Cost and survival analysis of treating stage IV non -small cell lung cancer

The United States spends about 17% of its gross domestic product (GDP) on healthcare, the most of any industrialized nation. Oncology care alone accounts for 5-10% of this expenditure. Although the cancer survival data in the US are better than of most industrialized nations, the fact that healthcare expenditure is rising faster than the GDP makes the current situation unsustainable. In 2010 lung cancer accounted for 13% of the 124 billion dollars the USA spent on cancer care. Though survival for some patients with metastatic non -small cell lung cancer is improving with increasing use of targeted therapy, for the majority of patients it is still short but the amount of money spent treating them is quit high. With many different chemotherapy regimens to choose from , different threshold for individual clinicians to initiate and discontinue therapy as well as the lack of firm guidelines to image patients during treatment, we decided to study the cost and cost distribution of treating this patient population at our institution with the goal of identifying areas of waste reduction and improve efficiency

FRACTION-RCC: nivolumab plus ipilimumab for advanced renal cell carcinoma after progression on immuno-oncology therapy

Background The role and sequencing of combination immuno-oncology (IO) therapy following progression on or after first-line IO therapy has not been well-established. The Fast Real-time Assessment of Combination Therapies in Immuno-ONcology (FRACTION) program is an open-label, phase 2 platform trial designed to evaluate multiple IO combinations in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC) who progressed during or after prior IO therapy. Here, we describe the results for patients treated with nivolumab plus ipilimumab. For enrollment in track 2 (reported here), patients with histologically confirmed clear cell aRCC, Karnofsky performance status ≥70%, and life expectancy ≥3 months who had previously progressed after IO (anti-programmed death 1 (PD-1), anti-programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1), or anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 (CTLA-4)) therapy were eligible. Previous treatment with anti-CTLA-4 therapy plus anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy precluded eligibility for enrollment in the nivolumab plus ipilimumab arm. Patients were treated with nivolumab 3 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg every 3 weeks for four doses, followed by nivolumab 480 mg every 4 weeks for up to 2 years or until progression, toxicity, or protocol-specified discontinuation. The primary outcome measures were objective response rate (ORR), duration of response (DOR), and progression-free survival (PFS) rate at 24 weeks. Secondary outcomes were safety and tolerability up to 2 years. Overall survival (OS) was a tertiary/exploratory endpoint. Overall, 46 patients were included with a median follow-up of 33.8 months. The ORR was 17.4% (95% CI, 7.8 to 31.4) with eight (17.4%) patients achieving partial response. Stable disease was achieved in 19 (41.3%) patients, while 14 (30.4%) had progressive disease. Median DOR (range) was 16.4 (2.1+ to 27.0+) months. The PFS rate at 24 weeks was 43.2%, and median OS was 23.8 (95% CI, 13.2 to not reached) months. Grade 3–4 immune-mediated adverse events were reported in seven (15.2%) patients. No treatment-related deaths were reported. Patients with aRCC treated with nivolumab plus ipilimumab may derive durable clinical benefit after progression on previous IO therapies, including heavily pretreated patients, with a manageable safety profile that was consistent with previously published safety outcomes. These outcomes contribute to the knowledge of optimal sequencing of IO therapies for patients with aRCC with high unmet needs.Trial registration number NCT02996110

A Phase I Study of Combination Olaparib and Radium-223 in Men with Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer (mCRPC) with Bone Metastases (COMRADE).

Given that radium-223 is a radiopharmaceutical that induces DNA damage, and olaparib is a PARP inhibitor that interferes with DNA repair mechanisms, we hypothesized their synergy in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). We sought to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of olaparib + radium-223. We conducted a multicenter phase I 3+3 dose escalation study of olaparib with fixed dose radium-223 in patients with mCRPC with bone metastases. The primary objective was to establish the RP2D of olaparib, with secondary objectives of safety, PSA response, alkaline phosphatase response, radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS), overall survival, and efficacy by homologous recombination repair (HRR) gene status. Twelve patients were enrolled; all patients received a prior androgen receptor signaling inhibitor (ARSI; 100%) and 3 patients (25%) prior docetaxel. Dose-limiting toxicities (DLT) included cytopenias, fatigue, and nausea. No DLTs were seen in the observation period however delayed toxicities guided the RP2D. The RP2D of olaparib was 200 mg orally twice daily with radium-223. The most common treatment-related adverse events were fatigue (92%) and anemia (58%). The rPFS at 6 months was 58% (95% confidence interval, 27%-80%). Nine patients were evaluable for HRR gene status; 1 had a BRCA2 alteration (rPFS 11.8 months) and 1 had a CDK12 alteration (rPFS 3.1 months). Olaparib can be safely combined with radium-223 at the RP2D 200 mg orally twice daily with fixed dose radium-223. Early clinical benefit was observed and will be investigated in a phase II study

FRACTION-RCC: nivolumab plus ipilimumab for advanced renal cell carcinoma after progression on immuno-oncology therapy.

BACKGROUND: The role and sequencing of combination immuno-oncology (IO) therapy following progression on or after first-line IO therapy has not been well-established. The Fast Real-time Assessment of Combination Therapies in Immuno-ONcology (FRACTION) program is an open-label, phase 2 platform trial designed to evaluate multiple IO combinations in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC) who progressed during or after prior IO therapy. Here, we describe the results for patients treated with nivolumab plus ipilimumab. For enrollment in track 2 (reported here), patients with histologically confirmed clear cell aRCC, Karnofsky performance status ≥70%, and life expectancy ≥3 months who had previously progressed after IO (anti-programmed death 1 (PD-1), anti-programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1), or anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 (CTLA-4)) therapy were eligible. Previous treatment with anti-CTLA-4 therapy plus anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy precluded eligibility for enrollment in the nivolumab plus ipilimumab arm. Patients were treated with nivolumab 3 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg every 3 weeks for four doses, followed by nivolumab 480 mg every 4 weeks for up to 2 years or until progression, toxicity, or protocol-specified discontinuation. The primary outcome measures were objective response rate (ORR), duration of response (DOR), and progression-free survival (PFS) rate at 24 weeks. Secondary outcomes were safety and tolerability up to 2 years. Overall survival (OS) was a tertiary/exploratory endpoint. Overall, 46 patients were included with a median follow-up of 33.8 months. The ORR was 17.4% (95% CI, 7.8 to 31.4) with eight (17.4%) patients achieving partial response. Stable disease was achieved in 19 (41.3%) patients, while 14 (30.4%) had progressive disease. Median DOR (range) was 16.4 (2.1+ to 27.0+) months. The PFS rate at 24 weeks was 43.2%, and median OS was 23.8 (95% CI, 13.2 to not reached) months. Grade 3-4 immune-mediated adverse events were reported in seven (15.2%) patients. No treatment-related deaths were reported. Patients with aRCC treated with nivolumab plus ipilimumab may derive durable clinical benefit after progression on previous IO therapies, including heavily pretreated patients, with a manageable safety profile that was consistent with previously published safety outcomes. These outcomes contribute to the knowledge of optimal sequencing of IO therapies for patients with aRCC with high unmet needs. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02996110

Neoadjuvant Atezolizumab With Gemcitabine and Cisplatin in Patients With Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer: A Multicenter, Single-Arm, Phase II Trial.

PURPOSE: Neoadjuvant gemcitabine and cisplatin (GC) followed by radical cystectomy (RC) is standard for patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC). On the basis of the activity of atezolizumab (A) in metastatic BC, we tested neoadjuvant GC plus A for MIBC. METHODS: Eligible patients with MIBC (cT2-T4aN0M0) received a dose of A, followed 2 weeks later by GC plus A every 21 days for four cycles followed 3 weeks later by a dose of A before RC. The primary end point was non-muscle-invasive downstaging to \u3c pT2N0. RESULTS: Of 44 enrolled patients, 39 were evaluable. The primary end point was met, with 27 of 39 patients (69%) \u3c pT2N0, including 16 (41%) pT0N0. No patient with \u3c pT2N0 relapsed and four (11%) with ≥ pT2N0 relapsed with a median follow-up of 16.5 months (range: 7.0-33.7 months). One patient refused RC and two developed metastatic disease before RC; all were considered nonresponders. The most common grade 3-4 adverse event (AE) was neutropenia (n = 16; 36%). Grade 3 immune-related AEs occurred in five (11%) patients with two (5%) requiring systemic steroids. The median time from last dose of chemotherapy to surgery was 7.8 weeks (range: 5.1-17 weeks), and no patient failed to undergo RC because of AEs. Four of 39 (10%) patients had programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1)-positive tumors and were all \u3c pT2N0. Of the patients with PD-L1 low or negative tumors, 23 of 34 (68%) achieved \u3c pT2N0 and 11 of 34 (32%) were ≥ pT2N0 ( CONCLUSION: Neoadjuvant GC plus A is a promising regimen for MIBC and warrants further study. Patients with \u3c pT2N0 experienced improved relapse-free survival. The PD-L1 positivity rate was low compared with published data, which limits conclusions regarding PD-L1 as a predictive biomarker