Physician reported treatment patterns and outcomes in metastatic bladder cancer in the USA: the CancerMPact® Survey 2020

Aim: This study assessed physician-reported treatment patterns for metastatic bladder cancer. Materials & methods: A total of 106 USA-based physicians were surveyed in 2020 using the CancerMPact® online survey. Results: Among cisplatin-eligible patients, 86.1% received first-line (1L) platinum-containing chemotherapy, most commonly cisplatin plus gemcitabine, and 9.8% received immune checkpoint inhibitor monotherapy. Among cisplatin-ineligible patients, 46.5% received 1L platinum-containing chemotherapy, most commonly carboplatin plus gemcitabine and 46.2% received 1L immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy. Approximately 44% of patients who received 1L treatment received second-line (2L) therapy after progression. Conclusion: Platinum-containing chemotherapy was the most widely reported 1L treatment approach. A high proportion of patients received no 2L therapy. Validation in an updated dataset is warranted following the practice-changing approvals of avelumab 1L maintenance and additional 2L options.

Treatment patterns in metastatic bladder cancer in Japan: results of the CancerMPact® survey 2020

Aim: To assess physician-reported treatment of metastatic bladder cancer in Japan. Methods: 76 physicians completed the CancerMPact® survey in July 2020, considering patients treated within 6 months. Results: Physicians treated a mean of 38.1 patients per month. Of cisplatin-eligible and -ineligible patients, 97.6 and 89.3%, respectively, received first-line platinum-based therapy, most commonly cisplatin plus gemcitabine (72.9%) and carboplatin plus gemcitabine (59.7%). 1.6 and 5.6% received first-line immune checkpoint inhibitors, respectively. 48.4 and 45.0%, respectively, progressed and received second-line therapy, most commonly with pembrolizumab (61.7%). Conclusion: In 2020, most patients with metastatic bladder cancer in Japan received first-line platinum-based chemotherapy; however, >50% received no subsequent treatment, highlighting the need for new treatment regimens to improve outcomes and maximize first-line treatment benefits.

Metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer without driver mutations: projections by therapy line in Western Europe, 2021-2026

Aim: To estimate the incidence, prevalence and treated prevalence by line of therapy (LOT) for non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients without driver mutations from 2021 to 2026. Materials & methods: Country-specific registry data for Western Europe were used to project incidence and prevalence of NSCLC; LOT information was obtained from CancerMPact® Treatment Architecture physician surveys. Results: Incidence, prevalence and treated prevalence across LOTs for NSCLC are projected to increase across five WE countries, including for stage IV patients without driver mutations (184,966 cases [2021] to 197,925 [2026]). Pembrolizumab monotherapy is utilized by ∼50% of NSCLC patients with programmed death-ligand 1 expression ≥50%. Conclusion: Improved treatment options for NSCLC patients without known driver mutations are important for combating the projected increase in prevalence.

Treatment of HR+/HER2− breast cancer in urban mainland China: results from the CancerMPact Survey 2019

Purpose

To report the treatment utilization patterns for hormone receptor-positive (HR+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2−) breast cancer in urban mainland China (CancerMPact®).

Methods

The results presented are from an online survey conducted in September 2019 with 45 physicians treating breast cancer patients from 11 cities in mainland China.

Results

Surveyed physicians reported that Stage I HR+/HER2(−) breast cancer patients are often treated with surgery alone (42%), whereas the use of surgery in combination with systemic therapy with or without radiotherapy increases in later stages (Stage II 67%, Stage III 77%). Doxorubicin–cyclophosphamide (AC)-based regimens were the most common in both the neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings in HR+/HER2(−) breast cancer patients, across all stages. In metastatic patients, use of surgery and radiotherapy decreases in favor of utilization of systemic therapy alone. Pre- and post-menopausal metastatic patients were frequently treated with hormone therapy or AC-based regimens in first line. Regardless of the first-line therapy administered, capecitabine-based regimens were commonly used in second line. In third line, chemotherapy regimens containing capecitabine or gemcitabine were given to nearly 40% of HR+/HER2(−) breast cancer patients. There were no standard of care regimens established for fourth or greater lines of treatment. In metastatic HR+/HER2(−) breast cancer, physicians reported 50% objective response rates in first-line settings with a progression-free survival of 16 months.

Conclusion

HR+/HER2(−) breast cancer patients in urban mainland China were prescribed chemotherapy regimens more frequently than CDK4/6 inhibitors. Treatment practices varied, with physicians reporting the use of multiple modalities and treatment regimens for their patients.

Patterns of Care and Outcomes for Non-Metastatic Prostate Cancer in the United States: Results of the CancerMPact® Survey 2018

Purpose

We describe patterns of care and treatment outcomes for non-metastatic PCa (nmPCA), either hormone-sensitive or castration-resistant, in the United States of America (USA) in 2018.

Methods

A survey (CancerMPact^®) recruited physicians nationwide to answer an online questionnaire about how they treated patients with nmPCA. Questions covered aspects of treatment at all disease stages. Board-certified urologists and oncologists with at least five years of clinical practice and who treated at least 30 PCa patients monthly were included.

Results

The survey included responses from ninety-four physicians with an average of 17.5 years of clinical practice, who had treated a combined average of 4415 patients with nmPCA per month in 2018. Approximately 40% of patients in stage I were managed with either active surveillance or observation/no therapy, decreasing to 20%, 8% and 6% in stages II, III and IV(M0), respectively. Intensity-modulated radiotherapy was favored over other radiotherapy modalities, with rates of use ranging between 60% and 69% depending on disease stage. Leuprolide as monotherapy or in combination with enzalutamide, abiraterone or bicalutamide were the most common systemic treatment options for non-metastatic hormone-sensitive PCa (nmHSPC) patients with the first or second recurrence. Only 16.5% of non-metastatic castration-resistant PCa (nmCRPC) patients did not relapse within five years of initial therapy for nmCRPC.

Conclusion

While PCa treatment recommendations are rapidly changing due to advances in treatment, we observed great concordance between their most current versions and real-world data treatment patterns reported by US physicians.

Treatment patterns in non-small-cell lung cancer in China: Results from the CancerMPact survey 2020

PURPOSE

To report the treatment patterns of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients in China based on a survey of physicians (CancerMPact).

METHODS

117 Chinese physicians from 27 cities in mainland China were recruited for an online survey in October 2020, reporting on how they treat their patients across all disease stages, including histology and relevant biomarkers in advanced or metastatic NSCLC.

RESULTS

Surveyed physicians indicated that almost half of their stage I patients were treated with surgery only. For stage II patients, it is more common to treat with surgery in combination with radiation and/or systemic therapy (44.5%), whereas the use of surgery decreases for stage III patients and the overall use of systemic therapy increases (63.4%-68.8%). Physicians are more likely to use systemic therapy alone for stage IV patients (31.4%). Chosen treatment regimens for stage IV NSCLC varied by histology and biomarkers, and several observed treatment patterns differed from the USA. In China, platinum-based chemotherapy is standard of care for treating stage IV NSCLC patients, unlike the USA, where checkpoint inhibitors are the dominant choice in first-line. Further, Chinese physicians reported prescribing biomarker-targeted agents for one-third or less of their patients with EGFR, ALK, ROS-1, or BRAF driver mutations, compared to 60-95% in the USA.

CONCLUSION

As treatment options expand in NSCLC in China, physicians face complex decisions for the treatment of their patients. Treatment patterns often vary, including by disease histology and clinically relevant biomarkers. The standard of care for NSCLC in China also differs from the USA.

Epidemiology of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) and follicular lymphoma (FL) in the United States and Western Europe: population-level projections for 2020-2025

Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) and follicular lymphoma (FL) treatments have been rapidly evolving for patients treated in later lines of therapy (LoT). Country-specific cancer registry data for the US and Western Europe (WE) were combined with physician survey results to project the incidence, prevalence, and number of DLBCL and FL patients eligible for and treated by LoT between 2020 and 2025. The total number of incidents and prevalent cases of DLBCL and FL is expected to increase between 2020 and 2025 in the US and WE. 56% and 53% of the third line plus (3L+) eligible DLBCL patients and 60% and 55% of eligible FL patients initiated treatment in the US and WE, respectively. Further research is warranted to understand the reasons behind the high proportion of treatment eligible patients who do not initiate treatment, and potential differences between countries, especially in the 3L + settings.

Estimate of multiple myeloma patients by line of therapy in the USA: population-level projections 2020-2025

Aim: To report the results of a patient epidemiology model for multiple myeloma (MM) treatment by line of therapy (LOT) in the USA. Materials & methods: Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results registry data and physician surveys were combined to project the incidence, prevalence and the number of MM patients treated with systemic therapy by LOT between 2020 and 2025. Results: Projected complete MM prevalence in the USA in 2020 was 144,922, increasing to 162,339 in 2025. Corresponding unique MM patients by LOT in 2020 were: 53,176 (1st; minimum-maximum: 47,304-59,212), 19,407 (2nd; 15,935-23,273), 6,481 (3rd; 5143-8877), 1649 (4th; 1146-2667) and 426 (5th; 217-876). Conclusion: MM incidence and prevalence by LOT is projected to continue to increase in the USA between 2020 and 2025.

Treatment of Advanced/Metastatic Melanoma in the United States and Western Europe: Results of the CancerMPact Survey

Context

Melanoma treatment has substantially changed over the last several years, yet little information regarding physician's preferences around treatment exists.

Objective

Our aim is to describe the results of the CancerMPact (CMP) survey performed in 2019 about the treatment of advanced/metastatic melanoma.

Methods

CMP is a data source from Kantar, Health Division, containing data on cancer epidemiology and treatment. Once a year, Kantar performs a series of surveys with specialists in the field of interest in the United States of America (USA), Western Europe (WE), Japan, and China. The results of the survey reported in this work comprise the answers from 94 USA and 99 WE physicians about the treatment of melanoma.

Results

In the first-line for the BRAF wild-type population, immuno-oncology (IO) drugs including nivolumab, ipilimumab or pembrolizumab (alone or in combination) were used in 80.1% of the cases in the USA and 70.6% in WE. Conventional chemotherapy or cytokine-based treatments were used in 16.4% of the USA patients and 28.2% in WE. In the second-line in the USA, 45.8% of BRAF wild-type patients received IO drugs, while 45.0% of patients received conventional chemotherapy or cytokine-based treatments. The majority of patients with BRAF mutant advanced/metastatic melanoma were treated in the first-line with BRAF-targeted therapy (61.3% USA, 71.9% WE), and few patients received conventional chemotherapy or cytokine-based treatments (11.9% USA, 12.4% WE); the most commonly used BRAF-targeted therapy was the combination of dabrafenib plus trametinib. In the second-line, BRAF mutant patients received IO drugs (45.1% USA, 53.7% WE), targeted therapy (37.6% USA, 32% WE) or conventional chemotherapy/cytokine-based treatments (14.4% USA, 11.7% WE).

Conclusion

The use of IO or targeted therapy for patients with advanced/metastatic melanoma is the preferred treatment strategy by physicians in the USA and WE based on BRAF mutation status. Many patients still receive conventional chemotherapies or cytokines with unsubstantial benefit, especially in recurrent patients of BRAF wild type.

Treatment patterns in non-small-cell lung cancer in USA: results of the CancerMPact Survey 2018

Aim: To report the results of a survey of USA physicians (CancerMPact) that treat non-small-cell lung cancer patients. Materials & methods: 60 physicians were surveyed. Questions covered aspects of the treatment for all stages of the disease. Results: For stage I patients, over 70% of the treatments were based on surgery. For stage II/III disease, a strong preference for combined therapy (surgery/radiation/systemic therapy) was observed. For advanced/stage IV patients, physicians used systemic therapy alone, and choosed the regimen based on histology and biomarkers. Use of PD-L1 inhibitors was highly dependent on histology and biomarkers. Conclusion: The treatment choices of non-small-cell lung cancer are increasingly complex, involve different treatment modalities and are highly dependent on histology and biomarkers, besides stage.

Epidemiology of paediatric immune thrombocytopenia in the General Practice Research Database

This study assessed the incidence of immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) and characteristics associated with ITP in the paediatric population using the General Practice Research Database (GPRD). Two hundred and fifty-seven paediatric ITP patients were identified out of 1145 incident patients with ITP recorded between 1990 and 2005. The age-specific incidence for ITP in paediatric patients was 4.2 per 100,000 person-years (PY) [95% confidence interval (CI): 3.7-4.8 per 100,000 PY], with a statistically significantly higher incidence in boys compared to girls aged 2-5 years [9.7 (95% CI: 7.5-12.2) per 100,000 PY vs. 4.7 (95% CI: 3.2-6.6) per 100,000 PY, respectively]. By contrast, among teenagers aged 13-17 years, the overall incidence was lower [2.4 (95% CI: 1.7-3.3) per 100,000 PY] with a similar incidence in girls and boys. There was a relationship between age and sex with ITP incidence, suggesting that patterns of disease burden differ among children and teenagers. Evidence of an infection or immunization shortly before ITP diagnosis was apparent in 52 (20.2%) and 22 (8.6%) of the 257 paediatric ITP patients, respectively. Two deaths were observed during the study period. ITP is an important although rarely fatal disease in paediatric patients and its aetiology remains unexplained in the majority of cases.

Use of electronic medical records in oncology outcomes research

Oncology outcomes research could benefit from the use of an oncology-specific electronic medical record (EMR) network. The benefits and challenges of using EMR in general health research have been investigated; however, the utility of EMR for oncology outcomes research has not been explored. Compared to current available oncology databases and registries, an oncology-specific EMR could provide comprehensive and accurate information on clinical diagnoses, personal and medical histories, planned and actual treatment regimens, and post-treatment outcomes, to address research questions from patients, policy makers, the pharmaceutical industry, and clinicians/researchers. Specific challenges related to structural (eg, interoperability, data format/entry), clinical (eg, maintenance and continuity of records, variety of coding schemes), and research-related (eg, missing data, generalizability, privacy) issues must be addressed when building an oncology-specific EMR system. Researchers should engage with medical professional groups to guide development of EMR systems that would ultimately help improve the quality of cancer care through oncology outcomes research.