FDA approval summary: fam-trastuzumab deruxtecan-nxki for unresectable or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer with activating HER2 mutations.

On August 11, 2022, FDA granted accelerated approval to fam-trastuzumab deruxtecan-nxki (DS-8201a, T-DXd, ENHERTU, Daiichi Sankyo) for adult patients with unresectable or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) whose tumors have activating human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) mutations, as detected by an FDA-approved test, and who have received a prior systemic therapy. The approval was based on a prespecified interim analysis of DESTINY-Lung02 (Study U206), a multi-center, randomized, dose-optimization trial in patients with NSCLC harboring activating HER2-mutations. At the approved dose of 5.4 mg/kg given intravenously every 3 weeks, the overall response rate (ORR) was 58% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 43, 71). The median duration of response was 8.7 months (95% CI: 7.1, not estimable). These results were consistent with response rates observed at the 6.4 mg/kg dose level. The most common (≥ 20%) adverse reactions were nausea, constipation, decreased appetite, vomiting, fatigue, and alopecia. The rate of interstitial lung disease (ILD) or pneumonitis was 6% at the 5.4 mg/kg dose level and 14% at the 6.4 mg/kg dose level. In the setting of similar efficacy and reduced toxicity, approval was granted for the 5.4 mg/kg dose level. The applicant conducted a randomized, dose-optimization study with guidance from the FDA Oncology Center of Excellence's Project Optimus. This is the first approval of a targeted therapy for HER2-mutated NSCLC.

Improving Collection and Analysis of Overall Survival Data.

Advances in anticancer therapies have provided crucial benefits for millions of patients who are living long and fulfilling lives. While these successes should be celebrated, there is certainly room to continue improving cancer care. Increased long-term survival presents additional challenges for determining whether new therapies further extend patients' lives through clinical trials, commonly known as the gold standard endpoint of overall survival (OS). As a result, there is an increasing reliance on earlier efficacy endpoints , which may or may not correlate with OS, to continue the timely pace of translating innovation into novel therapies available for patients. Even when not powered as an efficacy endpoint, OS remains a critical indication of safety for regulatory decisions and is a key aspect of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's Project Endpoint. Unfortunately, in the pursuit of earlier endpoints, many registrational clinical trials lack adequate planning, collection, and analysis of OS data, which complicates interpretation of a net clinical benefit or harm. This article shares best practices, proposes novel statistical methodologies, and provides detailed recommendations to improve the rigor of using OS data to inform benefit-risk assessments, including incorporating the following in clinical trials intending to demonstrate the safety and effectiveness of a cancer therapy: prospective collection of OS data, establishment of fit-for-purpose definitions of OS detriment, and prespecification of analysis plans for using OS data to evaluate for potential harm. These improvements hold promise to help regulators, patients and providers better understand the benefits and risks of novel therapies.

FDA Approval Summary: Durvalumab and Pembrolizumab, Immune Checkpoint inhibitors for the Treatment of Biliary Tract Cancer.

On September 2, 2022, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved durvalumab in combination with cisplatin and gemcitabine, for the treatment of patients with unresectable or metastatic biliary tract cancers (BTC). On October 31, 2023, the FDA approved pembrolizumab in combination with cisplatin and gemcitabine for the same indication. Approvals were based on two randomized, multiregional, placebo-controlled trials, which randomly allocated patients to receive durvalumab (TOPAZ-1) or pembrolizumab (KEYNOTE-966) in combination with chemotherapy or placebo in combination with chemotherapy. Overall survival (OS) was the primary endpoint in both studies. In both studies, a statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in OS was demonstrated. In the TOPAZ-1 trial the median OS of patients receiving durvalumab was 12.8 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 11.1, 14.0) and 11.5 months (95% CI 10.1, 12.5) in patients receiving placebo (HR 0.80 [95% CI 0.66, 0.97]). In the KEYNOTE-966 trial, the median OS of patients receiving pembrolizumab was 12.7 months (95% CI 11.5, 13.6) and 10.9 months (95% CI 9.9, 11.6) in patients receiving placebo (HR 0.83 [95% CI 0.72, 0.95]). The addition of checkpoint inhibitors to standard of care chemotherapy for this indication did not reveal any new adverse event signals and the safety profile was generally consistent with the known clinical experience with durvalumab, pembrolizumab, and the backbone chemotherapy regimen. The approvals of durvalumab and pembrolizumab in combination with standard of care cisplatin and gemcitabine for the treatment of unresectable or metastatic BTC add two new therapeutic option for these patients.

FDA Approval Summary: Repotrectinib for locally advanced or metastatic ROS1-positive non-small cell lung cancer.

On November 15, 2023, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) granted traditional approval to repotrectinib (Augtyro®, Bristol Myers Squibb Corporation), for the treatment of adult patients with locally advanced or metastatic ROS1-positive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The approval was based on TRIDENT-1, a single arm trial with multiple cohorts of patients with ROS1 fusion-positive (hereafter "ROS1-positive") NSCLC, (NCT03093116), who were either treatment naïve or had received prior ROS1 TKI and/or platinum-based chemotherapy. The primary efficacy outcome measure is objective response rate (ORR) assessed by blinded independent central review (BICR) using response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (RECIST) version 1.1. ORR was assessed in 71 patients who were ROS1 TKI naïve and 56 patients who had received a prior ROS1 TKI. Among 71 patients who were ROS1 TKI naïve, the ORR was 79% (95% CI 68, 88); median duration of response was 34.1 months (95% CI 26, NE). In patients who had received a prior ROS1 TKI and no prior chemotherapy, the ORR was 38% (95% CI 25, 52). The median duration of response was 14.8 months (95% CI 7.6, NE) BICR-assessed responses were observed in CNS metastases in patients in both cohorts, and in patients who developed resistance mutations following prior TKI therapy. The most common (> 20%) adverse reactions were dizziness, dysgeusia, peripheral neuropathy, constipation, dyspnea, ataxia, fatigue, cognitive disorders, and muscular weakness. A unique feature of this ROS1 TKI approval is the inclusion of robust evidence of efficacy in patients with ROS1-positive NSCLC who had progressed on prior ROS1 TKIs.

FDA Approval Summary: Dabrafenib in Combination with Trametinib for BRAFV600E Mutation-Positive Low-Grade Glioma.

On March 16, 2023, the FDA approved dabrafenib in combination with trametinib (Tafinlar, Mekinist; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation) for the treatment of pediatric patients with low-grade glioma (LGG) with a BRAFV600E mutation who require systemic therapy. FDA also approved oral formulations of both drugs suitable for patients who cannot swallow pills. This approval was based on the LGG cohort from study CDRB436G2201 (NCT02684058), a multicenter, open-label trial in which pediatric patients with LGG with a BRAFV600E mutation were randomly assigned 2:1 to dabrafenib plus trametinib (D+T) or carboplatin plus vincristine (C+V). The overall response rate (ORR) by independent review based on Response Assessment in Neuro-oncology LGG (2017) criteria was assessed in 110 patients randomly assigned to D+T (n = 73) or C+V (n = 37). ORR was 47% [95% confidence interval (CI), 35-59] in the D+T arm and 11% (95% CI, 3.0-25) in the C+V arm. Duration of response (DOR) was 23.7 months (95% CI, 14.5-NE) in the D+T arm and not estimable (95% CI, 6.6- NE) in the C+V arm. Progression-free survival (PFS) was 20.1 months (95% CI: 12.8, NE) and 7.4 months (95% CI, 3.6- 11.8) [HR, 0.31 (95% CI, 0.17-0.55); P < 0.001] in the D+T and C+V arms, respectively. The most common (>20%) adverse reactions were pyrexia, rash, headache, vomiting, musculoskeletal pain, fatigue, diarrhea, dry skin, nausea, hemorrhage, abdominal pain, and dermatitis acneiform. This represents the first FDA approval of a systemic therapy for the first-line treatment of pediatric patients with LGG with a BRAFV600E mutation.

Methodology for Good Machine Learning with Multi-Omics Data.

In 2020, Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) started a 4-year scientific collaboration to approach complex new data modalities and advanced analytics. The scientific question was to find novel radio-genomics-based prognostic and predictive factors for HR+/HER- metastatic breast cancer under a Research Collaboration Agreement. This collaboration has been providing valuable insights to help successfully implement future scientific projects, particularly using artificial intelligence and machine learning. This tutorial aims to provide tangible guidelines for a multi-omics project that includes multidisciplinary expert teams, spanning across different institutions. We cover key ideas, such as "maintaining effective communication" and "following good data science practices," followed by the four steps of exploratory projects, namely (1) plan, (2) design, (3) develop, and (4) disseminate. We break each step into smaller concepts with strategies for implementation and provide illustrations from our collaboration to further give the readers actionable guidance.

FDA Approval Summary: Selpercatinib for the Treatment of Advanced RET Fusion-Positive Solid Tumors.

On September 21, 2022, the FDA granted accelerated approval to selpercatinib (Retevmo, Eli Lilly and Company) for the treatment of adult patients with locally advanced or metastatic solid tumors with a rearranged during transfection (RET) gene fusion that have progressed on or following prior systemic treatment or who have no satisfactory alternative treatment options. The approval was based on data from Study LOXO-RET-17001 (LIBRETTO-001; NCT03157128), an international, non-randomized, multi-cohort clinical trial that included patients with advanced solid tumors harboring RET alterations. The overall response rate in 41 patients with locally advanced or metastatic RET fusion-positive solid tumors other than non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) or thyroid cancer was 44% [95% confidence interval (CI), 28%-60%], with median duration of response 24.5 months (95% CI, 9.2-not evaluable). Patients with 10 of 14 tumor types with a variety of fusion partners had objective responses, including patients with the following tumors: pancreatic adenocarcinoma, colorectal, salivary, unknown primary, breast, soft-tissue sarcoma, bronchial carcinoid, ovarian, small intestine, and cholangiocarcinoma. The recommendation for approval was supported by results from LIBRETTO-001 in patients with RET fusion-positive NSCLC and thyroid cancer, which formed the basis of prior approvals in these tumor types. The most common adverse reactions (>25%) were edema, diarrhea, fatigue, dry mouth, hypertension, abdominal pain, constipation, rash, nausea, and headache. This is the first tissue-agnostic approval of a RET-directed targeted therapy.

US Food and Drug Administration Approval Summary: Nivolumab Plus Platinum-Doublet Chemotherapy for the Neoadjuvant Treatment of Patients With Resectable Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

PURPOSE: On March 4, 2022, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved nivolumab plus platinum-doublet chemotherapy for the neoadjuvant treatment of patients with resectable non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We discuss the FDA's review of the key data and regulatory considerations supporting this approval. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The approval was based on the results of CheckMate 816, an international, multiregional, active-controlled trial that randomly assigned 358 patients with resectable NSCLC, stage IB (≥4 cm) to IIIA (N2) per the American Joint Committee on Cancer seventh staging edition to receive either nivolumab plus platinum-doublet or platinum-doublet chemotherapy alone for three cycles before planned surgical resection. The major efficacy end point that supported this approval was event-free survival (EFS). RESULTS: At the first planned interim analysis (IA), the hazard ratio (HR) for EFS was 0.63 (95% CI, 0.45 to 0.87; P = .0052; statistical significance boundary = .0262) favoring the nivolumab plus chemotherapy arm; the median EFS was 31.6 months (95% CI, 30.2 to not reached) in the nivolumab plus chemotherapy arm versus 20.8 months (95% CI, 14.0 to 26.7) in the chemotherapy-only arm. At the time of a prespecified IA for overall survival (OS), 26% of patients had died, and the HR for OS was 0.57 (95% CI, 0.38 to 0.87; P = .0079; statistical significance boundary = .0033). Eighty-three percent of patients in the nivolumab-containing arm versus 75% in the chemotherapy-only arm received definitive surgery. CONCLUSION: This approval, the first for any regimen for the neoadjuvant treatment of NSCLC in the United States, was supported by a statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in EFS with no evidence of detriment in OS or negative impact on patients' receipt and timing of surgery or surgical outcomes.

Bayesian Methods in Human Drug and Biological Products Development in CDER and CBER.

The Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) and the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER) of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) have been leaders in protecting and promoting the U.S. public health by helping to ensure that safe and effective drugs and biological products are available in the United States for those who need them. The null hypothesis significance testing approach, along with other considerations, is typically used to demonstrate the effectiveness of a drug or biological product. The Bayesian framework presents an alternative approach to demonstrate the effectiveness of a treatment. This article discusses the Bayesian framework for drug and biological product development, highlights key settings in which Bayesian approaches may be appropriate, and provides recent examples of the use of Bayesian approaches within CDER and CBER.

FDA Approval Summary: Mobocertinib for Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer with EGFR Exon 20 Insertion Mutations.

On September 15, 2021, the FDA granted accelerated approval to mobocertinib (Exkivity, Takeda Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc.) for the treatment of adult patients with locally advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with EGFR exon 20 insertion mutations, as detected by an FDA-approved test, whose disease has progressed on or after platinum-based chemotherapy. The approval was based on data from Study AP32788-15-101 (NCT02716116), an international, non-randomized, multi-cohort clinical trial that included patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC with EGFR exon 20 insertion mutations. The overall response rate in 114 patients whose disease had progressed on or after platinum-based chemotherapy was 28% [95% confidence interval (CI), 20%-37%] with a median duration of response of 17.5 months (95% CI, 7.4-20.3). The most common adverse reactions (>20%) were diarrhea, rash, nausea, stomatitis, vomiting, decreased appetite, paronychia, fatigue, dry skin, and musculoskeletal pain. Product labeling includes a Boxed Warning for QTc prolongation and torsades de pointes. This is the first approval of an oral targeted therapy for patients with advanced EGFR exon 20 insertion mutation-positive NSCLC.

FDA Approval Summary: Pembrolizumab for Neoadjuvant and Adjuvant Treatment of Patients with High-Risk Early-Stage Triple-Negative Breast Cancer.

On July 26, 2021, the FDA granted approval to pembrolizumab in combination with chemotherapy for neoadjuvant treatment and then continued as a single agent for adjuvant treatment following surgery for patients with high-risk, early-stage triple-negative breast cancer. Approval was based on results from KEYNOTE-522, an ongoing randomized (2:1) trial evaluating pembrolizumab or placebo in combination with chemotherapy for neoadjuvant treatment and then as a single agent for adjuvant treatment. The co-primary endpoints were pathological complete response (pCR) rate and event-free survival (EFS). The trial demonstrated an improvement in pCR and EFS in the pembrolizumab arm compared with the control arm. The number of patients who experienced an EFS event was 123 (16%) and 93 (24%), respectively [HR: 0.63, 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.48-0.82, P = 0.00031]. Patients on the pembrolizumab arm experienced EFS benefit regardless of tumor PD-L1 status. The absolute pCR rate improvement with the addition of pembrolizumab was 7.5% (95% CI, 1.6-13.4). Among patients receiving pembrolizumab, 44% experienced an immune-related adverse reaction. This article summarizes FDA's review of pembrolizumab and the data supporting the favorable benefit-risk assessment.

Association of Radiation Therapy With Risk of Adverse Events in Patients Receiving Immunotherapy: A Pooled Analysis of Trials in the US Food and Drug Administration Database.

Importance: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and radiation therapy (RT) are widely used to treat various cancers, but little data are available to guide clinicians on ICI use sequentially with RT. Objective: To assess whether there is an increased risk of serious adverse events (AEs) associated with RT given within 90 days prior to an ICI. Design, Setting, and Participants: Individual patient data were pooled from 68 prospective trials of ICIs submitted in initial or supplemental licensing applications in the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) databases through December 2019. Two cohorts were generated: (1) patients who received RT within the 90 days prior to beginning ICI therapy and (2) those who did not receive RT within the 90 days prior to beginning ICI therapy, and AE frequencies were determined. A 1:1 propensity score-matched analysis was performed. Interventions: All patients received an ICI (atezolizumab, avelumab, cemiplimab, durvalumab, ipilimumab, nivolumab, or pembrolizumab); 1733 received RT within the 90 days prior to starting ICI therapy, and 13 956 did not. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was frequency and severity of AEs. Incidence of AEs was compared descriptively between participants who did vs did not receive RT in the propensity score-matched set. Because all analyses are exploratory (ie, not preplanned and no alpha allocated), assessment for statistical significance of the differences between groups was not considered appropriate. Results: A total of 25 469 patients were identified; 8634 were excluded because they lacked comparators who had received RT (n = 976), did not receive an ICI (n = 4949), received RT outside of the target window (n = 2338), or had missing data in 1 or more variables used in the propensity analysis (n = 371), leaving 16 835 patients included in the analysis. The majority were younger than 65 years (9447 [56.1%]), male (10 459 [62.1%]), and White (13 422 [79.7%]). Patients receiving RT had generally similar rates of AEs overall to those patients who did not receive RT. The average absolute difference in rates across the AEs was 1.2%, and the difference ranged from 0% for neurologic AEs to 8% for fatigue. No difference in grade 3 to 4 AEs was observed between the 2 groups (absolute difference ranged from 0.01% to 2%). These findings persisted after propensity score matching. Conclusions and Relevance: In this pooled analysis, administration of an ICI within 90 days following RT did not appear to be associated with an increased risk of serious AEs. Thus, it would appear to be safe to administer an ICI within 90 days of receiving RT. These findings should be confirmed in future prospective trials.

FDA Approval Summary: Capmatinib and Tepotinib for the Treatment of Metastatic NSCLC Harboring MET Exon 14 Skipping Mutations or Alterations.

The FDA approved capmatinib and tepotinib on May 6, 2020, and February 3, 2021, respectively. Capmatinib is indicated for patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (mNSCLC) whose tumors have a mutation leading to mesenchymal-epithelial transition (MET) exon 14 skipping as detected by an FDA-approved test. Tepotinib is indicated for mNSCLC harboring MET exon 14 skipping alterations. The approvals were based on trials GEOMETRY mono-1 (capmatinib) and VISION (tepotinib). In GEOMETRY mono-1, overall response rate (ORR) per Blinded Independent Review Committee (BIRC) was 68% [95% confidence interval (CI), 48-84] with median duration of response (DoR) 12.6 months (95% CI, 5.5-25.3) in 28 treatment-naïve patients and 41% (95% CI: 29, 53) with median DoR 9.7 months (95% CI, 5.5-13) in 69 previously treated patients with NSCLC with mutations leading to MET exon 14 skipping. In VISION, ORR per BIRC was 43% (95% CI: 32, 56) with median DoR 10.8 months (95% CI, 6.9-not estimable) in 69 treatment-naïve patients and 43% (95% CI, 33-55) with median DoR 11.1 months (95% CI, 9.5-18.5) in 83 previously-treated patients with NSCLC harboring MET exon 14 alterations. These are the first two therapies to be FDA approved specifically for patients with metastatic NSCLC with MET exon 14 skipping.

FDA Approval Summary: Margetuximab plus Chemotherapy for Advanced or Metastatic HER2-Positive Breast Cancer.

On December 16, 2020, the FDA granted regular approval to margetuximab-cmkb (MARGENZA), in combination with chemotherapy, for the treatment of adult patients with HER2-positive (HER2+) metastatic breast cancer who have received two or more prior anti-HER2 regimens, at least one of which was for metastatic disease. Approval was based on data from SOPHIA, a multicenter, randomized, open-label, active controlled study comparing margetuximab with trastuzumab, in combination with chemotherapy. The primary efficacy endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) by blinded independent central review. SOPHIA demonstrated a 0.9-month difference in median PFS between the two treatment arms [5.8 vs. 4.9 months, respectively; stratified HR, 0.76 (95% confidence interval: 0.59-0.98; P = 0.0334)]. Overall survival (OS) was immature at the data cut-off date of September 10, 2019. Infusion-related reactions (IRR) are an important safety signal associated with margetuximab plus chemotherapy. In SOPHIA, 13% of patients treated with margetuximab plus chemotherapy reported IRRs, of which 1.5% were grade 3. The most commonly reported adverse drug reactions (>10%) with margetuximab in combination with chemotherapy were fatigue/asthenia, nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, constipation, headache, pyrexia, alopecia, abdominal pain, peripheral neuropathy, arthralgia/myalgia, cough, decreased appetite, dyspnea, IRR, palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia, and extremity pain. Overall, the favorable risk-benefit profile for margetuximab when added to chemotherapy supported its approval for the intended indication.

Model Development of CDK4/6 Predicted Efficacy in Patients With Hormone Receptor-Positive, Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-Negative Advanced or Metastatic Breast Cancer.

PURPOSE: Three cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors (CDKIs) are approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of patients with hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative advanced or metastatic breast cancer in combination with hormonal therapy (HT). We hypothesized that on an individual basis, efficacy outcomes and adverse event (AE) development can be predicted using baseline patient and tumor characteristics. METHODS: Individual-level data from seven randomized controlled trials submitted to the US Food and Drug Administration for new or supplemental marketing applications of CDKIs were pooled. Progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and AE prediction models were developed for specific treatment regimens (HT v HT plus CDKI). An individual's characteristics were used in all models simultaneously to create a group of predicted outcomes that are comparable across treatment settings. RESULTS: Accuracy of the PFS and OS prediction models for HT were 66% and 64%, respectively, with the strongest predictors being menopausal status and therapy line. The corresponding AE prediction models resulted in an average area under the curve of 0.613. Accuracy of the PFS and OS prediction models for HT plus CDKI were 62% and 63%, respectively, with the strongest predictors being histologic grade for both. The corresponding AE prediction models resulted in an average area under the curve of 0.639. CONCLUSION: This exploratory analysis demonstrated that models of efficacy outcomes and AE development can be developed using baseline patient and tumor characteristics. Comparison of paired models can inform treatment selection for individuals on the basis of the patient's personalized goals and concerns. Although use of CDKIs is standard of care in the first- or second-line setting, this model provides prognostic information that may inform individual treatment decisions.

Survival outcomes in older men with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer treated with androgen receptor inhibitors: a US Food and Drug Administration pooled analysis of patient-level data from three randomised trials.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the benefit-risk profile of second-generation androgen receptor inhibitors in older men with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. We aimed to examine the efficacy and safety of second-generation androgen receptor inhibitors in men aged 80 years or older with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. METHODS: We searched for all randomised controlled clinical trials evaluating second-generation androgen receptor inhibitors in patients with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer submitted to the US Food and Drug Administration before Aug 15, 2020, and pooled data from three trials that met the selection criteria. All three trials enrolled patients who were aged 18 years or older with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1, castration-resistant prostate cancer, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) 2·0 µg/L or greater, PSA doubling time of 10 months or less, and no evidence of distant metastatic disease on conventional imaging per the investigator's assessment at the time of screening. All patients had histologically or cytologically confirmed adenocarcinoma of the prostate without neuroendocrine differentiation or small-cell features. All patients who were randomly assigned to androgen receptor inhibitor or placebo groups in these trials were considered assessable and were included in this pooled analysis. We evaluated the effect of age on metastasis-free survival and overall survival across age groups (<80 years vs ≥80 years) in the intention-to-treat population. Safety analyses were done in patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. FINDINGS: Between Oct 14, 2013, and March 9, 2018, 4117 patients were assigned to androgen receptor inhibitor (apalutamide, enzalutamide, or daralutamide; n=2694) or placebo (n=1423) across three randomised trials. The median follow-up duration for metastasis-free survival was 18 months (IQR 11-26) and for overall survival was 44 months (32-55). In patients aged 80 years or older (n=1023), the estimated median metastasis-free survival was 40 months (95% CI 36-41) in the androgen receptor inhibitor groups and 22 months (18-29) in the placebo groups (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·37 [95% CI 0·28-0·47]), and the median overall survival was 54 months (50-61) versus 49 months (43-58), respectively (adjusted HR 0·79 [0·64-0·98]). In patients younger than 80 years of age (n=3094), the estimated median metastasis-free survival was 41 months (95% CI 36-not estimable [NE]) in the androgen receptor inhibitor groups and 16 months (15-18) in the placebo groups (adjusted HR 0·31 [95% CI 0·27-0·35]), and the median overall survival was 74 months (74-NE) versus 61 months (56-NE), respectively (adjusted HR 0·69 [0·60-0·80]). In patients aged 80 years or older, grade 3 or worse adverse events were reported in 371 (55%) of 672 patients in the androgen receptor inhibitor groups and 140 (41%) of 344 patients in the placebo groups, compared with 878 (44%) of 2015 patients in the androgen receptor inhibitor groups and 321 (30%) of 1073 patients in the placebo groups among patients younger than 80 years. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were hypertension (168 [8%] of 2015 patients aged <80 years and 51 [8%] of 672 patients aged ≥80 years in the androgen receptor inhibitor groups vs 53 [5%] of 1073 patients aged <80 years and 22 [6%] of 344 patients aged ≥80 years in the placebo groups) and fracture (61 [3%] and 36 [5%] in the androgen receptor inhibitor groups vs 15 [1%] and 11 [3%] in the placebo groups). INTERPRETATION: The findings of this pooled analysis support the use of androgen receptor inhibitors in older men with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. Incorporating geriatric assessment tools in the care of older adults with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer might help clinicians to offer individualised treatment to each patient. FUNDING: None.

Subgroup Analyses in Oncology Trials: Regulatory Considerations and Case Examples.

Subgroup analyses are assessments of treatment effects based on certain patient characteristics out of the total study population and are important for interpretation of pivotal oncology trials. However, appropriate use of subgroup analyses results for regulatory decision-making and product labeling is challenging. Typically, drugs approved by the FDA are indicated for use in the total patient population studied; however, there are examples of restriction to a subgroup of patients despite positive study results in the entire study population and also extension of an indication to the entire study population despite positive results appearing primarily in one or more subgroups. In this article, we summarize key issues related to subgroup analyses in the benefit-risk assessment of cancer drugs and provide case examples to illustrate approaches that the FDA Oncology Center of Excellence has taken when considering the appropriate patient population for cancer drug approval. In general, if a subgroup is of interest, the subgroup analysis should be hypothesis-driven and have adequate sample size to demonstrate evidence of a treatment effect. In addition to statistical efficacy considerations, the decision on what subgroups to include in labeling relies on the pathophysiology of the disease, mechanistic justification, safety data, and external information available. The oncology drug review takes the totality of the data into consideration during the decision-making process to ensure the indication granted and product labeling appropriately reflect the scientific evidence to support patient population for whom the drug is safe and effective.

Incidence and Survival for Common Cancers Are Lower in New Mexico and Along the US-Mexico Border Than Elsewhere in the United States.

Background Few in-depth reports on cancer epidemiology in New Mexico or the United States-Mexico border region exist. We aim to quantify cancer incidence and survival in New Mexico and the United States-Mexico border region in New Mexico. Methods Incidence and survival were obtained using SEER*Stat 8.3. The data were divided into either New Mexico, or SEER 18 (comprised of the 17 remaining regions) and then further divided by county in New Mexico and by time period. Incidence rates were age-standardized to the 2000 US census. Five-year survival was calculated for each cancer type. Kaplan-Meier survival plots were produced, and significance was determined using log-rank analysis. Results Analysis demonstrated that cancers in New Mexico are diagnosed at a lower rate with the exception of thyroid, liver, and ovarian. Survival is generally lower in New Mexico with 10 of the 14 cancers having worse survival in New Mexico. Only uterine cancer had improved survival in New Mexico (77.9% vs 74.9%, P < .001). Additionally, breast (82.2%), prostate (83.3%), lung and bronchus (13.7%), colorectal (53.7%), melanoma (80.1%), kidney and renal pelvis (61.2%), uterine (78.5%), and ovarian (41.6%) all had lower survival in the border counties. Conclusion Comparing New Mexico to the other regions in the SEER 18 database, both cancer incidence and survival are consistently lower; these findings could be explained by lower access to healthcare, which can result in underreporting and delays in diagnosis.

Why nurses stay: Analysis of the registered nurse workforce and the relationship to work environments.

AIM: To examine how factors such as a sense of belonging to a nursing work group, work environmental characteristics, and workplace violence effects the duration of employment in professional settings in a southwest region of the United States. DESIGN: The descriptive correlational survey study conducted in 2014. METHODS: A random sample of 700 licensed registered nurses (RN) from a Board of Nursing's list of currently licensed RNs' (approximate n = 2300). Participants completed and returned four survey tools to the principal investigator. The return rate was 36.8% (258/700). RESULTS/FINDINGS: Analysis indicated that a sense of belonging, as well as supportive workplace characteristics, played a role in why nurses stay. The three survey tools provided strong correlations in the survey data and further authenticated the tools' reliability. A healthy work environment supports nurse retention. CONCLUSION: The three survey tools used in this study showed substantial and significant correlations. Although not all sub-scales correlated, those that did had strong Cronbach alpha scores. The weakest correlations were with the belongingness scale. Rapid turnover rates of nursing staff continue to plague healthcare organizations. A variety of reasons including difficult practice settings and stressful work environments contribute to the outflow of nurses. IMPACT: Health care administration and management leaders can improve retention via their efforts to continue to create and sustain healthy work environments that address affiliation, belongingness, and the characteristics that attract and retain nurses.