|| Checking for direct PDF access through Ovid
New targeted and immunotherapies expand the treatment options for metastatic non–small-cell lung cancer. In this study we assessed contemporary treatment patterns and outcomes using a large electronic health record database of > 10,000 patients. Most targeted and immunotherapy use was in the second- and third-line treatment setting. Survival differences observed according to treatment type suggest that patients with actionable mutations have a survival advantage.Multiple therapeutic options now exist for metastatic non–small-cell lung cancer (mNSCLC). In this study we evaluated treatment patterns and outcomes in mNSCLC patients who received first-line (1L), second-line (2L), and third-line (3L) therapy.A retrospective, observational cohort study was conducted using an electronic health record database of mNSCLC patients who received initial treatment from January 2012 through April 2016, with follow-up through June 2016. Patient characteristics and treatment patterns were characterized. Overall survival (OS) was assessed using the Kaplan–Meier method.We identified 10,689 1L patients. Median age was 68 years, and 5816 (54%) were male. Most patients (6337; 59%) had a performance status of 1, and 8282 (77%) had nonsquamous histology. 1L treatment was chemotherapy in 9969 (93%) patients, and targeted therapy in 685 (6%). Median OS (mOS) for all patients in 1L was 12.3 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 11.9-12.7), and 24.3 months in 1L patients receiving targeted therapy. Among patients who received 2L therapy (n = 4235), 2790 (66%), 718 (17%), and 727 (17%) received chemotherapy, targeted therapy, and immunotherapy, respectively. mOS from 2L therapy was 9.6 months (95% CI, 9.1-10.1). In patients receiving 3L therapy (n = 1580), 921 (58%), 355 (22%), and 304 (19%) received chemotherapy, targeted therapy, and immunotherapy, respectively. mOS from 3L therapy was 8.2 months (95% CI, 7.3-8.7).Targeted therapy and immunotherapy was most frequently used in the 2L and 3L setting during the study time frame. Survival differences observed according to treatment types are likely because of biologic differences, and suggest that patients with actionable mutations have a survival advantage.