Identification and Treatment of Lung Cancer Oncogenic Drivers in a Diverse Safety Net Setting.

INTRODUCTION: Advances in the testing and treatment of patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) harboring oncogenic drivers have improved outcomes. Little is known about testing and treatment patterns in diverse patient populations. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study in a diverse cohort of patients treated in the John Peter Smith safety net healthcare system. We determined patterns of blood- and tissue-based testing and treatment of patients with EGFR and ALK alterations. Cox proportional-hazards regression models were used to assess the impact of EGFR and ALK testing. RESULTS: A total of 220 patients were included, 97 (44%) were non-Hispanic White, 72 (33%) were Black, 28 (13%) were Hispanic, and 23 (10%) were Asian. EGFR and ALK testing increased over time from 55% and 52%, respectively, in 2017 to 87% and 82%, respectively, in 2021. Frequency of EGFR alterations were highest in Asian patients (45%) and comparable among other groups (6-13%). Frequency of ALK alterations were highest in Hispanic (13%), and Asian (11%) patients, and were 2% for both Black and non-Hispanic White patients. In a multivariate model, lack of testing was associated with worse survival (aHR 1.6; P = .003) and testing positive for EGFR (aHR 0.43; P = .01) or ALK (aHR 0.28; P = .04) was associated with improved survival. Race and ethnicity were not associated with survival differences. CONCLUSION: As molecular testing for oncogenic mutations in NSCLC increases, druggable alterations such as ALK and EGFR can be identified in all race-ethnicity groups and are associated with improved outcomes.

Comparative effectiveness of treatment approaches for early invasive breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) suggested breast conserving therapy (BCT) and mastectomy have similar survival for early-stage breast cancer, whereas observational studies reported survival advantage for BCT. We aimed to address biases in observational studies to compare the effect of BCT and mastectomy on survival. METHODS: We emulated a target trial using institutional cancer registry. We included adult women diagnosed with early invasive first primary breast tumors ≤ 5 cm between July 2011 and December 2017. We used cloning, censoring, and weighting to estimate risk differences (RDs) and risk ratios (RRs) for all-cause mortality and recurrence or all-cause mortality between BCT and mastectomy (reference). RESULTS: Our study population comprised 534 observations with breast cancer. Median age was 56 years and 65 % were racial/ethnic minorities. The 8-year RD was 1.5 % (95 % confidence limits [CL]: -7.0 %, 9.8 %) and RR was 1.1 (95 % CL: 0.57, 2.2) for all-cause mortality. Results for recurrence or mortality were similar. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that target trial emulation to mitigate selection and immortal-time biases in observational studies may generate estimates that are more compatible with RCTs when comparing the effects of BCT and mastectomy on survival. Studies with longer follow-up and more events are needed to confirm our findings.