Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31381142›Full record

ArticleCancer2019

Real-world progression, treatment, and survival outcomes during rapid adoption of immunotherapy for advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

Sean Khozin, Rebecca A Miksad, Johan Adami, Mariel Boyd, Nicholas R Brown, Anala Gossai, Irene Kaganman, Deborah Kuk, Jillian M Rockland, Richard Pazdur and 3 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract readMulticenter Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05097599 (StrataPATH™), which is not on this map. Cited by 73 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
73citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT05097599 phase2terminatednot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

StrataPATH™ (Precision Indications for Approved Therapies): A Study Evaluating the Clinical Activity and Safety of Approved Drugs Within Biomarker-Guided Patients With Solid Tumors

TypeinterventionalSponsorStrata OncologyRan2022 to 2024Enrolled11ConditionsCancer, Advanced Solid TumorArmslorlatinib, encorafenib + binimetinib, talazoparib, sacituzumab govitecan, axitinib
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

73 citing papers in PubMed.

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

13 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.

Sean KhozinUS Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland.
Rebecca A MiksadFlatiron Health, Inc, New York, New York.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3194-5122
Johan AdamiFlatiron Health, Inc, New York, New York.
Mariel BoydFlatiron Health, Inc, New York, New York.
Nicholas R BrownFlatiron Health, Inc, New York, New York.
Anala GossaiFlatiron Health, Inc, New York, New York.
Irene KaganmanFlatiron Health, Inc, New York, New York.
Deborah KukFlatiron Health, Inc, New York, New York.
Jillian M RocklandFlatiron Health, Inc, New York, New York.
Richard PazdurUS Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland.
Aracelis Z TorresFlatiron Health, Inc, New York, New York.
Jizu ZhiUS Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland.
Amy P AbernethyFlatiron Health, Inc, New York, New York.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6930-8722

Funding

Flatiron Health
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite the rapid adoption of immunotherapies in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (advNSCLC), knowledge gaps remain about their real-world (rw) performance.

methodsThis retrospective, observational, multicenter analysis used the Flatiron Health deidentified electronic health record-derived database of rw patients with advNSCLC who received treatment with PD-1 and/or PD-L1 (PD-[L]1) inhibitors before July 1, 2017 (N = 5257) and had ≥6 months of follow-up. The authors investigated PD-(L)1 line of treatment and PD-L1 testing rates and the relationship between overall survival (OS) and rw intermediate endpoints: progression-free survival (rwPFS), rw time to progression (rwTTP), rw time to next treatment (rwTTNT), and rw time to discontinuation (rwTTD).

resultsFirst-line PD-(L)1 inhibitor use increased from 0% (in the third quarter of 2014 [Q3 2014]) to 42% (Q2 2017) over the study period. PD-L1 testing also increased (from 3% in Q3 2015 to 70% in Q2 2017). The estimated median OS was 9.3 months (95% CI, 8.9-9.8 months), and the estimated rwPFS was 3.2 months (95% CI, 3.1-3.3 months). Longer OS and rwPFS were associated with ≥50% PD-L1 percentage staining results. Correlations (⍴) between OS and intermediate endpoints were ⍴ = 0.75 (95% CI, 0.73-0.76) for rwPFS and ⍴ = 0.60 (95% CI, 0.57-0.63) for rwTTP, and, for treatment-based intermediate endpoints, correlations were ⍴ = 0.60 (95% CI, 0.56-0.64) for rwTTNT (N = 856) and ⍴ = 0.81 (95% CI, 0.80-0.82) for rwTTD.

conclusionsThe use of first-line PD-(L)1 inhibitors and PD-L1 testing has substantially increased, with better outcomes for patients who have ≥50% PD-L1 percentage staining. Intermediate rw tumor-dynamics estimates were moderately correlated with OS in patients with advNSCLC who received immunotherapy, highlighting the need for optimizing and standardizing rw endpoints to enhance the understanding of patient outcomes outside clinical trials.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overBiomarkers, TumorCarcinoma, Non-Small-Cell LungDisease ManagementDisease ProgressionFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansImmunotherapyLung NeoplasmsMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm StagingRetrospective StudiesBiomarkers, Tumorendpointsimmunotherapynon-small cell lung cancerPD-1PD-L1real-world

Identifiers

PMID31381142
PMCPMC6899461

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.