Association of systemic therapy with survival among adults with advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

Abstract

Background: Uptake of new systemic therapy treatments among patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) occurred rapidly after FDA approval. Few studies have characterized the association of these therapies on survival in community settings. We assessed survival by type of systemic therapy received among patients diagnosed with advanced NSCLC who were treated in community-based settings.

Methods: In this retrospective cohort, patients diagnosed with de novo stage IV NSCLC between March 2012 and December 2020 were followed through December 31, 2021. Survival was ascertained with restricted mean survival time from treatment receipt through 12 and 60 months and compared by RMST differences adjusting for demographic and tumor characteristics. Trends in one-year survival probabilities were assessed using joinpoint regression.

Results: Of 945 patients receiving systemic therapy, 46% received cytotoxic chemotherapy (Chemo-Only), 15% bevacizumab +/- Chemo, 22% immunotherapy +/- Chemo, and 16% targeted therapies. Median days from diagnosis to treatment ranged from 32 to 42. Compared to those receiving Chemo-Only, patients receiving immunotherapy +/- Chemo survived 1.4 months longer [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.5 to 2.3 months; P=0.002] and 3.2 months longer (95% CI: -1.4 to 7.9 months; P=0.18) through 12 and 60 months follow-up, respectively. Relative to those receiving Chemo-Only, patients receiving targeted therapies survived 1.6 months longer (95% CI: 0.7 to 2.5 months; P<0.001) and 5.5 months longer (95% CI: 0.7 to 10.4 months; P=0.02) through 12 and 60 months follow-up. One-year survival significantly increased from 30% to 59% between 2012 and 2020 (P=0.007).

Conclusions: We found patients receiving targeted therapies and immunotherapy +/- Chemo survived longer than those on Chemo-Only. One-year survival probabilities significantly increased between 2012 and 2020. Additional research is needed to better understand the potential benefits and harms, including patient adverse events and financial toxicity.