Treatment patterns and costs among patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) in the United States: A real-world study using integrated claims and clinical data.

Authors

Daniel Geynisman

Daniel M. Geynisman

Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA

Daniel M. Geynisman , Nathan Hill , Lisa Rosenblatt , Xin Yin , Valerie Haley , Chi Nguyen , John Barron , David Vilanova , Saby George

Organizations

Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, Bristol Myers Squibb, Princeton, NJ, Carelon Research, Wilmington, DE, Bristol Myers Squibb, Madrid, Spain, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, NY

Research Funding

Bristol Myers Squibb

Background: The treatment landscape for mRCC has evolved in recent years with the use of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) and immuno-oncology (IO) therapies. This study examined patient characteristics, treatment patterns, costs, and survival for individuals with mRCC who received either IO-IO or IO+TKI as first-line (1L) regimens. Methods: This retrospective cohort study used an administrative claims dataset from a commercial health plan integrated with clinical data from a cancer care quality program (CCQP) and socioeconomic data from national surveys. Eligible patients began treatment for mRCC between 04/01/2018 and 1/31/2023, were aged ≥ 18 years old, and had ≥ 6 months of health plan enrollment prior to and ≥ 1 month after their 1L treatment. Patient characteristics and 1L and second-line (2L) regimens were described. Costs were summarized per patient per month (PPPM) within time intervals. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate treatment-free interval (TFI) and survival times. Results: The study identified 824 eligible mRCC patients; mean age was 60, 77% were male, and 85% White/6% Black race. Patients receiving 1L IO-IO (n = 471; nivolumab plus ipilimumab) or IO+TKI regimens (n = 353; pembrolizumab plus axitinib [63.7%], nivolumab plus cabozantinib [21.8%], pembrolizumab plus lenvantinib [14.4%]) had similar baseline characteristics with the exception of health plan type, body mass index, and risk score (Table 1). As 2L therapy, patients most often received TKI monotherapy (56%) or IO+TKI (26%). Treatment costs were higher for IO-IO in the first 3 months but lower in subsequent time intervals compared with IO+TKI. Medication costs represented 80% of total costs on average. Between IO-IO and IO+TKI arms, median TFI (1.1 and 1.2 months, respectively) and cumulative survival time (75.1% and 78.3% at 12 months, respectively) were similar. Conclusions: The study described treatment patterns for mRCC and found patients receiving 1L IO-IO and IO+TKI regimens were similar demographically, though IO-IO patients started with poorer risk scores. Although IO-IO was associated with higher treatment costs in the first 3 months, the subsequent monthly costs were lower vs IO+TKI. Results also indicated that retreatment with IO in the 2L setting is occurring in real-world practice.

Key metrics by 1L therapy.

IO-IO
n = 471
IO+TKI
n = 353
Median follow-up, months (range)12.8 (0.3, 58.3)9.9 (0.5, 46.2)
Patients with RCC risk scorea, %55.443.9
Intermediate or poor risk89.776.1
2L therapy, n (%)213 (45)98 (28)
TKI mono, %58.251.0
IO+TKI, %29.119.4
IO or IO-IO, %5.613.3
Cost PPPMb
months 1-3/4-6/25-36$62,799/$28,096/$20,050$52,689/$36,814/$22,438

aHierarchically selected IMDC (calculated with lab data) before MSKCC (calculated) and CCQP (as reported by providers) risk scores. bAmong patients followed in interval, excerpt.

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

2024 ASCO Genitourinary Cancers Symposium

Session Type

Poster Session

Session Title

Poster Session C: Renal Cell Cancer; Adrenal, Penile, and Testicular Cancers

Track

Renal Cell Cancer,Adrenal Cancer,Penile Cancer,Testicular Cancer

Sub Track

Quality of Care/Quality Improvement and Real-World Evidence

Citation

J Clin Oncol 42, 2024 (suppl 4; abstr 398)

DOI

10.1200/JCO.2024.42.4_suppl.398

Abstract #

398

Poster Bd #

F22

Abstract Disclosures