RESULTS

HK Chinese patients were less adherent (67.41% vs 84.60%, adjusted odds ratio (AOR) for Americans over Chinese=2.23 (95% CI=1.60 to 3.12), p<0.001) to antiplatelet agents compared with American patients but better adherent to statins (90.00% vs 78.18%, AOR=0.37 (0.23 to 0.58), p<0.001). The discontinuation with statins was more common in American patients (13.33% vs 34.25%, adjusted hazard ratio (AHR)=2.95 (2.05 to 4.24), p<0.001). Low-to-moderate potency statins and clopidogrel were favoured by our HK local physicians, while American patients received higher doses of statins and prasugrel.

CONCLUSIONS

We seemed to find HK physicians tended to prescribe cheaper and lower doses of statins and antiplatelet agents when compared with the privately insured patients in the USA, though the adherence and persistence levels of HK patients with statins were relatively good.

Pazopanib has equivalent anti-tumor effectiveness and lower Total costs than Sunitinib for treating metastatic or advanced renal cell carcinoma: a meta-analysis

Background

Sunitinib and pazopanib are extensively used as first-line treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). We performed this meta-analysis to assess the anti-tumor effectiveness, toxicity, and total costs of the two drugs among patients with mRCC/advanced RCC (aRCC).

Materials and Methods: PubMed, ScienceDirect, Scopus, Web of Science, Ovid MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, Embase, and Google Scholar were searched to obtain eligible articles. The endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), adverse effects (AEs), and per-patient-per-month (PPPM) costs.

Results

We included 14 medium- to high-quality studies. Both drugs were valid for mRCC/aRCC, with equivalent PFS (hazard ratio (HR) =1.06, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.98–1.15, P = 0.13), OS (HR = 0.92, 95% CI: 0.79–1.07, P = 0.29), objective response rate (ORR, risk ratio (RR) =1.03, 95% CI: 0.93–1.13, p = 0.58), and disease control rate (DCR, RR = 1.03, 95% CI: 0.94–1.22, P = 0.54). Sunitinib had more dosage reductions and higher PPPM (weighted mean difference = − 1.50 thousand US dollars, 95% CI: − 2.27 to − 0.72, P = 0.0002). Furthermore, more incidences of severe fatigue, thrombocytopenia, and neutropenia were recorded for sunitinib, but pazopanib had more liver toxicity. In subgroup analysis, studies from the US reported longer OS (HR = 0.86, 95% CI: 0.77–0.95, P = 0.004) and higher ORR (RR = 1.24, 95% CI: 1.03–1.51, P = 0.03).

Conclusions

Pazopanib provides equivalent anti-tumor effectiveness and lower PPPM as compared with sunitinib for mRCC/aRCC. Great care should be given to pazopanib-treated patients with abnormal liver function. Nevertheless, more large-scale, high-quality studies are required.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12885-019-5704-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The effect of medication nonadherence on progression-free survival among patients with renal cell carcinoma

OBJECTIVE

To examine how observed medication nonadherence to 2 second-line, oral anticancer medications (axitinib and everolimus) affects progression-free survival (PFS) among patients with renal cell carcinoma.

METHODS

We used an adherence-exposure-outcome model to simulate the impact of adherence on PFS. Using a pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) population model, we simulated drug exposure measured by area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) and minimum blood or trough concentration (Cmin) under 2 scenarios: 1) optimal adherence and 2) real-world adherence. Real-world adherence was measured using the medication possession ratios as calculated from health insurance claims data. A population PK/PD model was simulated on individuals drawn from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS), a large survey broadly representative of the US population. Finally, we used previously published PK/PD models to estimate the effect of drug exposure (i.e., Cmin and AUC) on PFS outcomes under optimal and real-world adherence scenarios.

RESULTS

Average adherence measured using medication possession ratios was 76%. After applying our simulation model to 2164 individuals in MEPS, drug exposure was significantly higher among adherent patients compared with nonadherent patients for axitinib (AUC: 249.5 vs. 159.8 ng×h/mL, P<0.001) and everolimus (AUC: 185.4 vs. 118.0 µg×h/L, P<0.001). Patient nonadherence in the real world decreased the expected PFS from an optimally adherent population by 29% for axitinib (8.4 months with optimal adherence vs. 6.0 months using real-world adherence, P<0.001) and by 5% (5.5 vs. 5.2 months, P<0.001) for everolimus.

CONCLUSION

Nonadherence by renal cell carcinoma patients to second-line oral therapies significantly decreased the expected PFS.

Real-World Treatment Patterns and Costs for Patients with Renal Cell Carcinoma Initiating Treatment with Sunitinib and Pazopanib

BACKGROUND

Sunitinib and pazopanib are among the most prescribed targeted therapies for the systemic management of advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC), but published cost comparisons between the 2 agents are few and limited by methodological and population differences. Also, sunitinib is administered on a 4-week on/2-week off cycle, and pazopanib is taken continuously. Thus, appropriate use and cost comparisons between the 2 drugs require methodological approaches to account for these differences. One way to accomplish this is to substitute expected for observed days supply. Recognizing the effects of nonrepresentative days supply values is important for assessing real-world treatment patterns and costs.

OBJECTIVES

To (a) characterize demographic and clinical characteristics among patients with RCC newly initiating sunitinib or pazopanib, using a large administrative claims dataset; (b) characterize treatment patterns, persistence, and costs for each treatment group; and (c) assess the effect on treatment patterns and costs for sunitinib by substituting 42 days for prescriptions with 28- or 30-day supplies to account for sunitinib's 4-week on/2-week off dosing schedule.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study using health care claims data from the Truven MarketScan Research Databases, which include enrollment information and medical and pharmacy claims. Baseline patient demographic and clinical characteristics and treatment patterns (continuation, discontinuation, switching, or interruption; days supply; and persistence) were compared. Health care costs were calculated as mean daily index medication costs and as total, medical, and medication (all-cause and RCC-related) costs over the 12 months post-index period. Inclusion criteria were continuous health plan enrollment between 6 months pre-index and 12 months post-index; no RCC medications 6 months pre-index; ≥ 2 RCC diagnoses within ±180 days of index; and age ≥ 20 years. For demographic and clinical characteristics, treatment patterns, and costs, means (± standard deviations) for continuous data and relative frequencies for categorical data were reported. Chi-square tests or Student t-tests were used to evaluate differences other than costs. A generalized linear model with gamma distribution and log link was used for evaluating costs, controlling for patient demographic and pre-index clinical characteristics, persistence days, and index medication. All statistical tests were 2-tailed with significance set at P < 0.05 for all comparisons except for interactions with significance set at P < 0.10. The effects of substituting 42 days supply for sunitinib prescription records with 28 or 30 days supply were determined.

RESULTS

In total, 609 (15.1% of the sunitinib overall sample) sunitinib patients and 183 (8.3% of the pazopanib overall sample) pazopanib patients were included. Demographic and clinical characteristics were similar for each treatment cohort. The persistence periods and number of prescriptions filled were also similar. Without substitution, significant differences were observed between treatment groups in patterns of index medication use (overall P = 0.0409), with fewer patients taking sunitinib continuing treatment than patients taking pazopanib. However, with substitution, treatment patterns differed significantly (overall P = 0.0026), but with more sunitinib patients than pazopanib patients continuing treatment. Without substitution, unadjusted daily mean index medication costs were significantly different for sunitinib ($216) versus pazopanib ($177, P < 0.0001). Substitution of sunitinib days supply eliminated the significant differences in daily index medication costs between treatment groups. The 1-year RCC-related and all-cause medication, medical, and total unadjusted costs were not significantly different between treatment groups, and substitution had no effect on these costs. After adjustment for possible confounding factors, these cost results were similar to those found with unadjusted analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, patients with RCC who were initiating sunitinib and pazopanib had similar demographic and clinical characteristics and drug persistence patterns. The effect of substituting days supply values was demonstrated as an approach to considering differences in dosing cycles. Substitution significantly reduced sunitinib mean daily index medication costs and eliminated or reversed the direction of significant differences in costs between drugs during the persistence period. No significant differences were observed in unadjusted or adjusted 1-year costs.

DISCLOSURES

This study was funded and conducted fully by Pfizer. All authors are employees of Pfizer. This work was presented in part as posters at the 2015 Genitourinary Cancers Symposium, of the American Society of Clinical Oncology; Rosen Shingle Creek, Orlando, FL; February 26-28, 2015, and the 20th Annual International Meeting of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research; Philadelphia, PA; May 16-20, 2015. All authors contributed to study concept and design and to data interpretation. Mardekian was primarily responsible for data collection, along with Harnett. MacLean and Harnett worked on the manuscript, which was revised by MacLean and Mardekian.

Patterns of Care in Patients with Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Among a U.S. Payer Population with Commercial or Medicare Advantage Membership

BACKGROUND

Several systemic therapies are now approved for first- and second-line treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Although the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines offer physicians evidence-based recommendations for therapy, there are few real-world studies to help inform the utilization of these agents in clinical practice.

OBJECTIVES

To (a) describe the patterns of use associated with systemic therapies for mRCC among Humana members in the United States diagnosed with mRCC, (b) assess consistency with the NCCN guidelines for treatment, and (c) to describe the initial first-line therapy regimen by prescriber specialty and site of care.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study using Humana's claims database of commercially insured patients and patients insured by the Medicare Advantage Prescription Drug plan. The study period was from January 1, 2007, to December 31, 2013. Patients with mRCC were identified by ICD-9-CM codes 189.0/189.1 and 196.xx to 199.xx; all patients were between 18 and 89 years of age, had received systemic therapy for their disease, and were followed up for 180 days. Outcome measures included choice of initial systemic therapy, starting and ending doses, first-line treatment persistence and compliance, and choice of second-line therapy. Persistence was measured using time to discontinuation of first-line therapy and proportion of days covered (PDC; the ratio of [total days of drug available minus days of supply of last prescription] to [last prescription date minus first prescription date]). Compliance was measured using the medication possession ratio (MPR; the ratio of [total days supply minus days supply of last prescription] to [last prescription date minus first prescription date]).

RESULTS

A total of 649 patients met all inclusion criteria; 109 were insured by commercial plans and 540 were insured by Medicare. The mean ± SD age of patients was 68.6 ± 9.4 years, and 68.6% were male; Medicare patients were older than commercial patients (71.7 ± 7.4 vs. 56.6 ± 9.1 years, respectively; P < 0.001). The most common comorbidities among the patient population were hypertension, hyperlipidemia, diabetes, and heart disease. The majority of patients (68.6%) received an oral tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) as their first line of therapy: 43.9% received sunitinib, 14.0% received sorafenib, 10.0% received pazopanib, and 0.6% received axitinib. Mean ± SD time to discontinuation of first-line TKI treatment was 169.1 ± 29.5 days with sunitinib, 160.3 ± 41.1 days with pazopanib, and 160.1 ± 41.4 days with sorafenib. Other first-line therapies included inhibitors of mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) (19.7%) and the antivascular endothelial growth factor agent bevacizumab (9.4%). Among patients receiving mTOR inhibitors, 14.8% were started on temsirolimus and 4.9% were started on everolimus. The median starting and ending doses were the same for each drug except for sunitinib. Mean ± SD times to discontinuation of temsirolimus, everolimus, and bevacizumab were 171.8 ± 26.2, 137.0 ± 62.2, and 150.8 ± 56.0 days, respectively. Persistence on first-line regimen as measured by PDC was high (PDC ≥ 80%) for 89% of oral therapies and 77% of injectable therapies; first-line compliance was high (MPR ≥ 80%) for 77% of oral therapies and 68% of injectables. Among patients who received second-line therapy, the most common regimen was everolimus (29.2%), followed by bevacizumab (19.8%), temsirolimus (15.6%), and sunitinib (13.6%). Specialty codes obtained from the database provider identified internal medicine specialists and oncologists as the most common prescribers of TKIs and mTOR inhibitors.

CONCLUSIONS

Patterns of use were similar for each of the prescribed systemic treatments for mRCC, and the majority of patients were highly persistent and compliant with first-line therapies. Time to treatment discontinuation was slightly longer with oral agents compared with injectable drugs.

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.

Comparing two tyrosine kinase inhibitors for treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma in Medicare and commercially insured patients

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to compare treatment characteristics, survival and costs for sunitinib and pazopanib for advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) in a real-world setting.

METHODS

Using claims data, this observational, retrospective cohort study selected individuals aged 19 to 89 years, with commercial or Medicare insurance, advanced RCC, and at least one pharmacy claim for sunitinib or pazopanib between 1 November 2009 and 31 December 2012. Treatment characteristics (treatment interruption, adherence, duration and discontinuation), survival, and costs were measured up to 12 months. Statistical models were adjusted for age, gender, geographic region, race, and RxRisk-V score.

RESULTS

At baseline, pazopanib patients exhibited significantly worse health status indicators (RxRisk-V score, number of pharmacy claims, and pre-index total healthcare costs) than sunitinib patients. There were no differences in treatment characteristics or survival. Index medication costs (mean difference $5580, p = 0.03, adj p = 0.05) and total healthcare costs (mean difference $12,192, p = 0.09, adj p = 0.07) trended higher with sunitinib. Patients non-adherent with sunitinib incurred significantly higher total costs compared to patients non-adherent with pazopanib (mean difference $17,680, p = 0.04, adj p = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Mortality data and proxy variables for treatment effectiveness indicate comparable clinical value for both medications. Sunitinib treatment trended towards higher index medication and total healthcare costs despite higher pre-index total costs and worse health status indicators at baseline with pazopanib. Non-adherence with sunitinib was associated with significantly higher total healthcare costs, which may indicate differences in tolerability between the two agents and requires further investigation.