Effectiveness of Nivolumab versus Docetaxel as Second-Line Treatment in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients in Clinical Practice.

AIMS: To evaluate the effectiveness of nivolumab as second-line treatment compared to standard therapy with docetaxel in adult patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in clinical practice. METHODS: This is an observational, retrospective cohort study of adult patients diagnosed with NSCLC, stage III-IV, treated with docetaxel or nivolumab as second-line treatment. The end points evaluated were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). PFS and OS were described using the Kaplan-Meier method. The Cox proportional hazards model was applied to identify independent prognostic and predictive factors related to disease progression or death. RESULTS: Thirty-three patients were included in this study (i.e., 14 in the nivolumab group and 19 in the docetaxel group). Nonsquamous NSCLC was the most frequent histological subtype. Cohorts were homogeneous. The follow-up time was 116 ± 87.3 days. The median PFS was 84 days (95% CI 39-300) for patients treated with nivolumab and 61 days (95% CI 48-76) for patients treated with docetaxel. The risk of progression was 60% lower for patients treated with nivolumab (HR 0.40; 95% CI 0.16-0.97; p = 0.043) compared to patients receiving docetaxel. Among the patients treated with docetaxel, the median OS was 129 days (95% CI 106-300). More than 50% of the patients treated with nivolumab were alive at the end of the follow-up period; nevertheless, the risk difference was not statistically significant (HR 0.55; 95% CI 0.20-1.51; p = 0.244). CONCLUSION: NSCLC patients treated with nivolumab as second-line therapy had a longer PFS compared to patients treated with docetaxel in a health care environment.

Effectiveness, toxicity, and economic evaluation of ipilimumab for the treatment of patients with metastatic melanoma in the Spanish outpatient setting.

To evaluate the effectiveness and toxicity profile of ipilimumab treatment and to examine the cost-effectiveness relation in a real-world sample of patients with metastasic melanoma. This was a multicenter, observational, retrospective cohorts study. To assess the effectiveness and safety of ipilimumab treatment progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and adverse events were registered. An economic evaluation was performed and cost-effectiveness ratios (CERs) were calculated. Eleven patients were included, mean age 59 (SD=11) years. The median PFS was 3.83 months (95% confidence interval 0.98-9.80) and the median OS was 5.15 months (95% confidence interval 1.70-8.48). None of the patients included in the study achieved an objective response. A stable disease was achieved in four (36%) patients. The most commonly reported analytical adverse event was anemia, with all patients developing anemia in any grade. The most severe adverse event was neutropenia (n=6; 55%), with three patients developing grade 4 neutropenia (3/11; 27%). The total cost of ipilimumab treatment was &OV0556;483 397, with a median of 43 033 (interquartile range=9555) euros per patient. The median-based CER was 136 675 (28 539-474 865) euros per progression-free year gained and the median-based CER was 100 112 (23 107-374 893) euros per life-year gained. PFS observed in real-world patients was higher than that reported in clinical trials and OS was lower. The incidence of adverse events was higher. The additional cost per progression-free year gained was ∼&OV0556;136 675. The data from this study fill an important need for information on the relative value of this treatment in terms of cost-effectiveness.

Effectiveness, toxicity, and economic evaluation of vinflunine for the treatment of patients with transitional cell carcinoma in the Spanish outpatient setting.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness and toxicity profile of the vinflunine chemotherapy regimen and to examine the cost-effectiveness relation in a real-world sample of patients with transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder. This is a multicenter, observational, retrospective cohort study. To assess the effectiveness and safety of vinflunine treatment, progression-free survival, overall survival, and adverse events were registered. An economic evaluation was performed and cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated. A total of 37 patients were included in the study, with a mean age of 67 (SD=9) years. The median progression-free survival was 2.61 months (95% confidence interval 1.79-4.23) and the median overall survival was 5.72 months (95% confidence interval 3.34-10.35). An objective response was achieved in eight (22%) patients. Statistically significant differences were found between patients treated with vinflunine as a second-line therapy and those treated with vinflunine as a third-line therapy (P=0.036). The most commonly reported analytical adverse event was anemia (n=34; 92%), and the most severe was neutropenia (n=19; 51%), with nine patients developing grade 4 neutropenia (9/19; 47%). The total cost of vinflunine treatment was &OV0556;553 873, with a median of &OV0556;8524 (interquartile range, &OV0556;9220) per patient. The median-based cost-effectiveness ratio was &OV0556;44 789 (&OV0556;31 706-58 022) per progression-free year gained and &OV0556;22 750 (&OV0556;14 526-34 085) per life-year gained. The data from this study fill an important need for information on the relative value of this treatment in terms of cost-effectiveness and might help achieve an optimal quality healthcare system.

Dose modifications of anti-TNF drugs in rheumatoid arthritis patients under real-world settings: a systematic review.

Anti-TNF dose modifications in rheumatoid arthritis have implications on healthcare resource utilization. The objective was to systematically review the dose modifications, both escalations and reductions, of currently available anti-TNF drugs (adalimumab, certolizumab, etanercept, golimumab and infliximab) in the real-world setting. We performed a systematic literature search of MEDLINE, ISI Web of Science, EMBASE, Indice Médico Español databases and American College of Rheumatology and European League Against Rheumatism annual congresses databases. PRISMA and MOOSE guidelines were followed. Only observational studies were included. Clinical trials were excluded since they do not reflect routine clinical practice. Dose escalations and reductions of the anti-TNF drug and their magnitude were collected. Thirty-four studies fulfill the inclusion criteria. Etanercept was associated with the lower percentage of patients under dose escalation (4.5 %; range 0-22 %), both in naïve (4.9 %) and non-naïve patients (1.3 %). Adalimumab and infliximab were associated with significantly higher percentages. Dose modification magnitude in those patients compared to basal dose was significantly different between treatments; 7.1 % (95 % CI 6.3-7.9 %) in etanercept, 30.4 % (95 % CI 28.3-32.5 %) in adalimumab and 21 % (95 % CI 20.3-21.7 %) in infliximab. Adalimumab and infliximab were associated with a higher risk of dose escalation relative to etanercept. There were no significant differences in the dose reduction percentages for the whole group of patients between treatments. In rheumatoid arthritis, etanercept is associated with a significantly lower percentage of dose-escalated patients and a lower magnitude of dose modification. Significant differences in the dose reduction between anti-TNF drugs evaluated were not observed.