OBJECTIVES: Endometrial Cancer Health Outcomes Study in Argentina (ECHOS-A) was a real-world database study evaluating treatment patterns and health outcomes in patients with endometrial cancer (EC) in Argentina. This analysis describes first (1L) and second line (2L) systemic therapy treatment patterns.

METHODS: A retrospective cohort study using electronic medical records for patients affiliated to a health insurance plan, with an EC diagnosis between 2010—2019. Index (proxy for diagnosis) was the first date of an EC-related health term or procedure/treatment. Diagnosis was confirmed by specialists. Among patients receiving systemic treatment, International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) staging was evaluated, proportions of patients by treatment class calculated, and the most common 1L (dispensed within the initial 30-day cycle) and 2L regimens described.

RESULTS: Among the 805 patients identified with EC, 198 (24.6%) received ≥1and 90 (11.2%) ≥2 lines of systemic treatment during follow-up. Mean follow-up was 33.6 (standard deviation, 31.7) months. FIGO staging at diagnosis in the systemically treated population was I-44.9%, II-17.4%, III-24.6%, IV-13.2%. Proportions of patients receiving 1L and 2L systemic therapy, respectively, of each class (alone or in combination with other classes) were: platinum chemotherapy, 73.7% and 36.7%; non-platinum chemotherapy, 73.7% and 62.2%; immunotherapy, 1.0% and 11.1% and hormone therapy, 17.7% and 26.7%. The most frequent regimens in 1L were: carboplatin/paclitaxel (52.5%), tamoxifen (8.1%), anastrozole (5.6%), carboplatin (5.1%) and cisplatin/doxorubicin/paclitaxel (4.5%); and in 2L were: carboplatin/paclitaxel (14.4%), doxorubicin (12.2%), letrozole (10.0%), tamoxifen (7.8%) and anastrozole (7.8%).

CONCLUSIONS: Platinum and non-platinum chemotherapy dominated treatment choice in 1L systemic therapy, but use of platinum decreased in 2L. In contrast to chemotherapy, hormone therapy and immunotherapy were more common in 2L than 1L. Paclitaxel/carboplatin was the most frequent 1L regimen. The absence of a preferred regimen in 2L reflects the need for better agents in this setting.