REAL-WORLD TREATMENT PATTERNS AMONG PATIENTS WITH METASTATIC UROTHELIAL CANCER RECEIVING SECOND-LINE THERAPY IN THE US VETERAN POPULATION
Author(s)
Bhanegaonkar A1, Kim R2, Pandya S3, Krulewicz S4, Wang L3, Pennock G1, Phatak H1
1EMD Serono, Inc., Rockland, MA, USA, 2Pfizer, Inc., New York, NY, USA, 3STATinMED Research, Plano, TX, USA, 4Pfizer, Inc., Collegeville, PA, USA
Presentation Documents
OBJECTIVES To assess baseline characteristics and treatment patterns among patients in the US Veterans Health Administration with metastatic urothelial cancer (mUC) treated with second-line (2L) therapy. METHODS This retrospective study identified newly diagnosed treatment-naive adult patients with mUC who received ≥2 lines of therapy from 01Oct2013-31Jan2018. The 2L therapy was defined by the earliest new therapy added >30 days after first-line (1L) therapy start, regimen switch, or a new/existing regimen beginning >90 days after prior regimen end (index date=2L therapy start date). Patients were required to have continuous health plan enrollment from ≥6 months pre–initial UC diagnosis date until ≥2 months post–index date with follow-up until death or study end. Duration of 2L therapy was assessed as period between index date and earliest of last prescription’s end date, third-line therapy start date, or follow-up end and was compared among patients treated with chemotherapy vs those treated with immunotherapy using log-rank tests of Kaplan-Meier curves. RESULTS Of 149 patients with mUC, 64% and 36% were treated with 2L chemotherapy and immunotherapy, respectively. Patient characteristics were similar; ≥75% were white men aged ≥65 years with mean Charlson comorbidity index of ≥5 during the 6 months prior to index date. During the pre-index period, time from 1L to 2L therapy was significantly longer in the immunotherapy cohort (230 vs 150 days; p=0.0055). Carboplatin+gemcitabine (24%) and docetaxel (14%) were the most commonly recommended 2L chemotherapy regimens. Patients prescribed immunotherapy had a significantly longer duration of 2L therapy during the follow-up period than those administered chemotherapy (median, 196 vs 91 days; p=0.0003). CONCLUSIONS Current study findings suggest that mUC patients treated with IO regimens had significantly prolonged treatment duration relative to chemotherapy-treated patients in the 2L setting. Future research should examine the impact of these newer therapies on clinical and economic benefits.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2019-05, ISPOR 2019, New Orleans, LA, USA
Value in Health, Volume 22, Issue S1 (2019 May)
Acceptance Code
TP1
Topic
Health Service Delivery & Process of Care
Topic Subcategory
Treatment Patterns and Guidelines
Disease
Oncology