Effectiveness of adjuvant FOLFOX versus 5FU for colon cancer treatment in community oncology practice using a hybrid study approach.

Authors

null

Jennifer Leigh Lund

Department of Epidemiology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC

Jennifer Leigh Lund , Michael Webster-Clark , Alexander P Keil , Daniel Westreich , Til Sturmer , Hanna Kelly Sanoff

Organizations

Department of Epidemiology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, UNC Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC

Research Funding

Other Government Agency
Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute

Background: Treatment effects may differ between trials and community settings, in part due to underrepresentation of certain patient subgroups in trials. We used a hybrid approach combining clinical trial and real-world data to compare the effectiveness of adjuvant FOLFOX vs 5FU for stage II-III colon cancer in community oncology practice. Methods: We used Multicenter International Study of Oxaliplatin/5FU-LV in the Adjuvant Treatment of Colon Cancer (MOSAIC) combined with patients who met trial eligibility criteria within US Oncology from 1/1/2008-5/31/2019. In the combined data, we used logistic regression to estimate the probability of trial enrollment as a function of age, sex, substage, body mass index (BMI), and performance status. We estimated inverse odds of sampling weights and weighted MOSAIC participants to reflect three US Oncology populations: 1) patients meeting trial eligibility, 2) stage III patients, and 3) stage III patients initiating FOLFOX. Within the weighted trial populations, we estimated mortality hazard ratios (HRs) and bootstrapped 95% confidence intervals (CIs) comparing FOLFOX with 5FU. Results: There were 2246 MOSAIC participants and 9335 US Oncology patients. MOSAIC participants were younger, had more stage II cancer, lower BMI, and worse performance status compared with US Oncology patients. After weighting MOSAIC participants to reflect the US Oncology populations, the HRs were attenuated (Table) compared with the original MOSAIC estimate (HR = 0.84; 0.71,1.00). Conclusions: When differences between trial and clinical populations exist and response to therapy varies across subgroups, treatment efficacy can differ from clinical effectiveness. Compared with trial results, we found that effectiveness of FOLFOX versus 5FU was attenuated in community oncology practice.

Effectiveness of FOLFOX vs 5FU on mortality in MOSAIC and three US Oncology populations.

PopulationTrial Arm6-Year MortalityHR (95% CI)
Trial eligible US Oncology patients5FU19.3%1.0
FOLFOX20.0%1.05 (0.80,1.33)
Stage III US Oncology patients5FU24.0%1.0
FOLFOX24.8%0.97 (0.73,1.31)
Stage III US Oncology patients on FOLFOX5FU24.5%1.0
FOLFOX24.4%0.93 (0.71,1.25)

Disclaimer

This material on this page is ©2024 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org

Abstract Details

Meeting

2020 ASCO Virtual Scientific Program

Session Type

Poster Session

Session Title

Health Services Research and Quality Improvement

Track

Quality Care/Health Services Research

Sub Track

Real-World Data/Outcomes

Citation

J Clin Oncol 38: 2020 (suppl; abstr 7067)

DOI

10.1200/JCO.2020.38.15_suppl.7067

Abstract #

7067

Poster Bd #

339

Abstract Disclosures