Exploring the impact of patient-specific clinical features on osimertinib effectiveness in a real-world cohort of patients with EGFR mutated non-small cell lung cancer.

Osimertinib is prescribed to patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and a sensitizing EGFR mutation. Limited data exists on the impact of patient characteristics or osimertinib exposure on effectiveness outcomes. This was a Dutch, multicenter cohort study. Eligible patients were ≥18 years, with metastatic EGFRm+ NSCLC, receiving osimertinib. Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS) and safety. Kaplan-Meier analyses and multivariate Cox proportional hazard models were performed. In total, 294 patients were included. Primary EGFR-mutations were mainly exon 19 deletions (54%) and p.L858R point mutations (30%). Osimertinib was given in first-line (40%), second-line (46%) or beyond (14%), with median PFS 14.4 (95% CI: 9.4-19.3), 13.9 (95% CI: 11.3-16.1) and 8.7 months (95% CI: 4.6-12.7), respectively. Patients with low BMI (<20.0 kg/m2 ) had significantly shorter PFS/OS compared to all other subgroups. Patients with a high plasma trough concentration in steady state (Cmin,SS ; >271 ng/mL) had shorter PFS compared to a low Cmin,SS (<163 ng/mL; aHR 2.29; 95% CI: 1.13-4.63). A significant longer PFS was seen in females (aHR = 0.61, 95% CI: 0.45-0.82) and patients with the exon 19 deletion (aHR = 0.58, 95% CI: 0.36-0.92). A trend towards longer PFS was seen for TP53 wild-type patients, while age did not impact PFS. Patients with a primary EGFR exon 19 deletion had longer PFS, while a low BMI, male sex and a high Cmin,SS were indicative for shorter PFS and/or OS. Age was not associated with effectiveness outcomes of osimertinib.

Incidence of Bone Metastases and Skeletal-Related Events in Patients With EGFR-Mutated NSCLC Treated With Osimertinib.

Introduction: Bone metastases are frequent in patients with EGFR-mutated (EGFR+) NSCLC. Skeletal-related events (SREs) are common in these patients; however, no data on SRE in osimertinib-treated patients are reported. We investigated the development of bone metastases and SREs in patients with EGFR+ NSCLC treated with osimertinib. Methods: This is a retrospective multicenter cohort study that included patients with metastatic EGFR+ NSCLC who were treated with osimertinib between February 2016 and September 2021. Demographics, bone metastases-related outcomes, SREs, treatment efficacy, and overall survival (OS) were collected. Results: In total, 250 patients treated with osimertinib (43% first line) were included. Of the patients, 51% had bone metastases at initiation of osimertinib. Furthermore, 16% of the patients with bone metastases used bone-targeted agents. Median follow-up from initiation of osimertinib was 23.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 19.9-26.9 mo). During osimertinib treatment, 10% developed new bone metastases or bone progression. Of the patients with bone metastases, 39% had more than or equal to one SREs: 28% developed first SRE before osimertinib treatment, 1% after, and 11% during. Median OS post-bone metastasis was 30.8 months (95% CI: 21.9-39.7). Median OS after first SRE was 31.1 months (95% CI: 15.8-46.5). Conclusions: Bone metastases and SREs are frequent before and during treatment with osimertinib in EGFR+ NSCLC. Because of these findings and the long OS post-bone metastases, we advocate prescription of bone-targeted agents in these patients and recommend adding bone-specific end points in clinical trials.

Development and validation of an HPLC-MS/MS method to simultaneously quantify brigatinib, lorlatinib, pralsetinib and selpercatinib in human K2-EDTA plasma.

A liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry method was developed and validated to quantify the small-molecule inhibitors (SMIs) brigatinib, lorlatinib, pralsetinib and selpercatinib, which are used in patients with oncogenic-driven non-small cell lung cancer. Chromatographic separation was performed on a HyPURITY® C18 analytical column with a gradient elution using ammonium acetate in water and in methanol, both acidified with formic acid 0,1%. Detection and quantification were performed using a triple quad mass spectrometer with an electrospray ionization interface. The assay was validated over a linear range of 50-2,500 ng/ml for brigatinib, 25-1,000 ng/ml for lorlatinib, 100-10,000 ng/ml for pralsetinib and 50-5,000 ng/ml for selpercatinib. All four SMIs were stable for at least 7 days under cool conditions (2-8°C), and at least 24 h at room temperature (15-25°C) in K2-EDTA plasma. Under freezing conditions (-20°C), all SMIs were stable for at least 30 days, except for the lowest quality control (QCLOW ) of pralsetinib. The QCLOW of pralsetinib was stable for at least 7 days at -20°C. This method provides an efficient and simple way to quantify four SMIs with a single assay in clinical practice.

Pharmacokinetic boosting of osimertinib with cobicistat in patients with non-small cell lung cancer: The OSIBOOST trial.

INTRODUCTION: Exposure to osimertinib, a third generation epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) for treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and a sensitizing EGFR mutation, can be substantially below average. We evaluated whether plasma levels could be boosted by co-administration of cobicistat, a strong Cytochrome P450 3A-inhibitor. METHODS: This was a pharmacokinetic, proof-of-concept clinical trial (the OSIBOOST trial, NCT03858491). NSCLC-patients with osimertinib were eligible if their steady state osimertinib plasma trough concentration was low (≤195 ng/mL). On day 1, the area under the plasma curve (AUC0-24,ss) of osimertinib and its metabolite (AZ5104) was calculated using a limited sampling strategy (four samples). Cobicistat co-treatment (150 mg, once daily) was started on day 2. Between day 22-26, a second AUC was determined. Cobicistat dose could be escalated if the osimertinib trough concentration was still ≤ 195 ng/mL, in the absence of toxicity. Primary endpoint was the increase in osimertinib exposure, secondary endpoint was toxicity. Cobicistat could be continued during the expanded access phase, with follow-up (2-4 months) of the boosting effect. RESULTS: The mean baseline osimertinib trough concentration for the eleven enrolled patients was 154 ng/mL. In all patients, cobicistat addition led to an increase in osimertinib exposure. Mean increase in total AUC0-24ss (AUC osimertinib + AUC AZ5104) was 60%, (range 19%-192%). The boosting effect was consistent over time. No grade ≥ 2 toxicity was observed. CONCLUSION: Pharmacokinetic boosting of osimertinib with cobicistat in patients with NSCLC is feasible without increasing toxicity, although the degree of boosting is variable.

Characteristics of patients with lung cancer in clinical practice and their potential eligibility for clinical trials evaluating tyrosine kinase inhibitors or immune checkpoint inhibitors.

INTRODUCTION: In- and exclusion criteria of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) aim to include a homogeneous study-population. This study compared characteristics of lung cancer patients from phase III RCTs evaluating tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) or immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) with characteristics of lung cancer patients in a real world setting in the United Kingdom. METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink GOLD. Patients (N = 9239) with a first ever lung cancer registration between 2014 and 2018 were identified. Eligibility for inclusion was assessed for twelve RCTs (evaluating TKIs or ICIs). Reasons for potential exclusion and the number of unmet criteria were assessed for each RCT independently. OS was assessed using Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards analyses. RESULTS: The proportion of potentially eligible patients was 74.3% and 51.9% for TKI and ICI RCTs, respectively. History of another malignancy, renal insufficiency or concomitant drug-use were main reasons for exclusion. OS was considerably longer for potentially eligible patients. Hazards ratios varied from 1.17 (95% confidence interval, 1.11-1.24) to 1.35 (1.20-1.42) across the RCTs. CONCLUSION: This study showed that a considerable proportion of lung cancer patients in a real-world setting would have been ineligible for participation in phase III RCTs and that potentially ineligible patients experienced a shorter OS.

Development and validation of an HPLC-MS/MS method to simultaneously quantify alectinib, crizotinib, erlotinib, gefitinib and osimertinib in human plasma samples, using one assay run.

A liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry method was developed and validated to quantify alectinib, crizotinib, erlotinib and gefitinib. This assay can be combined with our method for osimertinib, allowing quantification of the most used ALK- and EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) in non-small cell lung cancer with a single-assay setup. Chromatographic separation was performed on a HyPurity® C18 analytical column using an elution gradient of ammonium acetate in water and in methanol, both acidified with formic acid 0.1%. Detection and quantification were performed using a triple quad mass spectrometer with an electrospray ionization interface. This method led to robust results, as the selectivity, carryover, precision and accuracy met all pre-specified requirements. The assay was validated over a linear range of 100-2,000 ng/ml for alectinib and erlotinib and 50-1,000 ng/ml for crizotinib and gefitinib. Alectinib, crizotinib, erlotinib and gefitinib were all stable for at least 4 h in whole blood (at room temperature and at 4°C) and for at least 1 month in EDTA plasma when stored at -80°C, while osimertinib proved to be unstable at room temperature. Although high-performance liquid chromatography was used, the run time was short and comparable with other methods using ultra-high performance liquid chromatography.

Validation of an analytical method using HPLC-MS/MS to quantify osimertinib in human plasma and supplementary stability results.

A new method for quantification of osimertinib (OSIM) in human plasma using a high-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry method was developed and validated. Methanol was used for protein precipitation and pazopanib as internal standard. Separation was performed on a HyPURITY®C18 analytical column (50 × 2.1 mm; 3 µm) using a gradient elution of ammonium acetate in water and ammonium acetate in methanol, both acidified with formic acid 0.1%. Detection and quantification of OSIM and pazopanib was performed using a triple quadruple mass spectrometer after electrospray ionization. This method led to robust results, as the selectivity, carryover, precision and accuracy all met pre-specified requirements. OSIM was stable in human serum when stored at -80°C. Reduced stability was found when stored at 2-4°C or room temperature. Degradation of OSIM slowed down in EDTA-plasma and acidified human serum. The limited stability of OSIM at room temperature should be considered for transport and sample preparation. Plasma samples should be frozen as soon as possible and sample preparation should be performed on dry-ice. In the future, EDTA-plasma and sample acidification may be used to improve OSIM stability at room temperature. However, more research and validation of such an approach are required.

Using Real-World Data in Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Practice: A Comparative Study of Five HTA Agencies.

BACKGROUND: Reimbursement decisions are conventionally based on evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs), which often have high internal validity but low external validity. Real-world data (RWD) may provide complimentary evidence for relative effectiveness assessments (REAs) and cost-effectiveness assessments (CEAs). This study examines whether RWD is incorporated in health technology assessment (HTA) of melanoma drugs by European HTA agencies, as well as differences in RWD use between agencies and across time. METHODS: HTA reports published between 1 January 2011 and 31 December 2016 were retrieved from websites of agencies representing five jurisdictions: England [National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE)], Scotland [Scottish Medicines Consortium (SMC)], France [Haute Autorité de santé (HAS)], Germany [Institute for Quality and Efficacy in Healthcare (IQWiG)] and The Netherlands [Zorginstituut Nederland (ZIN)]. A standardized data extraction form was used to extract information on RWD inclusion for both REAs and CEAs. RESULTS: Overall, 52 reports were retrieved, all of which contained REAs; CEAs were present in 25 of the reports. RWD was included in 28 of the 52 REAs (54%), mainly to estimate melanoma prevalence, and in 22 of the 25 (88%) CEAs, mainly to extrapolate long-term effectiveness and/or identify drug-related costs. Differences emerged between agencies regarding RWD use in REAs; the ZIN and IQWiG cited RWD for evidence on prevalence, whereas the NICE, SMC and HAS additionally cited RWD use for drug effectiveness. No visible trend for RWD use in REAs and CEAs over time was observed. CONCLUSION: In general, RWD inclusion was higher in CEAs than REAs, and was mostly used to estimate melanoma prevalence in REAs or to predict long-term effectiveness in CEAs. Differences emerged between agencies' use of RWD; however, no visible trends for RWD use over time were observed.