498 research outputs found

    PSY39 Predictors of Health Utilities Among Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis in Europe

    Get PDF

    PDB31 The Prevalence and Burden of Comorbid Hypertension and Obesity Among Patients With Type 2 Diabetes in Urban China

    Get PDF

    PND18 HEALTH STATUS, RESOURCE UTILIZATION, AND WORK PRODUCTIVITY FOR CAREGIVERS OF ADULTS WITH EPILEPSY: A PROPENSITY SCORE ANALYSIS OF NATIONAL SURVEY DATA

    Get PDF

    PHP88 Societal Unmet Needs within Spain

    Get PDF

    PDB67 Treatment Patterns and Health Outcomes Among Type 2 Diabetes with Comorbid Obesity in France, Germany, And UK

    Get PDF

    PMH16 THE ECONOMIC AND HUMANISTIC BURDEN OF ILLNESS IN GENERALISED ANXIETY DISORDER (GAD): A RETROSPECTIVE DATABASE ANALYSIS IN EUROPE

    Get PDF

    PCV79 Survey of Patients with Atrial Fibrillation on the Use of Warfari and Dabigatran

    Get PDF

    Real-World Usage and Clinical Outcomes of Alectinib Among Post-Crizotinib Progression Anaplastic Lymphoma Kinase Positive Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer Patients in the USA

    Get PDF
    Background: Alectinib is an approved treatment for anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-positive patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. Despite positive supporting clinical data, there is a lack of real-world information on the usage and patient outcomes of those treated with alectinib post-crizotinib progression. Methods: Participating oncologists (N=95) in the USA were recruited from an online physician panel to participate in a retrospective patient chart review. Physicians randomly selected eligible patients (ie, patients who progressed on crizotinib as their first ALK inhibitor and were treated with alectinib as their second ALK inhibitor), collected demographics and clinical history from their medical charts, and entered the data into an online data collection form. Results: A total of N=207 patient charts were included (age: 60.1±10.4 years; 53.6% male). The patients in our sample were older (median age of 60 vs 53 years), were more likely to be current smokers (12% vs 1%), had better performance status (45% vs 33% had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group [ECOG] of 0), and were less likely to have an adenocarcinoma histology (83% vs 96%) relative to published clinical trials. The objective response rate was higher than in clinical trials (67.1% vs 51.3%, respectively) as was the disease control rate (89.9% vs 78.8%, respectively), though it varied by race/ethnicity, ECOG, and prior treatment history. Discontinuation (0.0%) and dose reductions (3.4%) due to adverse events were uncommon in alectinib. Conclusion: Patients using alectinib post-crizotinib in clinical practice are older, more racially/ethnically and histologically diverse than patients in published trials. Real-world response rates were high and similar to those reported in clinical studies, though there is some variation by patient characteristics. Alectinib was well tolerated in clinical practice as reflected by the rates of discontinuation, dose reductions, and dose interruptions
    corecore