Second and later-line erlotinib use in non-small cell lung cancer: real world outcomes and practice patterns overtime in Canada.

Lung cancer biomarkers erlotinib real-world data

Journal

Journal of thoracic disease
ISSN: 2072-1439
Titre abrégé: J Thorac Dis
Pays: China
ID NLM: 101533916

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Sep 2021
Historique:
received: 09 05 2021
accepted: 06 08 2021
entrez: 18 10 2021
pubmed: 19 10 2021
medline: 19 10 2021
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

In Canada, epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitor therapies in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) were initially approved regardless of This is a retrospective cohort study derived at ICES (formerly known as the Institute for Clinical and Evaluative Sciences) of advanced NSCLC patients diagnosed from 2007-2016 in Ontario, Canada, over the age of 65, who received at least one dose of first-line chemotherapy. The exposure of interest was receipt of second or later-line erlotinib. The primary outcome was the hazard ratio for mortality evaluated using a Cox proportional hazards model, and the secondary outcome, ED visits, was evaluated using a Poisson model. First-line chemotherapy was administered in 30.4% of stage IV NSCLC patients. Of these patients, 19.7% received second or later-line erlotinib. The proportion of patients prescribed second or later-line erlotinib decreased over the course of the study (P<0.0001). Unadjusted median overall survival in the entire cohort was 325 days (95% CI: 314-337 days), 513 days (95% CI: 485-539 days) in the erlotinib cohort, and 282 days (95% CI: 270-291 days) in the non-erlotinib cohort. Despite this, the adjusted hazard ratio for death was 1.89 (95% CI: 1.73-2.07, P<0.0001) for patients on erlotinib. Patients receiving erlotinib also had a marginally higher relative rates of ED visits with an adjusted relative risk of 1.10 (95% CI: 1.02-1.19, P=0.013). This study highlights the importance of using EGFR targeted treatments in NSCLC patients with a predictive biomarker, and suggests that treatment with erlotinib therapy is unlikely to benefit unselected patients with advanced NSCLC.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
In Canada, epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitor therapies in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) were initially approved regardless of
METHODS METHODS
This is a retrospective cohort study derived at ICES (formerly known as the Institute for Clinical and Evaluative Sciences) of advanced NSCLC patients diagnosed from 2007-2016 in Ontario, Canada, over the age of 65, who received at least one dose of first-line chemotherapy. The exposure of interest was receipt of second or later-line erlotinib. The primary outcome was the hazard ratio for mortality evaluated using a Cox proportional hazards model, and the secondary outcome, ED visits, was evaluated using a Poisson model.
RESULTS RESULTS
First-line chemotherapy was administered in 30.4% of stage IV NSCLC patients. Of these patients, 19.7% received second or later-line erlotinib. The proportion of patients prescribed second or later-line erlotinib decreased over the course of the study (P<0.0001). Unadjusted median overall survival in the entire cohort was 325 days (95% CI: 314-337 days), 513 days (95% CI: 485-539 days) in the erlotinib cohort, and 282 days (95% CI: 270-291 days) in the non-erlotinib cohort. Despite this, the adjusted hazard ratio for death was 1.89 (95% CI: 1.73-2.07, P<0.0001) for patients on erlotinib. Patients receiving erlotinib also had a marginally higher relative rates of ED visits with an adjusted relative risk of 1.10 (95% CI: 1.02-1.19, P=0.013).
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
This study highlights the importance of using EGFR targeted treatments in NSCLC patients with a predictive biomarker, and suggests that treatment with erlotinib therapy is unlikely to benefit unselected patients with advanced NSCLC.

Identifiants

pubmed: 34659808
doi: 10.21037/jtd-21-804
pii: jtd-13-09-5419
pmc: PMC8482335
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

5419-5429

Informations de copyright

2021 Journal of Thoracic Disease. All rights reserved.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Conflicts of Interest: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at https://dx.doi.org/10.21037/jtd-21-804). KP has received travel funding from Roche, continuing medical education speaker honorarium from Merck, Pfizer and Astra Zeneca, and consulting fees from Amgen. NBL has received continuing medical education speaker honoraria from Merck and Bristol Myers Squibb as well as institutional research funding from Array, Guardant Health, Pfizer, MSD, Roche, Astra Zeneca, Lilly, EMD Serono, Takeda, and Bayer. The other authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Références

Curr Oncol. 2012 Jun;19(Suppl 1):S33-44
pubmed: 22787409
Math Biosci Eng. 2019 Aug 28;16(6):7921-7933
pubmed: 31698647
Lancet Oncol. 2017 Nov;18(11):1454-1466
pubmed: 28958502
J Thorac Oncol. 2011 Aug;6(8):1379-91
pubmed: 21709590
N Engl J Med. 2018 Jan 11;378(2):113-125
pubmed: 29151359
Lung Cancer. 2011 Jul;73(1):70-7
pubmed: 21095039
J Clin Oncol. 2005 Apr 10;23(11):2513-20
pubmed: 15738541
Med Care. 2011 Oct;49(10):940-7
pubmed: 21921849
J Thorac Oncol. 2014 Jul;9(7):947-956
pubmed: 24922009
J Clin Oncol. 2005 May 10;23(14):3227-34
pubmed: 15886310
Lancet Oncol. 2015 Aug;16(8):897-907
pubmed: 26156651
N Engl J Med. 2009 Sep 3;361(10):947-57
pubmed: 19692680
N Engl J Med. 2005 Jul 14;353(2):123-32
pubmed: 16014882
PLoS One. 2019 Apr 11;14(4):e0215135
pubmed: 30973926
Oncogene. 2009 Aug;28 Suppl 1:S14-23
pubmed: 19680292
Clin Cancer Res. 2006 Jul 1;12(13):3908-14
pubmed: 16818686
Cancer. 2015 Aug 1;121(15):2562-9
pubmed: 25891153
J Thorac Oncol. 2014 Feb;9(2):154-62
pubmed: 24419411
Rev Mal Respir. 2019 Jun;36(6):649-663
pubmed: 31204231
Lung Cancer. 2016 Dec;102:30-37
pubmed: 27987585
Med Care. 1991 May;29(5):452-72
pubmed: 1902278
Ann Oncol. 2015 Jul;26(7):1415-21
pubmed: 25922063
N Engl J Med. 2020 Jan 2;382(1):41-50
pubmed: 31751012
Lancet Oncol. 2010 Feb;11(2):121-8
pubmed: 20022809
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2013 May 1;105(9):595-605
pubmed: 23594426
Ann Oncol. 2015 Sep;26(9):1883-1889
pubmed: 26105600
Rev Recent Clin Trials. 2006 Jan;1(1):1-13
pubmed: 18393776
Curr Med Res Opin. 2012 Aug;28(8):1253-62
pubmed: 22697276
Lancet Oncol. 2010 Jun;11(6):521-9
pubmed: 20493771
J Thorac Oncol. 2010 Oct;5(10):1616-22
pubmed: 20736854
Curr Oncol. 2017 Feb;24(1):16-22
pubmed: 28270720
Curr Oncol. 2020 Oct;27(5):244-249
pubmed: 33173375
J Clin Oncol. 2007 Feb 10;25(5):587-95
pubmed: 17290067
Lancet Oncol. 2012 Mar;13(3):239-46
pubmed: 22285168

Auteurs

Kirstin Perdrizet (K)

Department of Oncology and Hematology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre/University Health Network, Toronto, Canada.
Division of Oncology, William Osler Health System, Brampton, Canada.
Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.

Rinku Sutradhar (R)

Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
ICES (formerly the Institute for Clinical and Evaluates Sciences), Toronto, Canada.
Department of Biostatistics, Dalla Lana School of Public Health at the University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.

Qing Li (Q)

ICES (formerly the Institute for Clinical and Evaluates Sciences), Toronto, Canada.

Ning Liu (N)

ICES (formerly the Institute for Clinical and Evaluates Sciences), Toronto, Canada.

Craig C Earle (CC)

Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
ICES (formerly the Institute for Clinical and Evaluates Sciences), Toronto, Canada.
Department of Oncology and Hematology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada.

Natasha B Leighl (NB)

Department of Oncology and Hematology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre/University Health Network, Toronto, Canada.
Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.

Classifications MeSH