Aims
To estimate the incidence of direct oral anticoagulant drug (DOAC) use in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation and to describe user and treatment characteristics in 8 European ...healthcare databases representing 6 European countries.
Methods
Longitudinal drug utilization study from January 2008 to December 2015. A common protocol approach was applied. Annual period incidences and direct standardisation by age and sex were performed. Dose adjustment related to change in age and by renal function as well as concomitant use of potentially interacting drugs were assessed.
Results
A total of 186 405 new DOAC users (age ≥18 years) were identified. Standardized incidences varied from 1.93–2.60 and 0.11–8.71 users/10 000 (2011–2015) for dabigatran and rivaroxaban, respectively, and from 0.01–8.12 users/10 000 (2012–2015) for apixaban. In 2015, the DOAC incidence ranged from 9 to 28/10 000 inhabitants in SIDIAP (Spain) and DNR (Denmark) respectively. There were differences in population coverage among the databases. Only 1 database includes the total reference population (DNR) while others are considered a population representative sample (CPRD, BIFAP, SIDIAP, EGB, Mondriaan). They also varied in the type of drug data source (administrative, clinical). Dose adjustment ranged from 4.6% in BIFAP (Spain) to 15.6% in EGB (France). Concomitant use of interacting drugs varied between 16.4% (SIDIAP) and 70.5% (EGB). Cardiovascular comorbidities ranged from 25.4% in Mondriaan (The Netherlands) to 82.9% in AOK Nordwest (Germany).
Conclusion
Overall, apixaban and rivaroxaban increased its use during the study period while dabigatran decreased. There was variability in patient characteristics such as comorbidities, potentially interacting drugs and dose adjustment. (EMA/2015/27/PH).
Full text
Available for:
BFBNIB, FZAB, GIS, IJS, KILJ, NLZOH, NUK, OILJ, SAZU, SBCE, SBMB, UL, UM, UPUK
Purpose of Review
Bone-modifying agents have an important role in the treatment of patients with bone mineral density loss, early-stage breast cancer to reduce risk of recurrence, and metastatic ...breast cancer with bone involvement. Here we review mechanisms of action of these agents and clinical indications for their use.
Recent Findings
The meta-analysis undertaken by the Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group showed that the use of bisphosphonates was associated with a decreased risk of breast cancer recurrence.
Summary
The effect of bisphosphonates and receptor activator of nuclear factor kappa-B ligand inhibitors on bone health provides an opportunity to decrease the incidence of skeletal-related events and improve cancer outcomes in certain subsets of patients.
Full text
Available for:
EMUNI, FIS, FZAB, GEOZS, GIS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, MFDPS, NLZOH, NUK, OBVAL, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, SBMB, SBNM, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK, VKSCE, ZAGLJ
Immunotherapy has become a mainstay of cancer treatment in many malignancies, though its application in breast cancer remains limited. Of the breast cancer subtypes, triple-negative breast cancers ...(TNBCs) are characterized by immune activation and infiltration and more commonly express biomarkers associated with response to immunotherapy. Checkpoint inhibitor therapy has shown promising activity in metastatic TNBC. In 2019, the US FDA granted accelerated approval of atezolizumab, a programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitor, in combination with nab-paclitaxel for unresectable locally advanced or metastatic PD-L1-positive TNBC, based on the results of the phase III IMpassion130 trial. In 2020, the FDA also granted accelerated approval of pembrolizumab, a PD-1 inhibitor, in combination with chemotherapy for locally recurrent unresectable and metastatic PD-L1-positive TNBC, based on results of the phase III KEYNOTE-355 trial. Additional combination strategies are being explored in the treatment of metastatic TNBC, with the goal of augmenting antitumor activity. In this review, the clinical development of checkpoint inhibitors in the treatment of metastatic TNBC will be discussed, including clinical outcomes with monotherapy and combination therapy regimens, biomarkers that may predict for benefit, and future directions in the field.
Full text
Available for:
EMUNI, FIS, FZAB, GEOZS, GIS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, MFDPS, NLZOH, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, SBMB, SBNM, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK, VKSCE, ZAGLJ
The emergence of immunotherapy as a first- or second-line of treatment has revolutionized the therapeutic management of lung cancer patients. However, not all lung cancer patients receive the same ...benefit from this treatment, leading to limitations in the number of patients who can receive anti-PD-1/PD-L1 checkpoint inhibitors because some secondary toxicity has been associated with immunotherapy, and because some patients would benefit more from chemotherapy. In this context, the selection of patients is currently based on PD-L1 immunohistochemistry (IHC), specifically on the percentage of PD-L1 positive tumor cells. To date, this is the only validated biomarker that is used as a companion diagnostic test for immunotherapy in non-small cell carcinoma lung (NSCLC) patients. However, this biomarker is not sufficiently robust and demonstrates many challenges. For example, some patients with more than 50% PD-L1 positive tumor cells are non-responders to anti-PD-1/PD-L1 treatment, while conversely, other patients with no PD-L1 positive tumor cells are good responders. The tumor mutation burden (TMB) or tumor mutation load (TML) emerged recently as a new predictive biomarker for immunotherapy response in NSCLC. However, this biomarker needs to be validated for routine clinical use and shares similar constraints with the PD-L1 IHC biomarker. PD-L1 IHC and TMB are currently the two best predictive biomarkers that could soon be used to systematically inform treatment decisions in advanced or metastatic NSCLC patients. The aim of this review is to consider the possible integration of TMB testing in daily practice through a pros- and cons-debate, and to establish sample quality-dependent algorithms and the main current constraints for laboratories considering TMB assessments.
The emergence of immunotherapy in oncology requires the discovery, validation and subsequent adoption of robust, sensitive and specific predictive and prognostic biomarkers for daily practice. Until ...now, anti-PD-L1 immunohistochemistry (IHC) on tissue sections has been the only validated companion diagnostic test for first-line immunotherapy for advanced and metastatic cancer, notably non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, detection of this biomarker presents limitations that have stimulated the development of other biomarkers and other approaches. Within this context, the use of a liquid biopsy (LB) could provide an important complementary or alternative added value to PD-L1 IHC. In this review, we discuss how LBs have been used in the field of immuno-oncology (I-O) to predict response, relapse or adverse advents for patients undergoing immune-checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy (anti-PD-1/PD-L1 and CTLA-4) and we highlight recent developments. Circulating tumor cells (CTCs), cell-free DNA (cfDNA), proteins and cytokines detected in plasma as well as circulating T-lymphocytes are discussed as potential sources for developing new I-O biomarkers. The quantification of cfDNA as a predictive biomarker, as well as its sequencing for the determination of tumor mutational burden, is already well advanced. Additionally, the quantification of PD-L1 from CTCs, bound on exosomes or free in plasma, as well as the determination of cytokines, are also being actively investigated with promising results having recently been published. Lastly, analysis of T-lymphocytes, especially by analyzing the T-cell receptor, has recently emerged as a valuable biomarker that might become relevant for the prediction of response to ICIs. While LBs have not yet been implemented in routine I-O clinical practice, recent promising data and rapidly advancing technologies indicate that this approach has the potential to soon personalize the clinical management of cancer patients receiving ICIs.
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NLZOH, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UILJ, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK, ZAGLJ, ZRSKP
Randomized clinical trials compare participants receiving an experimental intervention to participants receiving standard of care (SOC). If one could predict the outcome for participants receiving ...SOC, a trial could be designed where all participants received the experimental intervention, with the observed outcome of the experimental group compared to the prediction for those individuals.
We used the CancerMath calculator to predict outcomes for participants in two large clinical trials of adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer: NSABPB15 and CALGB9344. NSABPB15 was the training set, and we used the modified algorithm to predict outcomes for two groups from CALGB9344: one which received standard of care (SOC) chemotherapy and one which received paclitaxel in addition. We made a prediction for each individual CALGB9344 participant, assuming each received only SOC.
The predicted outcome for the group which received only SOC matched what was observed in the CALGB9344 trial. In contrast, the predicted outcome for the group also receiving paclitaxel was significantly worse than what was observed for this group. This matches the conclusion of CALGB9344 that adding paclitaxel to SOC improves survival.
This project proves that a statistical model can predict the outcome of clinical trial participants treated with SOC. In some circumstances, a predictive model could be used instead of a control arm, allowing all participants to receive experimental treatment. Predictive models for cancer and other diseases could be constructed using the vast amount of outcomes data available to the federal government, and made available for public use.
Full text
Available for:
DOBA, IZUM, KILJ, NUK, PILJ, PNG, SAZU, SIK, UILJ, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK
Limited clinical data are available regarding the efficacy of EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR TKIs) in patients with NSCLC harboring uncommon EGFR mutations. This pooled analysis assessed the ...activity of afatinib in 693 patients with tumors harboring uncommon EGFR mutations treated in randomized clinical trials, compassionate-use and expanded-access programs, phase IIIb trials, noninterventional trials, and case series or studies.
Patients had uncommon EGFR mutations, which were categorized as follows: (1) T790M; (2) exon 20 insertions; (3) “major” uncommon mutations (G719X, L861Q, and S768I, with or without any other mutation except T790M or an exon 20 insertion); (4) compound mutations; and (5) other uncommon mutations. Key end points were overall response rate (ORR), duration of response, and time to treatment failure (TTF).
In EGFR TKI–naive patients (n = 315), afatinib demonstrated activity against major uncommon mutations (median TTF = 10.8 mo; 95% confidence interval CI: 8.1–16.6; ORR = 60.0%), compound mutations (median TTF = 14.7 mo; 95% CI: 6.8–18.5; ORR = 77.1%), other uncommon mutations (median TTF = 4.5 mo; 95% CI: 2.9–9.7; ORR = 65.2%), and some exon 20 insertions (median TTF = 4.2 mo; 95% CI: 2.8–5.3; ORR = 24.3%). The median duration of response for major uncommon mutations, compound mutations, other uncommon mutations, and some exon 20 insertions was 17.1, 16.6, 9.0, and 11.9 months, respectively. Activity of afatinib was also observed in EGFR TKI–pretreated patients (n = 378). A searchable database of these outcomes by individual genotype was generated.
Afatinib has clinical activity in NSCLC against major uncommon and compound EGFR mutations. It also has broad activity against other uncommon EGFR mutations and some exon 20 insertions. The data support the use of afatinib in these settings.
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NLZOH, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UILJ, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK, ZAGLJ, ZRSKP
PDF
