在非小细胞肺癌治疗中使用 Pembrolizumab 替代剂量后的实际总生存期:一项以非劣效性为主要目标的全国性回顾性队列研究

IF 4.5 2区 医学 Q1 ONCOLOGY Lung Cancer Pub Date : 2024-08-30 DOI:10.1016/j.lungcan.2024.107950
Geeske F Grit , Esmée van Geffen , Ruben Malmberg , Roelof van Leeuwen , Stefan Böhringer , Hans JM Smit , Pepijn Brocken , Job FH Eijsink , Esther Dronkers , Pim Gal , Eva Jaarsma , Regine JHM van Drie-Pierik , Anne MP Eldering-Heldens , AN Machteld Wymenga , Peter GM Mol , Juliëtte Zwaveling , Doranne Hilarius
{"title":"在非小细胞肺癌治疗中使用 Pembrolizumab 替代剂量后的实际总生存期:一项以非劣效性为主要目标的全国性回顾性队列研究","authors":"Geeske F Grit ,&nbsp;Esmée van Geffen ,&nbsp;Ruben Malmberg ,&nbsp;Roelof van Leeuwen ,&nbsp;Stefan Böhringer ,&nbsp;Hans JM Smit ,&nbsp;Pepijn Brocken ,&nbsp;Job FH Eijsink ,&nbsp;Esther Dronkers ,&nbsp;Pim Gal ,&nbsp;Eva Jaarsma ,&nbsp;Regine JHM van Drie-Pierik ,&nbsp;Anne MP Eldering-Heldens ,&nbsp;AN Machteld Wymenga ,&nbsp;Peter GM Mol ,&nbsp;Juliëtte Zwaveling ,&nbsp;Doranne Hilarius","doi":"10.1016/j.lungcan.2024.107950","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>High and increasing expenses on pembrolizumab ask for more cost-effective and sustainable treatment strategies to improve affordability of healthcare. Therefore, a part of the Dutch hospitals implemented an alternative, partially lower, weight-based dosing protocol for pembrolizumab. This provided the unique opportunity to compare the overall survival (OS) of the alternative pembrolizumab dosing protocol to standard dosing using a nationwide registry in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>This is a retrospective cohort study with a non-inferiority primary objective. Forty hospitals in the Dutch Medication Audit and Dutch Lung Cancer Audit treated 1966 patients with NSCLC with first line pembrolizumab (mono- or combination therapy) between Jan 1st 2021, and Mar 31st, 2023. Alternative weight-based pembrolizumab dosing (100/150/200 mg Q3W or 200/300/400 mg Q6W) was administered to 604 patients, and 1362 patients received standard pembrolizumab dosing (200 mg Q3W or 400 mg Q6W). A Cox proportional hazard model with selected covariates was used to compare the OS between alternative and standard dosing protocols. The non-inferiority margin was set at a hazard ratio (HR) of 1.2 for OS. Non-inferiority is established by showing that the upper limit of the 95 % confidence interval (CI) of the HR of OS is smaller or equal to 1.2.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Distribution of age (66.7 years +/-9.4), sex (45 % female) and treatment combinations were similar for both groups, comorbidity score was higher in the standard group. Median daily dose in the alternative dosing group was 22 % lower compared to the standard dosing group, 7.14 mg/day (interquartile range (IQR):5.48–8.04 mg/day) vs. 9.15 mg/day (IQR:8.33–9.52 mg/day), respectively. Alternative dosing was non-inferior to standard dosing regarding overall survival (adjusted HR 0.83, 95 %CI:0.69–1.003).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>This large, retrospective real-world analysis supports the hypothesis that the alternative, partially lower pembrolizumab dosing protocol in NSCLC maintains treatment effectiveness while reducing treatment costs.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":18129,"journal":{"name":"Lung Cancer","volume":"196 ","pages":"Article 107950"},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169500224004847/pdfft?md5=bf8a047be08faefbf97a909981240bde&pid=1-s2.0-S0169500224004847-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Real-world overall survival after alternative dosing for pembrolizumab in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer: A nationwide retrospective cohort study with a non-inferiority primary objective\",\"authors\":\"Geeske F Grit ,&nbsp;Esmée van Geffen ,&nbsp;Ruben Malmberg ,&nbsp;Roelof van Leeuwen ,&nbsp;Stefan Böhringer ,&nbsp;Hans JM Smit ,&nbsp;Pepijn Brocken ,&nbsp;Job FH Eijsink ,&nbsp;Esther Dronkers ,&nbsp;Pim Gal ,&nbsp;Eva Jaarsma ,&nbsp;Regine JHM van Drie-Pierik ,&nbsp;Anne MP Eldering-Heldens ,&nbsp;AN Machteld Wymenga ,&nbsp;Peter GM Mol ,&nbsp;Juliëtte Zwaveling ,&nbsp;Doranne Hilarius\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.lungcan.2024.107950\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>High and increasing expenses on pembrolizumab ask for more cost-effective and sustainable treatment strategies to improve affordability of healthcare. Therefore, a part of the Dutch hospitals implemented an alternative, partially lower, weight-based dosing protocol for pembrolizumab. This provided the unique opportunity to compare the overall survival (OS) of the alternative pembrolizumab dosing protocol to standard dosing using a nationwide registry in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>This is a retrospective cohort study with a non-inferiority primary objective. Forty hospitals in the Dutch Medication Audit and Dutch Lung Cancer Audit treated 1966 patients with NSCLC with first line pembrolizumab (mono- or combination therapy) between Jan 1st 2021, and Mar 31st, 2023. Alternative weight-based pembrolizumab dosing (100/150/200 mg Q3W or 200/300/400 mg Q6W) was administered to 604 patients, and 1362 patients received standard pembrolizumab dosing (200 mg Q3W or 400 mg Q6W). A Cox proportional hazard model with selected covariates was used to compare the OS between alternative and standard dosing protocols. The non-inferiority margin was set at a hazard ratio (HR) of 1.2 for OS. Non-inferiority is established by showing that the upper limit of the 95 % confidence interval (CI) of the HR of OS is smaller or equal to 1.2.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Distribution of age (66.7 years +/-9.4), sex (45 % female) and treatment combinations were similar for both groups, comorbidity score was higher in the standard group. Median daily dose in the alternative dosing group was 22 % lower compared to the standard dosing group, 7.14 mg/day (interquartile range (IQR):5.48–8.04 mg/day) vs. 9.15 mg/day (IQR:8.33–9.52 mg/day), respectively. Alternative dosing was non-inferior to standard dosing regarding overall survival (adjusted HR 0.83, 95 %CI:0.69–1.003).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>This large, retrospective real-world analysis supports the hypothesis that the alternative, partially lower pembrolizumab dosing protocol in NSCLC maintains treatment effectiveness while reducing treatment costs.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":18129,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Lung Cancer\",\"volume\":\"196 \",\"pages\":\"Article 107950\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169500224004847/pdfft?md5=bf8a047be08faefbf97a909981240bde&pid=1-s2.0-S0169500224004847-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Lung Cancer\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169500224004847\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Lung Cancer","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169500224004847","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景彭博利珠单抗的费用居高不下且不断增加,这就要求采取更具成本效益和可持续性的治疗策略,以提高医疗保健的可负担性。因此,部分荷兰医院对彭博拉珠单抗实施了一种替代性的、部分较低的、基于体重的给药方案。这为我们提供了一个独特的机会,利用全国范围内的非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)患者登记资料,比较彭博罗珠单抗替代给药方案与标准给药方案的总生存期(OS)。荷兰药物审计和荷兰肺癌审计中的 40 家医院在 2021 年 1 月 1 日至 2023 年 3 月 31 日期间对 1966 名 NSCLC 患者进行了 Pembrolizumab(单药或联合疗法)一线治疗。604名患者接受了基于体重的另一种彭博拉珠单抗剂量(100/150/200 毫克 Q3W 或 200/300/400 毫克 Q6W),1362 名患者接受了标准彭博拉珠单抗剂量(200 毫克 Q3W 或 400 毫克 Q6W)。该研究采用了带有选定协变量的 Cox 比例危险模型来比较替代给药方案和标准给药方案的 OS。OS的非劣效边际设定为危险比(HR)1.2。结果两组患者的年龄(66.7 岁 +/-9.4)、性别(45% 为女性)和治疗组合分布相似,标准组的合并症评分更高。与标准剂量组相比,替代剂量组的中位日剂量低 22%,分别为 7.14 毫克/天(四分位间距(IQR):5.48-8.04 毫克/天)与 9.15 毫克/天(IQR:8.33-9.52 毫克/天)。在总生存期方面,替代剂量不劣于标准剂量(调整后HR为0.83,95 %CI:0.69-1.003)。结论这项大型回顾性真实世界分析支持这样的假设,即在NSCLC中采用替代的、部分降低pembrolizumab剂量的方案可以保持治疗效果,同时降低治疗成本。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Real-world overall survival after alternative dosing for pembrolizumab in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer: A nationwide retrospective cohort study with a non-inferiority primary objective

Background

High and increasing expenses on pembrolizumab ask for more cost-effective and sustainable treatment strategies to improve affordability of healthcare. Therefore, a part of the Dutch hospitals implemented an alternative, partially lower, weight-based dosing protocol for pembrolizumab. This provided the unique opportunity to compare the overall survival (OS) of the alternative pembrolizumab dosing protocol to standard dosing using a nationwide registry in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients.

Methods

This is a retrospective cohort study with a non-inferiority primary objective. Forty hospitals in the Dutch Medication Audit and Dutch Lung Cancer Audit treated 1966 patients with NSCLC with first line pembrolizumab (mono- or combination therapy) between Jan 1st 2021, and Mar 31st, 2023. Alternative weight-based pembrolizumab dosing (100/150/200 mg Q3W or 200/300/400 mg Q6W) was administered to 604 patients, and 1362 patients received standard pembrolizumab dosing (200 mg Q3W or 400 mg Q6W). A Cox proportional hazard model with selected covariates was used to compare the OS between alternative and standard dosing protocols. The non-inferiority margin was set at a hazard ratio (HR) of 1.2 for OS. Non-inferiority is established by showing that the upper limit of the 95 % confidence interval (CI) of the HR of OS is smaller or equal to 1.2.

Results

Distribution of age (66.7 years +/-9.4), sex (45 % female) and treatment combinations were similar for both groups, comorbidity score was higher in the standard group. Median daily dose in the alternative dosing group was 22 % lower compared to the standard dosing group, 7.14 mg/day (interquartile range (IQR):5.48–8.04 mg/day) vs. 9.15 mg/day (IQR:8.33–9.52 mg/day), respectively. Alternative dosing was non-inferior to standard dosing regarding overall survival (adjusted HR 0.83, 95 %CI:0.69–1.003).

Conclusion

This large, retrospective real-world analysis supports the hypothesis that the alternative, partially lower pembrolizumab dosing protocol in NSCLC maintains treatment effectiveness while reducing treatment costs.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Lung Cancer
Lung Cancer 医学-呼吸系统
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
3.80%
发文量
407
审稿时长
25 days
期刊介绍: Lung Cancer is an international publication covering the clinical, translational and basic science of malignancies of the lung and chest region.Original research articles, early reports, review articles, editorials and correspondence covering the prevention, epidemiology and etiology, basic biology, pathology, clinical assessment, surgery, chemotherapy, radiotherapy, combined treatment modalities, other treatment modalities and outcomes of lung cancer are welcome.
期刊最新文献
Addressing knowledge and attitude barriers to lung cancer screening: Development and evaluation of web-based decision aid Lorlatinib-associated weight gain and dyslipidaemia: A retrospective analysis and implications for future care The molecular subtypes of small cell lung cancer defined by key transcription factors and their clinical significance Radiological follow-up in patients with resected pulmonary carcinoids: Should we reduce radiation exposure? Diagnostic performance of Shape-Sensing Robotic-Assisted bronchoscopy with mobile Cone-Beam CT for cystic and cavitary pulmonary lesions
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1