Oops, you're using an old version of your browser so some of the features on this page may not be displaying properly.

MINIMAL Requirements: Google Chrome 24+Mozilla Firefox 20+Internet Explorer 11Opera 15–18Apple Safari 7SeaMonkey 2.15-2.23

Poster display session

4796 - Differences in Prescribing Attitudes and Treatment Patterns between Right-sided and Left-sided mCRC in EU5 and the US

Date

09 Sep 2017

Session

Poster display session

Presenters

Fabian Bermudez

Citation

Annals of Oncology (2017) 28 (suppl_5): v158-v208. 10.1093/annonc/mdx393

Authors

F. Bermudez, A. Franceschetti

Author affiliations

  • Global Oncology Therapy Monitor, Ipsos MORI, E1W 1WY - London/GB
More

Resources

Abstract 4796

Background

There is evidence to suggest that location of primary colorectal tumours has an impact on prognosis and efficacy of biological agents. Studies focus on RAS WT (KRAS WT and NRAS WT) mCRC, and have identified that left sided colon cancer (LSCC) is more common than right sided colon cancer (RSCC), is observed more in males and is associated with a better prognosis. RSCC on the other hand, is observed more in females and is associated with a worse prognosis. Patients with LSCC show a better response to EGFR inhibitors, whereas those with RSCC show a better response to VEGF inhibitors. This study aims to demonstrate the differences in prescribing habits by tumour location in EU5 and US and to evaluate the impact of new clinical data on real-world treatment patterns.

Methods

Between July 2016 and January 2017, a panel of oncologists in EU5 (n = 624) and US (n = 101) were asked to report on mCRC RAS WT patients and their treatments through the submission of online de-identified record forms.

Results

Out of 996 mCRC patients in EU5 and 821 in US, there are significantly more males with LSCC (57% & 56%) than RSCC (43% & 44%, p 

Conclusions

1L mCRC patients with LSCC receive EGFR inhibitors more than RSCC patients, whereas RSCC patients receive VEGF inhibitors more than LSCC patients, a trend not observed in 2L+. This supports the literature when considering that ‘new clinical data’ has been a significant reason for these prescribing patterns.

Clinical trial identification

Legal entity responsible for the study

Ipsos Healthcare

Funding

None

Disclosure

All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

This site uses cookies. Some of these cookies are essential, while others help us improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used.

For more detailed information on the cookies we use, please check our Privacy Policy.

Customise settings
  • Necessary cookies enable core functionality. The website cannot function properly without these cookies, and you can only disable them by changing your browser preferences.