Adherence to recommended clinical guidelines in extensive disease small-cell lung cancer across the US, Europe, and Japan

Efficacy and safety of anti-PD-1 inhibitor versus anti-PD-L1 inhibitor in first-line treatment of extensive-stage small cell lung cancer: a multicenter retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Immunotherapy targeting PD-1/PD-L1 has revolutionized the treatment of extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC). However, clinical trials suggest differential efficacy of anti-PD-1 agents and anti-PD-L1 agents in first-line treatment of ES-SCLC. This retrospective multicenter study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of anti-PD-1 agents versus anti-PD-L1 agents in first-line treatment of ES-SCLC in real-world practice.

METHODS

Patients with pathologically or cytologically confirmed ES-SCLC treated with platinum plus etoposide combined with anti-PD-1 or PD-L1 agents as first-line treatment in different centers of PLA General Hospital between January 2017 and October 2021 were included for this study. Survival outcomes and safety were compared between patients receiving anti-PD-1 and PD-L1 agents.

RESULTS

Of the total 154 included patients, 68 received anti-PD-1 agents plus chemotherapy (PD-1 group), and 86 received anti-PD-L1 agents plus chemotherapy (PD-L1 group). Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in the entire cohort were 7.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 6.5-8.2 months) and 17.4 months (95% CI: 15.3-19.3 months), respectively. Median PFS and OS were comparable between the PD-1 group and PD-L1 group (PFS: 7.6 months vs. 8.3 months, HR = 1.13, 95% CI: 0.79-1.62, p = 0.415; OS: 26.9 months vs. 25.6 months, HR = 0.96, 95% CI: 0.63-1.47, p = 0.859. The objective response rate and disease control rate were comparable between the two groups: 79.4% vs. 79.1% and 92.6% vs. 94.2%, respectively. The 6-month, 12-month, and 18-month PFS and OS rates were slightly higher in the PD-L1 group than in the PD-1 group, while the 24-month PFS rate was slightly higher in the PD-1 group than in the PD-L1 group. Stratified analysis showed that locoregional thoracic radiotherapy and normal lactate dehydrogenase level were independent predictors of better OS in ES-SCLC patients treated with first-line chemotherapy plus ICI. Adverse events were not significantly different between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Anti-PD-1 agents and anti-PD-L1 agents combined with chemotherapy as first-line treatment for ES-SCLC are comparably effective and well tolerated.

A cross-sectional analysis of treatment patterns in small-cell lung cancer in five European countries

Aim: To investigate changes in treatment patterns in extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) in France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the UK (EU5) between 2018 and 2021. Methods: Cross-sectional data from an oncology database were analyzed retrospectively. Results: Of 5832 eligible patients, 88.4% had stage IV disease at diagnosis. Among patients receiving first-line treatment, 91.8% (1079 /1176) received the platinum-etoposide (PE) combination in 2018 which decreased to 42.3% (509/1203) by 2021. Usage of the PE-atezolizumab combination increased from 0 to 41.2% during the same timeframe. Topotecan monotherapy remained the most widely used second-line treatment regardless of patients' platinum sensitivity. Conclusion: The first-line standard of care for ES-SCLC has evolved in EU5 with the PE-atezolizumab/durvalumab combination gradually superseding PE usage.

Trends in cost of treatment of lung cancer patients in 2014-2019 in Finland - a descriptive register study

AIM

The aim of this descriptive study is to analyze the cost for the treatment of NSCLC and SCLC patients (2014-2019) in Finland. The primary objective is to understand recent (2014-2019) cost developments.

METHODS

The study is retrospective and based on hospital register data. The study population consists of NSCLC and SCLC patients diagnosed in four out of the five Finnish university hospitals. The final sample included 4047 NSCLC patients and 766 SCLC patients.

RESULTS

Cost of the treatment in lung cancer is increasing. Both the average cost of the first 12 months as well as the first 24 months after diagnosis increases over time. For patients diagnosed in 2014, the average cost of the first 24 months was 19,000 €and for those diagnosed in 2015 22,000 €. The annual increase in the nominal 24-month costs was 10.4% for NSCLC and 7.3% for SCLC patients.

CONCLUSION

The average cost per patient has increased annually for both NSCLC and SCLC. Possible explanations to the cost increase are increased medicine costs (especially in NSCLC), and the increased percentage of patients being actively treated.

Efficacy and Safety of Programmed Death-Ligand 1 Inhibitor Plus Platinum-Etoposide Chemotherapy in Patients With Extensive-Stage SCLC: A Prospective Observational Study

Introduction

To date, the efficacy and safety of programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitor plus platinum-etoposide chemotherapy for patients with extensive-stage SCLC (ES-SCLC), with real-world evidence, stratified on the basis of age and performance status (PS), have not been fully investigated. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of PD-L1 inhibitor plus platinum-etoposide chemotherapy in patients with ES-SCLC.

Methods

This multicenter prospective study evaluated patients with ES-SCLC who received PD-L1 inhibitor plus platinum-etoposide chemotherapy between September 2019 and October 2021.

Results

A total of 45 patients with ES-SCLC received the aforementioned treatment, including 18 elderly (≥75 y old) patients and six patients with a PS of 2. Multivariate analysis indicated that a PS of 2 was a significant independent prognostic factor for progression-free survival and overall survival (p = 0.008 and p = 0.001, respectively). Of patients with PS of 2 at the initial phase, those that achieved PS improvement during treatment had significantly longer progression-free survival and overall survival than those who did not (p = 0.02 and p = 0.02, respectively). The incidence of adverse events accompanied with treatment discontinuation was significantly higher in the elderly patients than in the non-elderly patients (p = 0.03).

Conclusions

This real-world prospective study found that PD-L1 inhibitor plus platinum-etoposide chemotherapy had limited efficacy in patients with ES-SCLC with a PS of 2, except for cases with improvement of PS during treatment. Owing to the emergence of adverse events and treatment discontinuation, this treatment should be administered with caution in elderly patients with ES-SCLC.

Treatment patterns and burden of myelosuppression for patients with small cell lung cancer: A SEER-medicare study

PURPOSE

To depict the treatment journey for patients with small cell lung cancer (SCLC) and evaluate health care resource utilization (HCRU) associated with myelosuppression, a complication induced by chemotherapy or chemotherapy plus radiation therapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This was a descriptive, retrospective study of patients with SCLC aged ≥65 years, identified from linked Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare data curated between January 2012 and December 2015. Treatment types (chemotherapy, radiation therapy, surgery) were classified as first, second, or third line, depending on the temporal sequence in which regimens were prescribed. For each year, the proportions of patients completing 4- or 6-cycle chemotherapy regimens, with hospital admissions associated with myelosuppression, or who used granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSFs), blood/platelet transfusions, or erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs), were calculated.

RESULTS

Chemotherapy was administered as initial treatment in 7,807/11,907 (65.6%) patients whose treatment journey was recorded. Approximately one-third (n = 3,985) subsequently received radiation therapy. In total, 5,791 (57.8%) patients completed the guideline-recommended 4-6 cycles of chemotherapy. Among all chemotherapy-treated patients, 10,370 (74.3%) experienced ≥1 inpatient admission associated with myelosuppression (anemia, 7,366 [52.8%]; neutropenia, 4,642 [33.3%]; thrombocytopenia, 2,375 [17.0%]; pancytopenia, 1,983 [14.2%]). Supportive care interventions included G-CSF (6,756 [48.4%] patients), ESAs (1,534 [11.0%]), and transfusions (3,674 [26.3%]).

CONCLUSION

Chemotherapy remains a cornerstone of care for patients with SCLC. Slightly over half of patients completed the recommended number of cycles, underscoring the frailty of patients and aggressiveness of SCLC. HCRU associated with myelosuppression was prominent, suggesting a substantial burden on older patients with SCLC.

Advances in Treatment of Recurrent Small Cell Lung Cancer (SCLC): Insights for Optimizing Patient Outcomes from an Expert Roundtable Discussion

Second-line treatment options for patients with relapsed, extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) are limited, and even with currently available treatments, prognosis remains poor. Until recently, topotecan (a topoisomerase I inhibitor) was the only drug approved by the United States (US) Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the management of ES-SCLC following progression after first-line treatment with etoposide plus a platinum derivative (EP; carboplatin preferred). With the most recent approval of EP plus a programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitor, there are now more therapeutic options for managing ES-SCLC. A number of novel agents have emerging data for activity in relapsed ES-SCLC, and single-agent lurbinectedin (an alkylating drug and selective inhibitor of oncogenic transcription and DNA repair machinery in tumor cells) has conditional FDA approval for use in this patient population. Trilaciclib, a short-acting cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 (CDK 4/6) inhibitor, has also been recently approved as a supportive intervention for use prior to an EP or a topotecan-containing regimen to diminish the incidence of chemotherapy-induced myelosuppression. The current review is based on a recent expert roundtable discussion and summarizes current therapeutic agents and emerging data on newer agents and biomarkers. It also provides evidence-based clinical considerations and a treatment decision tool for oncologists treating patients with relapsed ES-SCLC. This paper discusses the importance of various factors to consider when selecting a second-line treatment option, including prior first-line treatment, available second-line treatment options, tumor platinum sensitivity, and patient characteristics (such as performance status, comorbidities, and patient-expressed and perceived values).

Evaluation of topotecan monotherapy for relapsed small-cell lung cancer after amrubicin monotherapy failure

Objective: The utility of topotecan monotherapy for relapsed small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) after failure of amrubicin monotherapy has not been evaluated. We aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of topotecan monotherapy in patients with relapsed SCLC after amrubicin monotherapy.

Patients and Methods: We retrospectively analyzed data from 16 patients with relapsed SCLC who were treated with topotecan monotherapy after amrubicin monotherapy at our hospital.

Results: The response rate, progression-free survival, and overall survival were 0%, 32.5 days (95% confidence interval [CI] = 18–51), and 112 days (95% CI = 55–267), respectively. The most common adverse events (grade ≥3) were leukopenia (31.3%) and thrombocytopenia (31.3%), followed by anemia, anorexia, edema, and lung infections.

Conclusion: The efficacy of topotecan monotherapy for relapsed SCLC after amrubicin monotherapy is inconclusive. Therefore, further studies are warranted.

Treatment patterns and survival in patients with small cell lung cancer in Taiwan

BACKGROUND

Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is the most aggressive form of lung cancer. The chemotherapy regimens and their efficacy in practice are seldom reported. We aimed to investigate treatment patterns and survival outcomes of patients with SCLC in Taiwan.

METHODS

Patients newly diagnosed with SCLC from 2011 to 2015 were identified from the Cancer Registry database. Their clinical characteristics, treatment regimens, and survival status were obtained from National Health Insurance Research database. The Kaplan-Meier method and Cox-proportional hazard model were used to analyze the survival outcomes.

RESULTS

Among a total of 2707 patients enrolled, 439 were in the limited stage (LS, 16.22%) and 2268 were in the extensive stage of the disease (ES, 83.78%). The median age was 66 and the majority were male (90.36%). The first-line regimen used for the patients was etoposide/cisplatin-based treatment, followed by etoposide/carboplatin-based regimen, and etoposide only. The median overall survival (OS) was 16.92 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 15.31-18.92) and 8.71 months (95% CI 8.38-9.07) in LS and ES patients, respectively. Chemotherapy regimen, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, and history of radiotherapy were significant factors associated with OS. On the other hand, the major second-line treatment was a topotecan-based regimen (68.3%). However, this showed inferior survival outcome compared to etoposide-based regimen (5.09 months [95% CI 4.76-5.62] versus 8.77 months [95% CI 6.31-11.89], p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Etoposide is the preferred and superior first-line chemotherapy regimen in combination with platinum, and an alternative choice of second-line regimen for Taiwanese patients with SCLC.

First-line durvalumab plus platinum-etoposide in extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer: CASPIAN Japan subgroup analysis

Background

In the phase 3 CASPIAN study (NCT03043872), first-line durvalumab plus etoposide and cisplatin or carboplatin (EP) significantly improved OS versus EP alone in patients with extensive-stage (ES)-SCLC (HR 0.73 [95% CI 0.59–0.91; p = 0.0047]). Here we report results for a preplanned subgroup analysis of patients recruited in Japan.

Methods

Treatment-naïve patients with ES-SCLC received either 4 cycles of durvalumab 1500 mg plus EP q3w followed by maintenance durvalumab 1500 mg q4w until disease progression or up to 6 cycles of EP q3w. The primary endpoint was OS. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), safety, and tolerability.

Results

In the Japan subgroup, 18 patients were randomized to durvalumab plus EP and 16 patients to EP. At the interim analysis with a median follow-up of 12.5 months in the subgroup, OS numerically favored durvalumab plus EP versus EP (HR 0.77 [95% CI 0.26‒2.26]; median not reached vs 15.2 months). PFS was similar for durvalumab plus EP versus EP (HR 0.90 [95% CI 0.43‒1.89]). Confirmed ORR was 89% with durvalumab plus EP versus 69% with EP. Adverse events (AEs) of CTCAE grade 3 or 4 were reported in 78% versus 94% of patients in the durvalumab plus EP versus EP arms. There were no AEs leading to treatment discontinuation or death in the Japan subgroup.

Conclusion

First-line durvalumab plus EP was effective and well tolerated in Japanese patients with ES-SCLC. Despite the small size of the Japan subgroup, results were generally consistent with the global study population.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10147-021-01899-8.

Durvalumab, with or without tremelimumab, plus platinum-etoposide versus platinum-etoposide alone in first-line treatment of extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (CASPIAN): updated results from a randomised, controlled, open-label, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

First-line durvalumab plus etoposide with either cisplatin or carboplatin (platinum-etoposide) showed a significant improvement in overall survival versus platinum-etoposide alone in patients with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) in the CASPIAN study. Here we report updated results, including the primary analysis for overall survival with durvalumab plus tremelimumab plus platinum-etoposide versus platinum-etoposide alone.

METHODS

CASPIAN is an ongoing, open-label, sponsor-blind, randomised, controlled phase 3 trial at 209 cancer treatment centres in 23 countries worldwide. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older (20 years in Japan) and had treatment-naive, histologically or cytologically documented ES-SCLC, with a WHO performance status of 0 or 1. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) in blocks of six, stratified by planned platinum, using an interactive voice-response or web-response system to receive intravenous durvalumab plus tremelimumab plus platinum-etoposide, durvalumab plus platinum-etoposide, or platinum-etoposide alone. In all groups, patients received etoposide 80-100 mg/m² on days 1-3 of each cycle with investigator's choice of either carboplatin area under the curve 5-6 mg/mL/min or cisplatin 75-80 mg/m² on day 1 of each cycle. Patients in the platinum-etoposide group received up to six cycles of platinum-etoposide every 3 weeks and optional prophylactic cranial irradiation (investigator's discretion). Patients in the immunotherapy groups received four cycles of platinum-etoposide plus durvalumab 1500 mg with or without tremelimumab 75 mg every 3 weeks followed by maintenance durvalumab 1500 mg every 4 weeks. The two primary endpoints were overall survival for durvalumab plus platinum-etoposide versus platinum-etoposide and for durvalumab plus tremelimumab plus platinum-etoposide versus platinum-etoposide in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03043872.

FINDINGS

Between March 27, 2017, and May 29, 2018, 972 patients were screened and 805 were randomly assigned (268 to durvalumab plus tremelimumab plus platinum-etoposide, 268 to durvalumab plus platinum-etoposide, and 269 to platinum-etoposide). As of Jan 27, 2020, the median follow-up was 25·1 months (IQR 22·3-27·9). Durvalumab plus tremelimumab plus platinum-etoposide was not associated with a significant improvement in overall survival versus platinum-etoposide (hazard ratio [HR] 0·82 [95% CI 0·68-1·00]; p=0·045); median overall survival was 10·4 months (95% CI 9·6-12·0) versus 10·5 months (9·3-11·2). Durvalumab plus platinum-etoposide showed sustained improvement in overall survival versus platinum-etoposide (HR 0·75 [95% CI 0·62-0·91]; nominal p=0·0032); median overall survival was 12·9 months (95% CI 11·3-14·7) versus 10·5 months (9·3-11·2). The most common any-cause grade 3 or worse adverse events were neutropenia (85 [32%] of 266 patients in the durvalumab plus tremelimumab plus platinum-etoposide group, 64 [24%] of 265 patients in the durvalumab plus platinum-etoposide group, and 88 [33%] of 266 patients in the platinum-etoposide group) and anaemia (34 [13%], 24 [9%], and 48 [18%]). Any-cause serious adverse events were reported in 121 (45%) patients in the durvalumab plus tremelimumab plus platinum-etoposide group, 85 (32%) in the durvalumab plus platinum-etoposide group, and 97 (36%) in the platinum-etoposide group. Treatment-related deaths occurred in 12 (5%) patients in the durvalumab plus tremelimumab plus platinum-etoposide group (death, febrile neutropenia, and pulmonary embolism [n=2 each]; enterocolitis, general physical health deterioration and multiple organ dysfunction syndrome, pneumonia, pneumonitis and hepatitis, respiratory failure, and sudden death [n=1 each]), six (2%) patients in the durvalumab plus platinum-etoposide group (cardiac arrest, dehydration, hepatotoxicity, interstitial lung disease, pancytopenia, and sepsis [n=1 each]), and two (1%) in the platinum-etoposide group (pancytopenia and thrombocytopenia [n=1 each]).

INTERPRETATION

First-line durvalumab plus platinum-etoposide showed sustained overall survival improvement versus platinum-etoposide but the addition of tremelimumab to durvalumab plus platinum-etoposide did not significantly improve outcomes versus platinum-etoposide. These results support the use of durvalumab plus platinum-etoposide as a new standard of care for the first-line treatment of ES-SCLC.

FUNDING

AstraZeneca.

Antitumor activity of lurbinectedin in second-line small cell lung cancer patients who are candidates for re-challenge with the first-line treatment

INTRODUCTION

The National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines recommend re-challenge with the first-line treatment for relapsed small cell lung cancer (SCLC) with chemotherapy-free interval (CTFI)≥180 days. A phase II study (NCT02454972) showed remarkable antitumor activity in SCLC patients treated with lurbinectedin 3.2 mg/m² 1 -h intravenous infusion every 3 weeks as second-line therapy. We report results for the pre-planned subset of patients with CTFI ≥ 180 days.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Twenty patients aged ≥18 years with pathologically proven SCLC diagnosis, pretreated with only one prior platinum-containing line, no CNS metastases, and with CTFI ≥ 180 days were evaluated. The primary efficacy endpoint was the overall response rate (ORR) assessed by the Investigators according to RECIST v1.1.

RESULTS

ORR was 60.0 % (95 %CI, 36.1-86.9), with a median duration of response of 5.5 months (95 %CI, 2.9-11.2) and disease control rate of 95.0 % (95 %CI, 75.1-99.9). Median progression-free survival was 4.6 months (95 %CI, 2.6-7.3). With a censoring of 55.0 %, the median overall survival was 16.2 months (95 %CI, 9.6-upper level not reached). Of note, 60.9 % and 27.1 % of patients were alive at 1 and 2 years, respectively. The most common grade 3/4 adverse events and laboratory abnormalities were hematological disorders (neutropenia, 55.0 %; anemia; 10.0 % thrombocytopenia, 10.0 %), fatigue (10.0 %) and increased liver function tests (GGT, 10 %; ALT and AP, 5.0 % each). No febrile neutropenia was reported.

CONCLUSION

Lurbinectedin is an effective treatment for platinum-sensitive relapsed SCLC, especially in patients with CTFI ≥ 180 days, with acceptable safety and tolerability. These encouraging results suggest that lurbinectedin can be another valuable therapeutic option rather than platinum re-challenge.

Utilization of Antineoplastic Agents and Medicare Spending in Elderly Patients With Extensive-Stage Small-Cell Lung Cancer Between 2001 and 2013

PURPOSE

Some elderly patients (≥ 65 years old) with small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) do not receive chemotherapy likely because of fear of toxicity and uncertainty regarding benefits. Thus, we aimed to study real-world trends in utilization of antineoplastics over the years and predictors of utilization, survival, and Medicare expenditure in elderly patients with extensive-stage (ES) SCLC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Using the linked SEER and Medicare database, we identified elderly patients with newly diagnosed ES-SCLC between 2001 and 2013. The Wald test was used to determine the significance of trends. Cox proportional hazards models were applied for survival analyses. We used SAS, version 9.4 (SAS Institute, Cary, NC).

RESULTS

We identified 15,763 patients with newly diagnosed ES-SCLC. Approximately 6,838 patients (43.38%) received antineoplastics, and 8,925 patients (56.61%) received supportive care only. Every year since 2001, the percentage of patients receiving antineoplastics has decreased (45.8% v 36.6% in 2001 and 2013, respectively; P_trend < .0001). Patients with advanced age (P < .001), patients from high-poverty areas (P < .001) or rural areas (P = .005), patients with Charlson comorbidity index ≥ 3 (P < .001), and non-Hispanic blacks (P = .003) and Hispanics (P = .001) were less likely to receive antineoplastics. Mean Medicare spending per patient decreased over the study period for patients treated with antineoplastics ($45,998 in 2001 and $35,053 in 2013; P_trend < .001) and for those receiving supportive care only ($34,197 in 2001 and $25,265 in 2013; P_trend < .001).

CONCLUSION

Decreasing utilization of antineoplastics in elderly patients with ES-SCLC since 2001 could be partly secondary to higher comorbidities and physiologic age, leading to poor candidacy. Medicare expenditures decreased likely as a result of value-based treatment initiatives by the Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services. However, expenditures are likely to increase with use of expensive novel agents.

Survival, Chemotherapy Treatments, and Health Care Utilization Among Patients with Advanced Small Cell Lung Cancer: An Observational Study

INTRODUCTION

Most cases of small cell lung cancer (SCLC) are diagnosed at an advanced stage. The objective of this study was to investigate patient characteristics, survival, chemotherapy treatments, and health care use after a diagnosis of advanced SCLC in subjects enrolled in a health system network.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of patients aged ≥ 18 years who either were diagnosed with stage III/IV SCLC or who progressed to advanced SCLC during the study period (2005-2015). Patients identified from the Indiana State Cancer Registry and the Indiana Network for Patient Care were followed from their advanced diagnosis index date until the earliest date of the last visit, death, or the end of the study period. Patient characteristics, survival, chemotherapy regimens, associated health care visits, and durations of treatment were reported. Time-to-event analyses were performed using the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

A total of 498 patients with advanced SCLC were identified, of whom 429 were newly diagnosed with advanced disease and 69 progressed to advanced disease during the study period. Median survival from the index diagnosis date was 13.2 months. First-line (1L) chemotherapy was received by 464 (93.2%) patients, most commonly carboplatin/etoposide, received by 213 (45.9%) patients, followed by cisplatin/etoposide (20.7%). Ninety-five (20.5%) patients progressed to second-line (2L) chemotherapy, where topotecan monotherapy (20.0%) was the most common regimen, followed by carboplatin/etoposide (14.7%). Median survival was 10.1 months from 1L initiation and 7.7 months from 2L initiation.

CONCLUSION

Patients in a regional health system network diagnosed with advanced SCLC were treated with chemotherapy regimens similar to those in earlier reports based on SEER-Medicare data. Survival of patients with advanced SCLC was poor, illustrating the lack of progress over several decades in the treatment of this lethal disease and highlighting the need for improved treatments.

Chemotherapy treatments, costs of care, and survival for patients diagnosed with small cell lung cancer: A SEER-Medicare study

OBJECTIVES

The effectiveness and costs of new treatments should be assessed in relation to existing practice. We describe treatments, survival and costs for advanced or metastatic small cell lung cancer (SCLC) patients receiving systemic therapy in the period preceding the introduction of immunotherapies.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of patients aged ≥65 years, identified using linked Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results and Medicare databases. Individuals with a new primary diagnosis of SCLC between January 2007 and December 2013 were followed until December 2014. Chemotherapy treatments, health care visits and costs (in 2016 USD), and survival were determined by line of therapy.

RESULTS

A total of 11 812 patients were identified with SCLC. First-line (1L) chemotherapy was received by 6509 (55.1%) patients, most (93.2%) with carboplatin- (71.0%) or cisplatin- (22.2%) based therapies, typically combined with etoposide (79.2%). Second- (2L) and third- (3L) line chemotherapies were received by 2238 (18.9%) and 679 (5.7%) patients, of which 48.4% and 30.9%, respectively, were platinum-based. The median durations of 1L, 2L, and 3L carboplatin-based therapies were 5.9, 4.8, and 5.4 months, respectively, and the corresponding durations of cisplatin-based therapies were 5.3, 4.2, and 5.3 months. During 1L, 2L, and 3L chemotherapies, patients averaged 8.2, 7.4, and 7.3 health care visits per month, respectively, and incurred total mean health care costs of $60 223, $42 636, and $35 903 per patient, respectively. Median survival from the start of 1L, 2L, and 3L chemotherapy was 9.2, 6.0, and 5.7 months, respectively.

CONCLUSION

First-line chemotherapy was primarily platinum-based, and a plethora of different regimens was used for 2L and 3L chemotherapies. Median survival from the start of 1L chemotherapy was 9 months, with an associated health care cost of $60 000. These data highlight an unmet medical need among SCLC patients receiving systemic therapy.