2021
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2021.04.004
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Outcomes of patients with solid tumour malignancies treated with first-line immuno-oncology agents who do not meet eligibility criteria for clinical trials

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
23
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

2
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 28 publications
(24 citation statements)
references
References 30 publications
1
23
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Our group previously investigated this phenomenon and found that 32% of "real-world" patients treated with immunotherapy for renal-cell carcinoma, NSCLC, or melanoma would not be eligible for corresponding immunotherapy trials due clinical and laboratory exclusion criteria, including ECOG. The patients who would be ineligible had a lower median overall survival and ORR compared with the eligible patients [16]. In the current study, there was a high proportion of poor ECOG status patients (>25%), suggesting a possible explanation for the increased shortterm mortality.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 53%
“…Our group previously investigated this phenomenon and found that 32% of "real-world" patients treated with immunotherapy for renal-cell carcinoma, NSCLC, or melanoma would not be eligible for corresponding immunotherapy trials due clinical and laboratory exclusion criteria, including ECOG. The patients who would be ineligible had a lower median overall survival and ORR compared with the eligible patients [16]. In the current study, there was a high proportion of poor ECOG status patients (>25%), suggesting a possible explanation for the increased shortterm mortality.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 53%
“…In this setting, no prospective data are available, and evidence is limited to few retrospective studies including both squamous and non-squamous histology and mixed populations. 35 , 36 Results from these studies were mainly limited to efficacy assessment. In the study by Waterhouse et al., 36 evaluating real-world outcomes of A-NSCLC patients receiving first-line ICIs, poor PS was confirmed as a negative prognostic factor in patients receiving combined chemotherapy plus immunotherapy (PS ≥2 patients: 16%; median OS 8 versus 11.6 months in squamous histology; 6.3 versus 14.2 months in non-squamous histology).…”
Section: Discussion On Clinical Practicementioning
confidence: 99%
“… 36 Similarly, a very recent study investigated the outcomes of trial-eligible and trial-ineligible patients treated with immunotherapy for different tumors. 35 ECOG PS >1 patients represented 61% of the trial-ineligible population within the NSCLC cohort. In this setting, the survival results of trial-ineligible versus trial-eligible patients were disappointing across treatment regimens including ICI monotherapy and ICI combinations (median OS 5.3 versus 20.4 months, P < 0.0001), 35 again confirming the negative prognostic impact of PS 2 category.…”
Section: Discussion On Clinical Practicementioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…[6] Treatment patterns post IOVE are less well characterised due to shorter follow up, but 35% of patients post 1L combination axitinib and pembrolizumab had already received 2L VEGFi directed therapy at a 30.6 median month follow up. [7] Given the established inferior outcomes of approved anti-cancer therapies noted in the majority of real world vs trial populations [8] , it is important to characterise drug activity in routine practice to clarify the relevance and reproducibility of trial data and inform practice regarding the optimum sequencing of therapies.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%