Health outcomes and healthcare resource utilization among Veterans with stage IV non-small cell lung cancer treated with second-line chemotherapy versus immunotherapy

Background Until recently, multi-agent chemotherapy (CT) was the standard of care for patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Clinical trials have confirmed benefits in overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival with immunotherapy (IO) compared to CT. This study compares real-world treatment patterns and outcomes between CT and IO administrations in second-line (2L) settings for patients with stage IV NSCLC. Materials and methods This retrospective study included patients in the United States Department of Veterans Affairs healthcare system diagnosed with stage IV NSCLC during 2012–2017 and receiving IO or CT in the 2L. Patient demographics and clinical characteristics, healthcare resource utilization (HCRU), and adverse events (AEs) were compared between treatment groups. Logistic regression was used to examine differences in baseline characteristics between groups, and inverse probability weighting multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression was used to analyze OS. Results Among 4,609 Veterans who received first-line (1L) therapy for stage IV NSCLC, 96% received 1L CT alone. A total of 1,630 (35%) were administered 2L systemic therapy, with 695 (43%) receiving IO and 935 (57%) receiving CT. Median age was 67 years (IO group) and 65 years (CT group); most patients were male (97%) and white (76–77%). Patients administered 2L IO had a higher Charlson Comorbidity Index than those administered CT (p = 0.0002). 2L IO was associated with significantly longer OS compared with CT (hazard ratio 0.84, 95% CI 0.75–0.94). IO was more frequently prescribed during the study period (p Conclusions Overall, the proportion of advanced NSCLC patients receiving 2L systemic therapy is low. Among patients treated with 1L CT and without IO contraindications, 2L IO should be considered, as this supports potential benefit of IO for advanced NSCLC. The increasing availability and indications for IO will likely increase the administration of 2L therapy to NSCLC patients

Health outcomes and healthcare resource utilization among Veterans with stage IV non-small cell lung cancer treated with second-line chemotherapy versus immunotherapy.

BackgroundUntil recently, multi-agent chemotherapy (CT) was the standard of care for patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Clinical trials have confirmed benefits in overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival with immunotherapy (IO) compared to CT. This study compares real-world treatment patterns and outcomes between CT and IO administrations in second-line (2L) settings for patients with stage IV NSCLC.Materials and methodsThis retrospective study included patients in the United States Department of Veterans Affairs healthcare system diagnosed with stage IV NSCLC during 2012-2017 and receiving IO or CT in the 2L. Patient demographics and clinical characteristics, healthcare resource utilization (HCRU), and adverse events (AEs) were compared between treatment groups. Logistic regression was used to examine differences in baseline characteristics between groups, and inverse probability weighting multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression was used to analyze OS.ResultsAmong 4,609 Veterans who received first-line (1L) therapy for stage IV NSCLC, 96% received 1L CT alone. A total of 1,630 (35%) were administered 2L systemic therapy, with 695 (43%) receiving IO and 935 (57%) receiving CT. Median age was 67 years (IO group) and 65 years (CT group); most patients were male (97%) and white (76-77%). Patients administered 2L IO had a higher Charlson Comorbidity Index than those administered CT (p = 0.0002). 2L IO was associated with significantly longer OS compared with CT (hazard ratio 0.84, 95% CI 0.75-0.94). IO was more frequently prescribed during the study period (p ConclusionsOverall, the proportion of advanced NSCLC patients receiving 2L systemic therapy is low. Among patients treated with 1L CT and without IO contraindications, 2L IO should be considered, as this supports potential benefit of IO for advanced NSCLC. The increasing availability and indications for IO will likely increase the administration of 2L therapy to NSCLC patients