Abstract 1500
Background
Docetaxel (Doc) was initially licenced for CRPC (TAX327) but more recently trials showed Doc at HSPC diagnosis improved survival, shifting patterns of use. Higher neutropenic toxicity rates were reported in the HSPC trials, but it is unclear if this was due to the Doc timing or differences in case-mix. We compared sepsis rates for Doc at HSPC and CRPC using routine NHS data for men randomised in STAMPEDE in England.
Methods
STAMPEDE patient data were linked to routine NHS data (Hospital Episode Statistics: HES; Systemic Anti-Cancer Therapy: SACT). Patient note review (ref) linked to NHS data assessed admission rates by HSPC & CRPC Doc at 1 site (N = 44) and were used to develop and validate algorithms for detecting sepsis events across the entire data set. Algorithms were restricted to sepsis-only & sepsis + neutropenia (S+N) (N = 3645). Missing HES CRPC Doc regimens were imputed with HES (N = 3645) or enhanced with SACT (N = 1573). Odds ratios (OR) were calculated for risk of sepsis (OR < 1 = lower risk for HSPC).
Results
Sepsis rates varied by method; for most, rates at CRPC were higher than in TAX327 but similar to or higher than reported STAMPEDE HSPC data.Table:
862P
HSPC Sepsis/Pts | CRPC Sepsis/Pts | % diff | OR, 95% CI | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
N | % | N | % | |||
Ref | ||||||
2/15 | 13 | 6/22 | 27 | -14 | 0.4 (0.1 - 2.1) | |
HES | ||||||
Sepsis | 69/834 | 8 | 114/1183 | 10 | -2 | 0.9 (0.6 - 1.2) |
S+N | 134/834 | 16 | 148/1183 | 13 | 3 | 1.3 (1.0 - 1.6) |
Imputed | 134/834 | 16 | 489/1351 | 36 | -20 | 0.4 (0.4 - 0.6) |
+ SACT | 41/200 | 21 | 60/297 | 20 | 1 | 1.0 (0.7 - 1.6) |
Conclusions
This analysis does not support the hypothesis that HSPC Doc has a higher sepsis risk than Doc use in CRPC. Sepsis rates found using routine data were higher than in the TAX327 trial but similar to reported “real world” CRPC data. Rates varied by data-identification method used; for most, CRPC sepsis rates were higher or similar to HSPC rates & overall a little higher than the reported STAMPEDE HSPC rate. These data suggest CRPC Doc has a similar or higher sepsis rate than use in HSPC & this should be factored into discussions for men with newly-diagnosed metastatic HSPC and supports Doc use in this setting.
Clinical trial identification
Editorial acknowledgement
Legal entity responsible for the study
The STAMPEDE Trial Group.
Funding
University of Warwick, Warwick Medical School (HM PhD studentship).
Disclosure
M.K.B. Parmar: Research grant / Funding (institution): Astellas Pharma; Research grant / Funding (institution): Clovis oncology; Research grant / Funding (institution): Novartis; Research grant / Funding (institution): Pfizer; Research grant / Funding (institution): Sanofi; Research grant / Funding (institution), The Unit I am Director of also receives educational grants and other non- financial support from a large number of different companies: Other. P. Patel: Advisory / Consultancy: Roche/Genentech. M.R. Sydes: Honoraria (self): Lilly; Honoraria (self), Research grant / Funding (self): Sanofi; Honoraria (self): Janssen; Research grant / Funding (self): Astellas Pharma; Research grant / Funding (self): Janssen-Cilag; Research grant / Funding (self): Pfizer; Research grant / Funding (self): Novartis; Research grant / Funding (self): Clovis Oncology. N.D. James: Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony, Research grant / Funding (institution), Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Sanofi; Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy: Bayer; Advisory / Consultancy: Merck; Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony, Research grant / Funding (institution): Astellas Pharma; Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony, Research grant / Funding (institution): Janssen; Honoraria (self), Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Pierre Fabre; Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Ferring; Honoraria (self): Oncogenex; Research grant / Funding (institution): Pfizer; Research grant / Funding (institution): Novartis. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.
Resources from the same session
5520 - Patient’s Usability Test results of a CINV Diary Application For Smartphones
Presenter: Paz Fernandez
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
2323 - Colorectal Telephone Assessment Pathway (CTAP) - A viable means of shortening time to a definitive diagnosis of Colorectal Cancer (CRC)
Presenter: Harriet Watson
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
6119 - Cancer Nursing and Social Media: Capturing the Zeitgeist
Presenter: Mark Foulkes
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
1776 - Examination of mobile applications on breast cancer
Presenter: AYDANUR AYDIN
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
4128 - E-health effectiveness to increase patient adherence for immunotherapy; a cost-benefit study.
Presenter: Maria José Dias
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
3219 - Experiences of internet-based stepped care among individuals with recently diagnosed cancer and symptoms of anxiety and/or depression
Presenter: Anna Hauffman
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
5010 - What do cancer patients know about their immunotherapy treatment?
Presenter: Mónica Arellano
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
4503 - Prospective Comparison of Travel Burden, Cost and Time to Obtain Tumor Board Treatment Plan Through In-Person Visits vs. an AI Enabled Health Technology (N=1803)
Presenter: Rajendra Badwe
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
4123 - Cancer care through the fire and flames: 3-year experience in the utilisation of electronic consultation and referral system at the Red Zone in Southern Thailand
Presenter: Nanthiya Rattanakhot
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
2087 - The effect of e-mobile education on the quality of life in women with breast cancer
Presenter: Derya ÇInar
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract