Julie A Lynch1, Brygida Berse2, Danielle Chun3, Donna Rivera4, Kelly K Filipski4, Scott Kulich5, Benjamin Viernes3, Scott L DuVall3, Michael J Kelley6. 1. Veterans Health Administration Salt Lake City Health Care System, Salt Lake City, UT; RTI International, Waltham, MA. Electronic address: Julie.Lynch@va.gov. 2. RTI International, Waltham, MA; Veterans Health Administration, Bedford, MA; Boston University Medical School, Boston, MA. 3. Veterans Health Administration Salt Lake City Health Care System, Salt Lake City, UT; University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT. 4. National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD. 5. Division of Pathology, Veterans Affairs Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, PA. 6. Veterans Administration Medical Center, Durham, NC; Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: We examined mutational testing of the epidermal growth factor gene (EGFR) and erlotinib treatment among veterans diagnosed with non-small-cell lung cancer in the United States Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). Our objectives were to identify the prevalence of clinically actionable EGFR mutations, to determine whether testing and treatment were guideline concordant, to evaluate the impact of testing and treatment on survival, and to estimate the rate of testing. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Test results were linked to electronic health records from VA Corporate Data Warehouse and the VA Central Cancer Registry. We analyzed patient demographic and clinical characteristics, prevalence of EGFR mutations, and timing of EGFR mutational testing and erlotinib treatment based on pharmacy records. Overall survival was assessed by Kaplan-Meier analysis. RESULTS: Among 973 patients tested at 70 VA medical centers between 2011 and 2013, 64 (7%) had sensitizing EGFR mutations, 694 (71%) were EGFR wild type, and 168 (17%) had clinically insignificant polymorphisms or variants of unknown significance. Results were not documented in 47 tests (5%). Erlotinib administration was in agreement with test results in 843 cases (87%). CONCLUSION: Veterans have a much lower rate of sensitizing EGFR mutations than the reported average of 10% to 15%, which correlates with a high rate of smoking among veterans. This may partially explain clinicians' reluctance to prescribe EGFR testing, which results in underutilization. Although test results appear to have influenced erlotinib treatment decisions, we documented a substantial number of cases where treatment was not applied in accordance with clinical guidelines, potentially resulting in worse outcomes and unnecessary cost. Published by Elsevier Inc.
INTRODUCTION: We examined mutational testing of the epidermal growth factor gene (EGFR) and erlotinib treatment among veterans diagnosed with non-small-cell lung cancer in the United States Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). Our objectives were to identify the prevalence of clinically actionable EGFR mutations, to determine whether testing and treatment were guideline concordant, to evaluate the impact of testing and treatment on survival, and to estimate the rate of testing. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Test results were linked to electronic health records from VA Corporate Data Warehouse and the VA Central Cancer Registry. We analyzed patient demographic and clinical characteristics, prevalence of EGFR mutations, and timing of EGFR mutational testing and erlotinib treatment based on pharmacy records. Overall survival was assessed by Kaplan-Meier analysis. RESULTS: Among 973 patients tested at 70 VA medical centers between 2011 and 2013, 64 (7%) had sensitizing EGFR mutations, 694 (71%) were EGFR wild type, and 168 (17%) had clinically insignificant polymorphisms or variants of unknown significance. Results were not documented in 47 tests (5%). Erlotinib administration was in agreement with test results in 843 cases (87%). CONCLUSION: Veterans have a much lower rate of sensitizing EGFR mutations than the reported average of 10% to 15%, which correlates with a high rate of smoking among veterans. This may partially explain clinicians' reluctance to prescribe EGFR testing, which results in underutilization. Although test results appear to have influenced erlotinib treatment decisions, we documented a substantial number of cases where treatment was not applied in accordance with clinical guidelines, potentially resulting in worse outcomes and unnecessary cost. Published by Elsevier Inc.
Entities:
Keywords:
Cancer genomics; Clinical guidelines; EGFR; Mutation rate; NSCLC
Authors: Andrea N Burnett-Hartman; Natalia Udaltsova; Lawrence H Kushi; Christine Neslund-Dudas; Alanna Kulchak Rahm; Pamala A Pawloski; Douglas A Corley; Sarah Knerr; Heather Spencer Feigelson; Jessica Ezzell Hunter; David C Tabano; Mara M Epstein; Stacey A Honda; Monica Ter-Minassian; Julie A Lynch; Christine Y Lu Journal: JCO Clin Cancer Inform Date: 2019-09
Authors: Austin Lammers; Christopher G Slatore; Erik K Fromme; Kelly C Vranas; Donald R Sullivan Journal: J Thorac Oncol Date: 2018-10-15 Impact factor: 15.609
Authors: Kara L Larson; Bin Huang; Heidi L Weiss; Pam Hull; Philip M Westgate; Rachel W Miller; Susanne M Arnold; Jill M Kolesar Journal: JCO Precis Oncol Date: 2021-07-09
Authors: Olga Efimova; Brygida Berse; Daniel W Denhalter; Scott L DuVall; Kelly K Filipski; Michael Icardi; Michael J Kelley; Julie A Lynch Journal: BMC Med Inform Decis Mak Date: 2017-05-30 Impact factor: 2.796
Authors: Bin Huang; Quan Chen; Derek Allison; Riham El Khouli; Keng Hee Peh; James Mobley; Abigail Anderson; Eric B Durbin; Donald Goodin; John L Villano; Rachel W Miller; Susanne M Arnold; Jill M Kolesar Journal: JCO Precis Oncol Date: 2021-09-29
Authors: Daniel J Becker; Kyung M Lee; Steve Y Lee; Kristine E Lynch; Danil V Makarov; Scott E Sherman; Christy D Morrissey; Michael J Kelley; Julie A Lynch Journal: JCO Precis Oncol Date: 2021-04-13
Authors: Julie A Lynch; Brygida Berse; Merry Rabb; Paul Mosquin; Rob Chew; Suzanne L West; Nicole Coomer; Daniel Becker; John Kautter Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2018-03-20 Impact factor: 4.430