Adjunctive Statistical Standardization of Adjuvant Estrogen Receptor and Progesterone Receptor in Canadian Cancer Trials Group MA.27 Postmenopausal Breast Cancer Trial of Exemestane Versus Anastrozole.

PURPOSE: ASCO/College of American Pathologists guidelines recommend reporting estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PgR) as positive with (1%-100%) staining. Statistically standardized quantitated positivity could indicate differential associations of positivity with breast cancer outcomes. METHODS: MA.27 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00066573) was a phase III adjuvant trial of exemestane versus anastrozole in postmenopausal women with early-stage breast cancer. Immunochemistry ER and PgR HSCORE and % positivity (%+) were centrally assessed by machine image quantitation and statistically standardized to mean 0 and standard deviation (SD) 1 after Box-Cox variance stabilization transformations of square for ER; for PgR, (1) natural logarithm (0.1 added to 0 HSCOREs and 0%+) and (2) square root. Our primary end point was MA.27 distant disease-free survival (DDFS) at a median 4.1-year follow-up, and secondary end point was event-free survival (EFS). Univariate survival with cut points at SDs about a mean of 0 (≤-1; (-1, 0]; (0, 1]; >1) was described with Kaplan-Meier plots and examined with Wilcoxon (Peto-Prentice) test statistic. Adjusted Cox multivariable regressions had two-sided Wald tests and nominal significance P < .05. RESULTS: Of 7,576 women accrued, 3,048 women's tumors had machine-quantitated image analysis results: 2,900 (95%) for ER, 2,726 (89%) for PgR, and 2,582 (85% of 3,048) with both ER and PgR. Higher statistically standardized ER and PgR HSCORE and %+ were associated with better univariate DDFS and EFS (P < .001). In multivariable assessments, ER HSCORE and %+ were not significantly associated (P = .52-.88) with DDFS in models with PgR, whereas higher PgR HSCORE and %+ were significantly associated with better DDFS (P = .001) in models with ER. CONCLUSION: Adjunctive statistical standardization differentiated quantitated levels of ER and PgR. Patients with higher ER- and PgR-standardized units had superior DDFS compared with those with HSCOREs and %+ ≤-1.

Palbociclib in Older Patients with Advanced/Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Palbociclib in combination with endocrine therapy is approved for treatment of hormone receptor-positive (HR+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) advanced breast cancer. In addition to clinical trials, several real-world studies have evaluated the effectiveness of palbociclib. With increased life expectancy in the general population, breast cancer in older women is also expected to increase. OBJECTIVE: The aim was to systematically review evidence from both clinical trials and real-world studies for palbociclib treatment outcomes in older patients with HR+/HER2- advanced/metastatic breast cancer (a/mBC). Older patients are often underrepresented in clinical trials, and real-world evidence (RWE) will enrich the analysis of palbociclib outcomes in this subgroup of patients. DESIGN: A systematic literature search in PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library through May 4, 2023, yielded 2355 unique articles. A total of 52 articles (13 and 39 articles reporting results from seven randomized controlled trials [RCTs] and 37 RWE studies, respectively) were included based on study eligibility criteria. RESULTS: All RCTs used age cutoffs of ≥ 65 years to define older population (n = 722; 437 received palbociclib); all RWE studies, except one with an age cutoff of > 60 years, had age cutoffs of ≥ 65 years or higher to define older population (n = 9840; 7408 received palbociclib). Overall, in studies that compared efficacy (progression-free survival [seven RCTs, 20 RWE studies], overall survival [four RCTs, 11 RWE studies], tumor response [three RWE studies], and clinical benefit rate [one RCT, two RWE studies]) and safety outcomes (three RCTs, three RWE studies) between older and younger patients, palbociclib showed similar benefits, regardless of age. Results from two RCTs and two RWE studies showed that global quality of life (QoL) was maintained in older patients receiving palbociclib. Overall, palbociclib dose modifications (two RWE studies), dose reductions (one RCT, seven RWE studies), and treatment discontinuation rates (three RCTs, three RWE studies) were higher in older patients compared with younger patients; however, these differences did not appear to adversely impact efficacy outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: In this systematic review, data from RCTs showed that palbociclib was effective, well tolerated, and maintained QoL in older patients with HR+/HER2- a/mBC. Palbociclib treatment in older patients in real-world settings was associated with similar clinical benefit as in RCTs. PROSPERO REGISTRATION: CRD42023444195.

Overall Survival With Palbociclib Plus Letrozole in Advanced Breast Cancer.

Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned coprimary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical trial updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported.PALOMA-2 demonstrated statistically and clinically significant improvement in progression-free survival with palbociclib plus letrozole versus placebo plus letrozole in estrogen receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (ER+/HER2-) advanced breast cancer (ABC). Here, we report results for the secondary end point overall survival (OS). Postmenopausal women (N = 666) with ER+/HER2- ABC without previous systemic therapy for ABC were randomly assigned 2:1 to palbociclib plus letrozole or placebo plus letrozole. After a median follow-up of 90.1 months, 405 deaths were observed and 155 patients were known to be alive. The median OS was 53.9 months (95% CI, 49.8 to 60.8) with palbociclib plus letrozole versus 51.2 months (95% CI, 43.7 to 58.9) with placebo plus letrozole (hazard ratio [HR], 0.96 [95% CI, 0.78 to 1.18]; stratified one-sided P = .34). An imbalance in the number of patients with unknown survival outcome between the treatment arms (13.3% v 21.2%, respectively) limited interpretation of OS results. With recovered survival data, the median OS was 53.8 (95% CI, 49.8 to 59.2) versus 49.8 months (95% CI, 42.3 to 56.4), respectively (HR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.76 to 1.12]; one-sided P = .21). OS was not significantly improved with palbociclib plus letrozole compared with placebo plus letrozole.

Clinical effectiveness and safety of olaparib in BRCA-mutated, HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer in a real-world setting: final analysis of LUCY.

PURPOSE: The interim analysis of the phase IIIb LUCY trial demonstrated the clinical effectiveness of olaparib in patients with germline BRCA-mutated (gBRCAm), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative metastatic breast cancer (mBC), with median progression-free survival (PFS) of 8.11 months, which was similar to that in the olaparib arm of the phase III OlympiAD trial (7.03 months). This prespecified analysis provides final overall survival (OS) and safety data. METHODS: The open-label, single-arm LUCY trial of olaparib (300 mg, twice daily) enrolled adults with gBRCAm or somatic BRCA-mutated (sBRCAm), HER2-negative mBC. Patients had previously received a taxane or anthracycline for neoadjuvant/adjuvant or metastatic disease and up to two lines of chemotherapy for mBC. RESULTS: Of 563 patients screened, 256 (gBRCAm, n = 253; sBRCAm, n = 3) were enrolled. In the gBRCAm cohort, median investigator-assessed PFS (primary endpoint) was 8.18 months and median OS was 24.94 months. Olaparib was clinically effective in all prespecified subgroups: hormone receptor status, previous chemotherapy for mBC, previous platinum-based chemotherapy (including by line of therapy), and previous cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor use. The most frequent treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were nausea (55.3%) and anemia (39.2%). Few patients (6.3%) discontinued olaparib owing to a TEAE. No deaths associated with AEs occurred during the study treatment or 30-day follow-up. CONCLUSION: The LUCY patient population reflects a real-world population in line with the licensed indication of olaparib in mBC. These findings support the clinical effectiveness and safety of olaparib in patients with gBRCAm, HER2-negative mBC. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical trials registration number: NCT03286842.

Effect of Metformin Versus Placebo on New Primary Cancers in Canadian Cancer Trials Group MA.32: A Secondary Analysis of a Phase III Randomized Double-Blind Trial in Early Breast Cancer.

Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned coprimary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical trial updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported.Metformin has been associated with lower cancer risk in epidemiologic and preclinical research. In the MA.32 randomized adjuvant breast cancer trial, metformin (v placebo) did not affect invasive disease-free or overall survival. Here, we report metformin effects on the risk of new cancer. Between 2010 and 2013, 3,649 patients with breast cancer younger than 75 years without diabetes with high-risk T1-3, N0-3 M0 breast cancer (any estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2) were randomly assigned to metformin 850 mg orally twice a day or placebo twice a day for 5 years. New primary invasive cancers (outside the ipsilateral breast) developing as a first event were identified. Time to events was described by the competing risks method; two-sided likelihood ratio tests adjusting for age, BMI, smoking, and alcohol intake were used to compare metformin versus placebo arms. A total of 184 patients developed new invasive cancers: 102 metformin and 82 placebo, hazard ratio (HR), 1.25; 95% CI, 0.94 to 1.68; P = .13. These included 48 contralateral invasive breast cancers (27 metformin v 21 placebo), HR, 1.29; 95% CI, 0.72 to 2.27; P = .40 and 136 new nonbreast primary cancers (75 metformin v 61 placebo), HR, 1.24; 95% CI, 0.88 to 1.74; P = .21. Metformin did not reduce the risk of new cancer development in these nondiabetic patients with breast cancer.

Impact of BMI in Patients With Early Hormone Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer Receiving Endocrine Therapy With or Without Palbociclib in the PALLAS Trial.

PURPOSE: BMI affects breast cancer risk and prognosis. In contrast to cytotoxic chemotherapy, CDK4/6 inhibitors are given at a fixed dose, irrespective of BMI or weight. This preplanned analysis of the global randomized PALLAS trial investigates the impact of BMI on the side-effect profile, treatment adherence, and efficacy of palbociclib. METHODS: Patients were categorized at baseline according to WHO BMI categories. Neutropenia rates were assessed with univariable and multivariable logistic regression. Time to early discontinuation of palbociclib was analyzed with Fine and Gray competing risk models. Unstratified Cox models were used to investigate the association between BMI category and time to invasive disease-free survival (iDFS). 95% CIs were derived. RESULTS: Of 5,698 patients included in this analysis, 68 (1.2%) were underweight, 2,082 (36.5%) normal weight, 1,818 (31.9%) overweight, and 1,730 (30.4%) obese at baseline. In the palbociclib arm, higher BMI was associated with a significant decrease in neutropenia (unadjusted odds ratio for 1-unit change, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.91 to 0.94; adjusted for age, race ethnicity, region, chemotherapy use, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group at baseline, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.92 to 0.95). This translated into a significant decrease in treatment discontinuation rate with higher BMI (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] for 10-unit change, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.67 to 0.83). There was no significant improvement in iDFS with the addition of palbociclib to ET in any weight category (normal weight HR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.63 to 1.12; overweight HR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.82 to 1.49; and obese HR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.69 to 1.30) in this analysis early in follow-up (31 months). CONCLUSION: This preplanned analysis of the PALLAS trial demonstrates a significant impact of BMI on side effects, dose reductions, early treatment discontinuation, and relative dose intensity. Additional long-term follow-up will further evaluate whether BMI ultimately affects outcome.

Reply to Trudeau, M.; Fraser, B. The CADTH pCODR Expert Review Committee Process Explained. Comment on "Rayson et al. Access to Neoadjuvant Pertuzumab for HER2 Positive Breast Cancer in Canada: A Dilemma Increasingly Difficult to Explain. Curr. Oncol. 2022, 29, 9891-9895".

We appreciate the opportunity to respond to the comment [...].

Metformin, placebo, and endocrine therapy discontinuation among participants in a randomized double-blind trial of metformin vs placebo in hormone receptor-positive early-stage breast cancer (CCTG MA32).

BACKGROUND: The MA32 study investigated whether 5 years of metformin (versus placebo) improves invasive disease-free survival in early-stage breast cancer (BC). Non-adherence to endocrine therapy (ET) and medications for chronic conditions is common and increases with drug toxicity and polypharmacy. This secondary analysis evaluates rates and predictors of early discontinuation of metformin, placebo, and ET among participants with HR-positive BC. METHODS: Patients with high-risk non-metastatic BC were randomized to 60 months of metformin (850 mg BID) or placebo BID. Patients were administered bottles of metformin/placebo every 180 days. Metformin/placebo adherence was defined as a bottle dispensed at month 48 or later. The ET adherence analysis included patients with HR-positive BC who received ET with start and stop date reported, with adherence defined as > 48 months of use. Associations of covariates with study drug and ET adherence were examined using multivariable models. RESULTS: Among the 2521 HR-positive BC patients, 32.9% were non-adherent to study drug. Non-adherence was higher among patients on metformin vs placebo (37.1% vs 28.7%, p < 0.001). Reassuringly, ET discontinuation rates were similar between treatment arms (28.4% vs 28.0%, p = 0.86). Patients who were non-adherent to ET were more likely to discontinue study therapy (38.8% vs 30.1%, p < 0.0001). In a multivariable analysis, study drug non-adherence was increased with metformin vs placebo (OR: 1.50, 95% CI 1.25-1.80; p < 0.0001); non-adherence to ET (OR: 1.47, 95% CI 1.20-1.79, p < 0.0001); grade 1 or greater GI toxicity during the first 2 years; lower age; and higher body mass index. CONCLUSION: While non-adherence was higher among patients on metformin, it was still considerable among patients on placebo. Reassuringly, treatment arm allocation did not impact ET adherence. Attention to global medication adherence is needed to improve BC and non-oncological outcomes in cancer survivors. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01.

A Phase 1B open-label study of gedatolisib (PF-05212384) in combination with other anti-tumour agents for patients with advanced solid tumours and triple-negative breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: This Phase 1b study (B2151002) evaluated the PI3K/mTOR inhibitor gedatolisib (PF-05212384) in combination with other anti-tumour agents in advanced solid tumours. METHODS: Patients with various malignancies were administered gedatolisib (90‒310 mg intravenously every week [QW]) plus docetaxel (arm A) or cisplatin (arm B) (each 75 mg/m2 intravenously Q3W) or dacomitinib (30 or 45 mg/day orally). The safety and tolerability of combination therapies were assessed during dose escalation; objective response (OR) and safety were assessed during dose expansion. RESULTS: Of 110 patients enrolled, 107 received gedatolisib combination treatment. Seven of 70 (10.0%) evaluable patients had dose-limiting toxicities; the most common was grade 3 oral mucositis (n = 3). Based upon reprioritisation of the sponsor's portfolio, dose expansion focused on arm B, gedatolisib (180 mg QW) plus cisplatin in patients (N = 22) with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). OR (95% CI) was achieved in four of ten patients in first-line (overall response rate 40.0% [12.2-73.8%]) and four of 12 in second/third-line (33.3% [9.9-65.1%]) settings. One patient in each TNBC arm (10%, first-line; 8.3%, second/third-line) achieved a complete response. CONCLUSIONS: Gedatolisib combination therapy showed an acceptable tolerability profile, with clinical activity at the recommended Phase 2 dose in patients with TNBC. CLINICAL TRIAL: ClinicalTrial.gov: NCT01920061.

Key Considerations for the Treatment of Advanced Breast Cancer in Older Adults: An Expert Consensus of the Canadian Treatment Landscape.

The prevalence of breast cancer amongst older adults in Canada is increasing. This patient population faces unique challenges in the management of breast cancer, as older adults often have distinct biological, psychosocial, and treatment-related considerations. This paper presents an expert consensus of the Canadian treatment landscape, focusing on key considerations for optimizing selection of systemic therapy for advanced breast cancer in older adults. This paper aims to provide evidence-based recommendations and practical guidance for healthcare professionals involved in the care of older adults with breast cancer. By recognizing and addressing the specific needs of older adults, healthcare providers can optimize treatment outcomes and improve the overall quality of care for this population.

Access to Neoadjuvant Pertuzumab for HER2 Positive Breast Cancer in Canada: A Dilemma Increasingly Difficult to Explain.

The addition of pertuzumab to neoadjuvant trastuzumab and chemotherapy for women with early-stage, high-risk, HER2+ breast cancer has been observed to lead to higher pathologic complete response rates (pCR), and improved event-free survival compared to trastuzumab and chemotherapy alone. Based on available data, neoadjuvant pertuzumab is recommended by ESMO, ASCO, and NICE as well as by a Canadian Consensus Guideline Group. We discuss the implications for Canadian patients with HER2+ early breast cancer due to a second and final negative funding decision by the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH) related to neoadjuvant pertuzumab. This decision will have adverse impacts for up to 1 in 6 women receiving neoadjuvant therapy for high-risk HER2+ breast cancer, due to suboptimal pCR rates and higher risks of invasive breast cancer recurrent events, resulting in the need for more toxic adjuvant therapy.

Cost-effectiveness of palbociclib in early breast cancer patients with a high risk of relapse: Results from the PENELOPE-B trial.

Background: Patients with hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer who have residual invasive disease after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) are at a high risk of relapse. PENELOPE-B was a double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase III trial that investigated adding palbociclib (PAL) for thirteen 28-day cycles to adjuvant endocrine therapy (ET) in these patients. Clinical results showed no significant improvement in invasive disease-free survival with PAL. Methods: We performed a pre-planned cost-effectiveness analysis of PAL within PENELOPE-B from the perspective of the German statutory health insurance. Health-related quality of life scores, collected in the trial using the EQ-5D-3L instrument, were converted to utilities based on the German valuation algorithm. Resource use was valued using German price weights. Outcomes were discounted at 3% and modeled with mixed-level linear models to adjust for attrition, repeated measurements, and residual baseline imbalances. Subgroup analyses were performed for key prognostic risk factors. Scenario analyses addressed data limitations and evaluated the robustness of the estimated cost-effectiveness of PAL to methodological choices. Results: The effects of PAL on quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were marginal during the active treatment phase, increasing thereafter to 0.088 (95% confidence interval: -0.001; 0.177) QALYs gained over the 4 years of follow-up. The incremental costs were dominated by PAL averaging EUR 33,000 per patient; costs were higher in the PAL arm but not significantly different after the second year. At an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of EUR 380,000 per QALY gained, PAL was not cost-effective compared to the standard-of-care ET. Analyses restricted to Germany and other subgroups were consistent with the main results. Findings were robust in the scenarios evaluated. Conclusions: One year of PAL added to ET is not cost-effective in women with residual invasive disease after NACT in Germany.

Comparative biomarker analysis of PALOMA-2/3 trials for palbociclib.

While cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 (CDK4/6) inhibitors, including palbociclib, combined with endocrine therapy (ET), are becoming the standard-of-care for hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2‒negative metastatic breast cancer, further mechanistic insights are needed to maximize benefit from the treatment regimen. Herein, we conducted a systematic comparative analysis of gene expression/progression-free survival relationship from two phase 3 trials (PALOMA-2 [first-line] and PALOMA-3 [≥second-line]). In the ET-only arm, there was no inter-therapy line correlation. However, adding palbociclib resulted in concordant biomarkers independent of initial ET responsiveness, with shared sensitivity genes enriched in estrogen response and resistance genes over-represented by mTORC1 signaling and G2/M checkpoint. Biomarker patterns from the combination arm resembled patterns observed in ET in advanced treatment-naive patients, especially patients likely to be endocrine-responsive. Our findings suggest palbociclib may recondition endocrine-resistant tumors to ET, and may guide optimal therapeutic sequencing by partnering CDK4/6 inhibitors with different ETs. Pfizer (NCT01740427; NCT01942135).

Effect of Metformin vs Placebo on Invasive Disease-Free Survival in Patients With Breast Cancer: The MA.32 Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Metformin, a biguanide commonly used to treat type 2 diabetes, has been associated with potential beneficial effects across breast cancer subtypes in observational and preclinical studies. Objective: To determine whether the administration of adjuvant metformin (vs placebo) to patients with breast cancer without diabetes improves outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: MA.32, a phase 3 randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial, conducted in Canada, Switzerland, US, and UK, enrolled 3649 patients with high-risk nonmetastatic breast cancer receiving standard therapy between August 2010 and March 2013, with follow-up to October 2020. Interventions: Patients were randomized (stratified for hormone receptor [estrogen receptor and/or progesterone receptor {ER/PgR}] status, positive vs negative; body mass index, ≤30 vs >30; human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 [ERBB2, formerly HER2 or HER2/neu], positive vs negative; and any vs no chemotherapy) to 850 mg of oral metformin twice a day (n = 1824) or oral placebo twice a day (n = 1825) for 5 years. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was invasive disease-free survival in hormone receptor-positive breast cancer. Of the 8 secondary outcomes, overall survival, distant relapse-free survival, and breast cancer-free interval were analyzed. Results: Of the 3649 randomized patients (mean age, 52.4 years; 3643 women [99.8%]), all (100%) were included in analyses. After a second interim analysis, futility was declared for patients who were ER/PgR-, so the primary analysis was conducted for 2533 patients who were ER/PgR+. The median duration of follow-up in the ER/PgR+ group was 96.2 months (range, 0.2-121 months). Invasive disease-free survival events occurred in 465 patients who were ER/PgR+. The incidence rates for invasive disease-free survival events were 2.78 per 100 patient-years in the metformin group vs 2.74 per 100 patient-years in the placebo group (hazard ratio [HR], 1.01; 95% CI, 0.84-1.21; P = .93), and the incidence rates for death were 1.46 per 100 patient-years in the metformin group vs 1.32 per 100 patient-years in the placebo group (HR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.86-1.41; P = .47). Among patients who were ER/PgR-, followed up for a median of 94.1 months, incidence of invasive disease-free survival events was 3.58 vs 3.60 per 100 patient-years, respectively (HR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.79-1.30; P = .92). None of the 3 secondary outcomes analyzed in the ER/PgR+ group had statistically significant differences. Grade 3 nonhematological toxic events occurred more frequently in patients taking metformin than in patients taking placebo (21.5% vs 17.5%, respectively, P = .003). The most common grade 3 or higher adverse events in the metformin vs placebo groups were hypertension (2.4% vs 1.9%), irregular menses (1.5% vs 1.4%), and diarrhea (1.9% vs 7.0%). Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with high-risk operable breast cancer without diabetes, the addition of metformin vs placebo to standard breast cancer treatment did not significantly improve invasive disease-free survival. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01101438.

Complementary Medicine Use Amongst Patients with Metastatic Cancer Enrolled in Phase III Clinical Trials.

BACKGROUND: Complementary medicines (CM) are frequently used by patients with cancer. Controversy exists over the effectiveness and risk that CM may add to conventional cancer therapy. The incidence of CM use among patients enrolled in phase III clinical trials is unknown. METHODS: Medication lists from 6 international phase III clinical trials were retrospectively reviewed to identify patients using CM. Patients had metastatic breast, colorectal, or lung cancers. Quality of life, adverse events, overall survival, and progression-free survival were compared between CM users and non-users. Baseline differences between groups were adjusted with propensity score matching groups. RESULTS: Seven hundred and six of 3446 patients (20.5%) used at least one CM. CM use was highest among patients with breast cancer (35.6%). CM users had more favorable baseline prognostic factors (ECOG 0-1, non-smoking status, younger age, and fewer metastases). CM use was associated with lower rates of adverse events (50% vs. 62%, P = .002) and quality of life was similar between both groups. After adjustment with propensity score matching, CM use was also associated with longer overall survival in patients with lung cancer (adjusted hazard ratio 0.80, 95%CI, 0.68-0.94, P =.0054). However, several key control variables like EGFR status were not available. CONCLUSION: One in 5 patients in phase III clinical trials report using CM. CM was not associated with worse cancer-specific outcomes. However, CM users had more favorable baseline prognostic factors, and likely other confounders that may have contributed to improved outcomes observed in the lung cohort. Physicians should monitor for CM use and potential interactions with clinical trial drugs.