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

E-Poster Display

1909P - Treatment patterns and outcomes in malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) in England: A nationwide CAS registry analysis from the I-O optimise initiative

Date

17 Sep 2020

Session

E-Poster Display

Topics

Tumour Site

Mesothelioma

Presenters

Paul Baas

Citation

Annals of Oncology (2020) 31 (suppl_4): S1018-S1025. 10.1016/annonc/annonc292

Authors

P. Baas1, M. Daumont2, L. Lacoin3, J.R. Penrod4, R. Carroll5, N. Tanna6, S. Venkatesan7, H. Ubhi7, A. Calleja7, M. Snee8

Author affiliations

  • 1 Department Of Thoracic Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, 1066 CX - Amsterdam/NL
  • 2 Worldwide Health Economics & Outcomes Research, Bristol Myers Squibb, Braine-L’Alleud/BE
  • 3 Epidemiology, Epi-Fit, Bordeaux, Nouvelle-Aquitaine/FR
  • 4 Worldwide Health Economics & Outcomes Research, Bristol Myers Squibb, Princeton/US
  • 5 Centre For Observational Research And Data Science, Bristol Myers Squibb, UB8 1DH - Uxbridge/GB
  • 6 Oncology Medical, Bristol Myers Squibb, UB8 1DH - Uxbridge/GB
  • 7 Real World Solutions, IQVIA, London/GB
  • 8 Leeds Cancer Centre, Leeds Teaching Hospital NHS Trust, Leeds/GB

Resources

Login to get immediate access to this content.

If you do not have an ESMO account, please create one for free.

Abstract 1909P

Background

MPM has an aggressive nature with a poor prognosis. Describing current disease management is critical for understanding the burden of disease. As part of I-O Optimise, a multinational research initiative providing insights into real-world lung cancer management, this study provides an overview of the MPM population, treatment patterns, and overall survival (OS) in England.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study used data from the national Cancer Analysis System (CAS) registry and included all adult patients (pts) diagnosed with MPM in England from Jan 2013 to Dec 2017, with follow-up to Mar 2018. Pt characteristics and initial treatment were described; OS was estimated using Kaplan-Meier methods. Analyses on systemic anticancer therapy (SACT) received and OS by line of therapy are ongoing.

Results

9458 pts diagnosed with MPM were analysed: median age was 75 years; ECOG performance status (PS) was 0–1 in 44.5%, 2 in 11.5%, >2 in 9.1%, and missing in 34.8%; TNM stage was not reported for 60.4%; histopathology distributions are presented (Table). Pts with sarcomatoid or not otherwise specified (NOS) MPM tended to be older with a higher ECOG PS than pts with biphasic or epithelioid MPM. In total, 6.5% of pts had surgery (mostly decortication or open excision of pleura; <6 pts had total pneumonectomy) and 34.9% received SACT. The proportion receiving best supportive care (BSC) or radiotherapy (RT) alone was high (60.1%) and varied by age, ECOG PS, and histopathology (79.9% of pts ≥75 years, 69.1% with ECOG PS 2, 95.4% with ECOG PS >2, 65.2% with sarcomatoid MPM, and 70.0% with NOS MPM). Overall, median OS was 8.3 months. OS by histopathology and initial treatment are presented (Table). Among pts able to receive SACT (± RT), OS remained poor with 10–13% alive 3 years after diagnosis.

Conclusions

This nationwide study highlights significant unmet needs in MPM and the difficulty managing the disease. Treatment rates were low and OS poor for all pt groups Table: 1909P

N % OS in months Median (Q1-Q3) 1-year OS (%) [95% CI] 3-year OS (%) [95% CI]
Histopathology
Epithelioid 3439 36 13.2 (6.5-23.4) 54 [53-56] 12 [11-14]
Sarcomatoid 883 9 4.3 (2.0-8.2) 15 [12-17] 2 [1-4]
Biphasic 693 7 8.3 (3.9-14.7) 32 [29-36] 3 [1-5]
NOS 4093 43 5.8 (1.9-14.4) 30 [29-32] 6 [6-7]
Initial treatment
Surgery + SACT 135 1 21.5 (13.0-35.1) 79 [72-86] 20 [11-34]
Surgery ± RT 478 5 15.3 (7.4-30.2) 60 [55-64] 19 [15-23]
SACT + RT 1099 12 15.7 (10.0-25.9) 65 [62-68] 13 [11-16]
SACT alone 2059 22 12.9 (7.3-21.4) 53 [51-56] 10 [9-12]
RT alone 1077 11 10.0 (4.8-18.3) 44 [41-47] 7 [6-9]
BSC 4604 49 3.8 (1.4-9.6) 20 [18-21] 5 [4-5]
.

Clinical trial identification

Editorial acknowledgement

Professional editorial assistance was provided by Richard Daniel, PhD, of Parexel, funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb.

Legal entity responsible for the study

Bristol-Myers Squibb Company.

Funding

Bristol-Myers Squibb Company.

Disclosure

P. Baas: Advisory/Consultancy: Bristol-Myers Squibb; Advisory/Consultancy: Takeda; Travel/Accommodation/Expenses: Takeda. M. Daumont: Shareholder/Stockholder/Stock options: Bristol-Myers Squibb; Full/Part-time employment: Bristol-Myers Squibb. L. Lacoin, J.R. Penrod, R. Carroll, N. Tanna: Full/Part-time employment: Bristol-Myers Squibb. S. Venkatesan, H. Ubhi: Research grant/Funding (institution), Full/Part-time employment: IQVIA. A. Calleja: Full/Part-time employment: IQVIA. M. Snee: Full/Part-time employment: IQVIA; Advisory/Consultancy: Bristol-Myers Squibb.

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.