Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29800974›Full record

ArticleJAMA oncology2018

Speed of Adoption of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors of Programmed Cell Death 1 Protein and Comparison of Patient Ages in Clinical Practice vs Pivotal Clinical Trials.

Jeremy M O'Connor, Kristen L Fessele, Jean Steiner, Kathi Seidl-Rathkopf, Kenneth R Carson, Nathan C Nussbaum, Emily S Yin, Kerin B Adelson, Carolyn J Presley, Anne C Chiang and 3 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA oncology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 64 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
64citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.6field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

64 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 107 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

4 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Jeremy M O'ConnorSection of General Internal Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut.
Kristen L FesseleFlatiron Health Inc, New York, New York.
Jean SteinerFlatiron Health Inc, New York, New York.
Kathi Seidl-RathkopfFlatiron Health Inc, New York, New York.
Kenneth R CarsonFlatiron Health Inc, New York, New York.
Nathan C NussbaumFlatiron Health Inc, New York, New York.
Emily S YinSection of General Internal Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut.
Kerin B AdelsonSection of General Internal Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut.
Carolyn J PresleyThe Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus.
Anne C ChiangSection of General Internal Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut.
Joseph S RossSection of General Internal Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut.
Amy P AbernethyFlatiron Health Inc, New York, New York.
Cary P GrossSection of General Internal Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut.
Flatiron Health (United States) · USYale University · USThe Ohio State University · US

Funding

Yale Clinical and Translational Science Award (U Component)UL1TR001863 · NCATS · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI John H. Krystal, LUCILA OHNO-MACHADO · 2016 to 2026
$102.9M
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is increasing its pace of approvals for novel cancer therapeutics, including for immune checkpoint inhibitors of programmed cell death 1 protein (anti-PD-1 agents). However, little is known about how quickly anti-PD-1 agents agents reach eligible patients in practice or whether such patients differ from those studied in clinical trials that lead to FDA approval (pivotal clinical trials). Objectives: To assess the speed with which anti-PD-1 agents agents reached eligible patients in practice and to compare the ages of patients treated in clinical practice with the ages of those treated in pivotal clinical trials. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study, performed from January 1, 2011, through August 31, 2016, included patients from the Flatiron Health Network who were eligible for anti-PD-1 agents treatment of selected cancer types, which included melanoma, non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), and renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Main Outcomes and Measures: Cumulative proportions of eligible patients receiving anti-PD-1 agents treatment and their age distributions. Results: The study identified 3089 patients who were eligible for anti-PD-1 agents treatment (median age, 66 [interquartile range, 56-75] years for patients with melanoma, 66 [interquartile range, 58-72] years for patients with RCC, and 67 [interquartile range, 59-74] years for patients with NSCLC; 1742 male [56.4%] and 1347 [43.6%] female; 2066 [66.9%] white). Of these patients, 2123 (68.7%) received anti-PD-1 agents treatment, including 439 eligible patients with melanoma (79.1%), 1417 eligible patients with NSCLC (65.6%), and 267 eligible patients with RCC (71.2%). Within 4 months after FDA approval, greater than 60% of eligible patients in each cohort had received anti-PD-1 agents treatment. Overall, similar proportions of older and younger patients received anti-PD-1 agents treatment during the first 9 months after FDA approval. However, there were significant differences in age between clinical trial participants and patients receiving anti-PD-1 agents treatment in clinical practice, with more patients being older than 65 years in clinical practice (range, 327 of 1365 [60.6%] to 46 of 72 [63.9%]) than in pivotal clinical trials (range, 38 of 120 [31.7%] to 223 of 544 [41.0%]; all P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: Anti-PD-1 agents rapidly reached patients in clinical practice, and patients treated in clinical practice differed significantly from patients treated in pivotal clinical trials. Future actions are needed to ensure that rapid adoption occurs on the basis of representative trial evidence.

Indexed as

Clinical Trials as TopicAgedAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedCarcinoma, Non-Small-Cell LungCarcinoma, Renal CellFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansKidney NeoplasmsLung NeoplasmsMaleMiddle AgedNivolumabPractice Patterns, Physicians'PrognosisProgrammed Cell Death 1 ReceptorAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedNivolumabPDCD1 protein, humanpembrolizumabProgrammed Cell Death 1 Receptor

Identifiers

PMID29800974
PMCPMC6143052
OpenAlexW2802509580

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.