Citations

e19049 Background: Acala and zanu are 2nd generation Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitors (BTKis) that have demonstrated improved safety profiles vs 1st generation BTKi ibrutinib in clinical trials. While head-to-head comparison of zanu vs acala is lacking, a recent meta-analysis of clinical trials provided a comprehensive, indirect comparison of the AE profiles in B-cell malignancies (Hwang, Hemasphere. 2023;7(S3):1134). This study aims to evaluate costs and impacts on quality of life (QoL) for zanu vs acala using their AE profiles. Methods: A health economic model was developed to determine cost and QoL associated with AE management for zanu and acala. The incidence rates ( IRs) of all grade and grade ≥3 AEs of interest (n=21, including bleeding events, hypertension, atrial fibrillation, cytopenias, infections, headache, arthralgia, diarrhea) were taken from the meta-analysis. Additional model inputs, such as disutility, average duration of AE, and unit cost of each AE were sourced from published literature and publicly available cost databases in consultation with clinical experts. The model was developed from the US perspective, considering Medicare costs, inflated to 2023 USD. Model outcomes were AE management cost (= IR * unit cost) and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) lost due to AE (= IR * Disutility * Duration/365.25). Results: In the base-case scenario (considering all AEs), treating a hypothetical cohort of 1000 patients (pts) with zanu instead of acala yielded cost savings of $124K and 3.7 QALY gains (i.e., 3.7 years extra in full health). Subgroup analysis for severe (grade ≥3) and non-severe AEs (grade 1-2) demonstrated similar trends. A sensitivity analysis limited to AEs significantly different between zanu and acala (n=13) yielded consistent results. Additionally, a probabilistic sensitivity analysis, conducted with 1000 iterations to account for uncertainty in model parameters, confirmed robustness of the model, indicating stable conclusions across a wide range of parameter uncertainties. Conclusions: This analysis suggested that zanu is cost-saving and associated with added health benefits compared to acala in terms of AE management in pts with B-cell malignancies. Should these results derived from meta-analysis of clinical trial data be applicable to real-world pt populations across different indications, the potential cost savings could be considerable. These results could be further improved if the differences in efficacy of zanu vs acala are also incorporated. [Table: see text]

7072 Background: LG-NHL is mostly incurable, imposing a prolong impact of cancer care burden for pts. This study aimed to quantify the burden of MH conditions in pts with newly diagnosed chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma (CLL/SLL), follicular lymphoma (FL), mantle cell lymphoma (MCL), Waldenström macroglobulinemia (WM), or marginal cell lymphoma (MZL). Methods: A retrospective study was conducted using Optum Clinformatics Data Mart to identify pts ≥18 years with ≥1 new diagnosis for CLL, FL, MCL, WM, or MZL from 6/2016-6/2022 (index period). Pts were required to be continuously enrolled for 60 days pre- and 365 days post-index date, defined as the date of first cancer diagnosis. Incidence and prevalence of MH conditions of interest (anxiety, depression, stress reaction/adjustment disorder, insomnia, post-traumatic stress disorder [PTSD]) were categorized based on if diagnoses were post- or pre-index date. All-cause healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and costs were measured during the 1-yr follow-up period. Results: Approximately half of newly diagnosed 36,054 LG-NHL pts (CLL/SLL=48.0%; FL=52.7%; MCL=57.2%; WM=50.5%; MZL=52.5%) had either an incident (19.4-25.7%) or prevalent (28.6-32.1%) MH condition diagnosis following their cancer diagnosis (Table). There were no significant demographic differences in pts with and without MH conditions. LG-NHL pts suffered most from anxiety (30.9-38.2%) and depression (27.5-31.9%), followed by insomnia (16-23.1%), stress (10.3-13.5%), and PTSD (1.4-1.9%). Median time from cancer diagnosis to onset of a MH condition was 334 days for CLL/SLL, 301 for FL, 248 for MCL, 351 for WM, and 328 for MZL. LG-NHL pts with an identifiable MH diagnosis had significantly higher costs and HCRU compared to those without; for example, in CLL/SLL pts with MH diagnosis, outpatient visits were 1.4 times higher, inpatient admissions 3.0 times higher, and costs 2.1 times higher than those without (all P=0.0001). HCRU and cost increases were also observed in MCL, FL, WM, and MZL pts with MH diagnosis. Conclusions: This real-world study uncovered a high proportion of LG-NHL patients suffer from MH conditions, incurring higher financial burden than those without. With advancements in new treatments, there remains unmet need of MH burden in these pts. [Table: see text]

Introduction: Chronic lymphocytic leukemia and small lymphocytic lymphoma (CLL/SLL) are the most prevalent types of leukemia in the United States. Given the emergence of novel CLL/SLL therapies, it is important to understand real-world treatment characteristics and unmet needs. The objectives of this retrospective cohort study were to examine patient characteristics, treatment patterns, and associated outcomes for patients with CLL/SLL, overall, and by CLL and SLL, respectively. Methods: A retrospective study was conducted using Symphony Integrated Dataverse (IDV ®), a comprehensive, longitudinal, open-claims database, and integrated electronic medical record data. Patients aged ≥18 years with ≥1 diagnosis for CLL or SLL and who initiated a first-line or second-line treatment between January 1, 2020, and December 31, 2022 (index period) were included in the study. Index date was defined as the date of treatment initiation. Patients were required to be continuously enrolled for 365 days prior to the index date and ≥90 days following the index date. Patient data were included until patients were lost to follow-up or to the end of the study period (March 31, 2023). Treatment patterns were examined with the following treatment regimens and stratified by line of therapy: chemotherapy (including bendamustine-based and other chemotherapy), anti-CD20-based, Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitors (BTKiibrutinib- and acalabrutinib-based), and venetoclax-based therapy. Zanubrutinib use was not captured in the BTKi treatment category as its CLL/SLL indication approval date (January 19, 2023) was outside the index period. Discontinuation rate was defined as the percentage of patients who discontinued their current treatment regimen within 90 days. Healthcare resource utilization was measured by number of outpatient visits, inpatient visits, and other medical/hospital services per patient per month (PPPM) during the treatment regimen. Results:There were 17,748 and 5,667 patients with CLL/SLL who initiated a first-line or second-line treatment regimen during the index period, respectively. The most frequently used treatment regimens in first line were BTKi (49.9%), followed by anti-CD20 (26.1%), venetoclax (15.4%), and chemotherapy (8.6%). BTKi continued to be the predominant treatment (49.6%) in second line, followed by venetoclax (30.9%), chemotherapy (10.4%), and anti-CD20 (9.2%). First-line patients treated with BTKi regimens were older and Medicare-insured when compared with patients receiving venetoclax-based regimens (65+ years: 77.1% vs 66.9%, P-value <0.001; Medicare: 61.7% vs 53.0%, P-value <0.001). Patients receiving BTKi had significantly lower discontinuation rates compared with other treatment regimens during both first and second lines of therapies (Figure 1). Mean PPPM outpatient visits, inpatient visits, and other medical/hospital services were less frequent with BTKi therapies vs other treatment regimens across both lines of therapy (Table 1). Of the 17,748 patients initiating first line of therapy, 13.3% had SLL while the remaining 86.7% had CLL. The proportion of patients with SLL vs CLL decreased in second line and second line or later (8.0% vs 92.0% and 6.8% vs 93.2%, respectively). Treatment discontinuation rate in SLL patients was higher than that in CLL patients in first line (32.41% and 25.08%, respectively); however, discontinuation rates became comparable with later lines of therapy. Across all lines of therapy, healthcare resource utilization was significantly higher in SLL patients than CLL patients. Median PPPM outpatient visits were 1.02 for SLL and 0.67 for CLL. Median PPPM for other medical/hospital services was 0.7 for SLL and 0.23 for CLL. Conclusions: BTKi therapy, the primary treatment regimen across first- and second-line therapies, has significantly lower discontinuation rate and healthcare resource utilization compared with other treatment regimens. Further studies are needed to evaluate real-world clinical outcomes of CLL/SLL regimens to support evidence-based treatment decisions.

Introduction: Chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL) is the most common leukaemia type. In 2020, there were an estimated 207,463 people living with CLL, with an annual incidence of approximately 4.9 per 100,000 in the United States (US). Zanubrutinib is a Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor that is FDA-approved and an NCCN preferred and recommended treatment of CLL. In the phase 3 ALPINE trial (NCT03734016), zanubrutinib elicited a significantly higher overall response rate and significantly longer progression-free survival (PFS) than ibrutinib. This study aimed to compare zanubrutinib versus ibrutinib in Relapsed/Refractory (R/R) CLL by calculating the number needed to treat (NNT) to avoid one progression or death and associated incremental costs. Methods:A health-economic model was developed to evaluate the number of R/R CLL patients needed to be treated to avoid a progression or death from the US payer perspective. Payer blend was assumed with 40% Commercial and 60% Medicare payer mix. Clinical efficacy data were extracted from the ALPINE trial. Final analysis result of 24-month PFS (79.5% for zanubrutinib and 67.3% for ibrutinib) was used for the base-case analysis in the model. Treatment, adverse event management, other medical resource use, and subsequent treatment costs were considered in the model. The NNT, incremental cost per treated patient, and incremental cost per additional patient with progression or death were captured. Deterministic sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess parameter uncertainties and explore key model drivers. Scenario analyses were conducted to test the impact of different PFS estimates. Results: The base-case results fromthe NNT model showed that for every 8 patients treated with zanubrutinib, 1 event of progression or death would be avoided compared to using ibrutinib. The total costs per patient treated with zanubrutinib and ibrutinib are $370,558 and $430,150, respectively, with a cost savings of $59,593 associated with using zanubrutinib (Table). Drug costs and PFS have the greatest impact on the incremental cost per patient. Varying the PFS scenarios, including adjustment with drug interruption, COVID death, or treatment discontinuation, change the NNT from 8 to 12, and are associated with cost savings of $58,179 to $67,153 per zanubrutinib-treated patient in a 24-month time frame. Applying the model result to a hypothetical scenario of a clinical practice of 100 patients treated with zanubrutinib versus ibrutinib suggest that approximately 13 patients will avoid disease progression events or death. Conclusions: The NNT model suggests thatusing zanubrutinib to treat R/R CLL patients, compared to ibrutinib, will result in more favorable clinical and economic outcomes in the US.

Background: The treatment landscape for chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is evolving at a rapid pace, with development of several targeted therapies. The real-world applicability of clinical trial effectiveness is markedly influenced by treatment choices, the specific characteristics of patients' diseases, their overall health, and individual preferences. However, there is limited evidence to understand the impact of multiple treatment options on real-world effectiveness in CLL in routine clinical practice. This study aimed to characterize recent real-world treatment sequencing patterns and associated time to next treatment among patients with CLL in the United States. Methods: This retrospective observational study included patients diagnosed with CLL (≥18 years at diagnosis) from January 1, 2018, through January 1, 2023, who received ≥1 treatment after initial diagnosis. Patients were sourced from the ConcertAI RWD360 dataset, a real-world de-identified dataset >6 million patients from across the United States derived from various electronic health record systems and integrated with a large administrative open claims dataset. Patients were followed through the end of the record or death, whichever occurred first. Patients were classified into the following treatment categories: chemotherapy (including bendamustine-based and other chemotherapy), anti-CD20-based, Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor (BTKi)-based (ibrutinib, acalabrutinib, or zanubrutinib), and venetoclax-based therapy. Demographic and clinical characteristics, treatment sequencing pattern, and time to next treatment were examined across lines of therapy for each treatment category. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to estimate median time to next treatment. Results: The study included 3,431 patients with CLL (median age: 69 years; male: 63.8%). There was a significant variation in average age among the 4 treatment groups ( P<0.0001). Compared with the overall population, patients who received anti-CD20-based therapy were slightly older (median age: 71 years), while patients who received venetoclax-based therapy were relatively younger (median age: 67 years). Patients were primarily treated in community rather than academic settings (76.4% vs 21.3%). First-line patients were most commonly treated with BTKi (60.1%), venetoclax (16.0%), and anti-CD20 (15.4%) regimens. Among patients who initiated BTKi therapies, zanubrutinib use (2.6%) was limited; this may be due to the recent approval date (January 2023). Among CLL patients, 35.0% received second-line treatment and BTKi stayed dominant (35.7%), followed by anti-CD20 (29.6%) and venetoclax (25.8%) therapies. From first- to second-line therapy, the prevailing sequencing pattern was from either one BTKi to another BTKi (23.5%), venetoclax to anti-CD20 (13.2%), or BTKi to an anti-CD20 (9.7%). From second- to third-line therapy, patients most frequently switched from anti-CD20 to venetoclax (24.6%), anti-CD20 to BTKi (13.3%), or one BTKi to another BTKi (12.6%). From third- to fourth-line therapy, the predominant sequencing pattern was from venetoclax to anti-CD20 (21.3%), anti-CD20 back to venetoclax (20.6%), or one BTKi to another BTKi (11.6%). Median time to next treatment in first line was significantly longest for patients receiving BTKi (53.9 months) and shortest for patients treated with venetoclax (7.7 months) ( P<0.0001) (Figure 1). Median time to next treatment in second line was not reached among patients using BTKi, while it was significantly shorter for those on venetoclax and anti-CD20 (10.4 months and 1.5 months, respectively; P<0.0001) (Figure 2). Conclusions: This studydemonstrated unique treatment sequencing patterns among patients with CLL in the real-world setting.As the most commonly used regimen, BTKi therapy was shown to have significantly improved time to next treatment compared with other treatment regimens in first and second lines of therapies. Future studies with extended follow-up are needed to allow for assessment of newer treatments and enable evaluation of long-term clinical outcomes.

e19526 Background: Zanubrutinib is an oral, highly selective, next-generation Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor. Efficacy of zanubrutinib was compared with bendamustine + rituximab (BR) in adult patients with treatment-naïve (TN) chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) in the phase 3 SEQUOIA trial (NCT03336333). However, efficacy of zanubrutinib compared with other frontline CLL treatments remains unknown. The goal of this network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was to estimate the relative efficacy of zanubrutinib compared with standard frontline treatments for CLL. Methods: A total of 4 relevant RCTs were identified by a targeted literature review conducted throughout January 2022, CLL11 (NCT01010061), ALLIANCE (NCT01886872), MABLE (NCT01056510), and SEQUOIA. A feasibility assessment was performed to ensure that RCTs included within each population strata did not differ with respect to effect modifiers including presence of mutation, age, del11, and del17 status. A network was constructed for the composed 4 RCTs to compare the efficacy of zanubrutinib with bendamustine + rituximab, chlorambucil + obinutuzumab, chlorambucil + rituximab, and ibrutinib in patients with previously untreated CLL. Bayesian NMA models were conducted to simultaneously synthesize hazard ratio (HR) and 95% credible intervals (CI) for investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS). A constant hazard ratio was assumed in the NMA analysis. Statistical analyses were performed using codes suggested by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Results: The efficacy results of the NMA indicated a statistically significant improvement in PFS for zanubrutinib over bendamustine + rituximab (HR=0.42; [95% CI=0.27, 0.65]), chlorambucil + obinutuzumab (0.45 [0.23, 0.86]), and chlorambucil + rituximab (0.22 [0.12, 0.41]). Zanubrutinib achieved comparable PFS to ibrutinib (1.07 [0.59, 1.94]). Conclusions: This is the first NMA to compare the efficacy of zanubrutinib with all commonly utilized first-line treatment for TN CLL. Results from this indirect treatment comparison suggested that the PFS for zanubrutinib may be statistically significantly better than immunochemotherapy. Findings from this study require validation with further large scale RCTs with longer follow up time.[Table: see text]

e19514 Background: Zanubrutinib, a next-generation Bruton’s tyrosine kinase inhibitor (BTKi), demonstrated superior overall response rate and a trend toward improved progression-free survival (PFS) as compared to ibrutinib in patients with relapsed or refractory (R/R) chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) in the phase 3 ALPINE trial (NCT03734016) based on interim analysis. However, its comparative efficacy with other treatments is not known. The goal of this study was to estimate the relative efficacy of zanubrutinib compared with standard treatments for R/R CLL through a network meta-analysis (NMA). Methods: The efficacy of zanubrutinib from ALPINE (study of zanubrutinib and ibrutinib in patients with R/R CLL was compared to ibrutinib, acalabrutinib, bendamustine and rituximab (BR), and venetoclax + rituximab (V+R) using data from 4 RCTs. Relevant RCTs were identified using a systematic literature review. A network was constructed that composed RCTs (ALPINE, ELEVATE-RR [NCT02477696], ASCEND [NCT02970318], and MURANO [NCT02005471]). Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) models were used to simultaneously synthesize hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% credible intervals (CrIs) for investigator-assessed PFS and overall survival (OS) to estimate the relative efficacy of zanubrutinib versus comparators of interest. An assumption of constant hazard ratio was applied in the NMA analysis. Analyses were performed using well-established codes published by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) Decision Support Unit and were implemented with OpenBUGS (version 3.2.3). Results: The NMA suggested a significant improvement in PFS for zanubrutinib over acalabrutinib (HR=0.52, 95% CrI [0.30, 0.90]), ibrutinib (0.47, [0.29, 0.76]), and BR (0.13, [0.06, 0.26]). Zanubrutinib had a numerically better PFS than V+R (0.69, [0.32, 1.46]) while not reaching statistical significance. For OS, NMA results showed a trend favoring zanubrutinib over acalabrutinib (0.75, [0.35, 1.59]), ibrutinib (0.62, [0.31, 1.22]), and BR (0.52, [0.21, 1.24]). The difference was not statistically significant with wide CrIs, suggesting a high uncertainty as inherent limitation of the analysis. Conclusions: This NMA reports the first summary of comparative PFS of available treatments for R/R CLL. Indirect treatment comparisons suggest PFS on zanubrutinib may be superior to other BTKis and immunochemotherapies in R/R CLL patients.[Table: see text]

e18729 Background: While the incidence of AF in CLL has been increasing, the implications of AF in real-world CLL patients remain understudied. This study aimed to assess the impact of AF on clinical and economic outcomes in CLL patients. Methods: This retrospective observational study used the US IBM MarketScan® commercial claims/Medicare supplement database (2017-2020) to identify newly diagnosed CLL patients (≥18 years) and incidence of AF after index date, defined as the first CLL diagnosis date. Patients were followed for ≥3-months pre-index, and from index to last follow-up or death. In addition to patient characteristics, clinical outcomes (incidence of heart failure [HF], bleeding and stroke) and economic outcomes (costs and healthcare resource utilization [HRU]) were compared between CLL patients with AF (CLL+AF) and CLL patients without AF (CLL-AF). HRU was evaluated by inpatient, outpatient, ER, and pharmacy visits. Multivariable regression analyses were conducted to examine the association between AF and clinical outcomes. Results: Among a total of 16,800 newly diagnosed CLL patients included in the study, 20% developed AF. CLL+AF were significantly older than CLL-AF (median: 77 vs 62 years; P < .001). Compared to CLL-AF, CLL+AF also had significantly more comorbidities at baseline, as shown by higher Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) (median: 1.0 vs 3.0; P < .001) and more patients with previous AF history (0.3% vs 8.4%; P < .001). Further assessing clinical outcomes in CLL+AF vs CLL-AF, significantly higher incidence of HF (26.3% vs 3.0%; P < .001), bleeding (12.2% vs 4.8%; P < .001) and stroke (6.6% vs 1.2%; P < .001) were observed. For HRU, CLL+AF were reported to have significantly higher rates of ER visits (29.4% vs 12.9%; P < .001) and hospitalizations (42.2% vs 14.5%; P < .001) than CLL-AF. In CLL+AF, the average total AF-related costs were $13,520.21 within 30 days after AF diagnosis, and $22,304.82 within 60 days after AF diagnosis. Controlling for demographics and comorbidities, multivariable regressions reported statistically significant associations between AF and HF, as well as AF and stroke (Table). Conclusions: This real-world study reported significantly higher incidence of HF, bleeding and stroke incurred by CLL patients who developed AF compared with those who did not. The presence of HF, bleeding and stroke further increased HRU and costs. These findings highlight the importance of better disease management and treatment selection to prevent AF in CLL patients.[Table: see text]

Abstract Introduction: Mantle cell lymphoma (MCL), Waldenström macroglobulinemia (WM), marginal zone lymphoma (MZL) and chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) are subtypes of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Collectively, these subtypes constitute a large proportion of all B-cell malignancies; however, they are typically associated with survival spanning several years with multiple interspersed treatment periods due to frequent relapses. This can predispose patients to repeated hospitalization resulting in significant economic impact. The objectives of this study were to examine real-world treatment patterns, costs and healthcare resource utilization for patients with these lymphomas, as well as identify disparities and risk factors associated with costs incurred in US hospitals. Methods: A retrospective study was conducted using the Premier Healthcare Database, a geographically diverse all-payer, hospital administrative database containing more than one billion inpatient and hospital-based outpatient encounters. Patients aged ≥18 years with at least 1 inpatient or 2 hospital-based outpatient visits with a MCL, WM, CLL, or MZL diagnosis, and who received treatment for these conditions from 1/1/2014 to 10/31/2019 were included in the study. Descriptive analysis was conducted to examine patient sociodemographic and hospital characteristics, all-cause and lymphoma-related healthcare resource utilization and costs. Costs were obtained from patients' discharge files and hospital billing records. Multivariable analysis was performed using generalized linear models to examine risk factors associated with costs and LOS for each lymphoma type. Treatment evaluated including any use of supportive care (blood transfusion, granulocyte colony stimulating factors [GCSF]), and by regimen (steroids alone, chemotherapy alone, chemo-immunotherapy, rituximab alone, targeted therapy alone, targeted therapy in combination with chemotherapy, other). Statistical significance was determined as a p-value of &lt;0.05. Results: The study population included 23,952 CLL, 3,387 MCL, 2,655 MZL, and 1,811 WM patients in the US hospital database. Patients with WM were statistically significantly older (77 ± 58.5 years) compared to patients with CLL (74.2 ± 30.2 years), MCL (70.7 ± 37.3 years) or MZL (69.3 ± 33.8 years). More male (71.7%) and white (87.8%) patients were identified in the MCL cohort compared to the general lymphoma cohorts (Males: 58.7%; whites: 86.3). The most common comorbidities included chronic pulmonary disease (27.1%), gastroesophageal reflux disease (17.6%), moderate-severe renal disease (16.6%), congestive heart failure (15.7%) and diabetes without chronic complications (15.2%). Overall, more than two-thirds of patients in each lymphoma group received treatment with steroids alone during hospitalizations. While the use of steroids alone was higher among whites compared to non-white patients (69.5% vs. 60.4%), the use of chemo-immunotherapy was lower in whites compared to non-whites (11.9% vs. 16.2%). The average LOS of inpatient hospitalization ranged from 6.3 days for CLL to 7.4 days for MCL, with the mean costs per hospitalization from $19,566 (CLL) to $24,439 (MCL). Non-white patients have significantly longer mean LOS days compared with white patients (CLL: 18.3 vs. 14.8; MCL: 21.7 vs. 18.3; MZL: 21.6 vs. 18.5; WM 19.0 vs. 14.5). Across the 4 lymphoma types, multivariable regression confirmed the descriptive results and demonstrated that higher hospitals costs were associated with patients who were non-white, Hispanic/Latino, treated in hospitals located in the Northeast or West, or had Medicaid; statistically significant increased cost of care was also noted for patients who received targeted therapy or supportive care, such as blood transfusion or GCSF (Table 1). Conclusions: Real-world data demonstrated the significantly high total hospital costs once patients with MCL, WM, MZL, and CLL patients were hospitalized, with significantly higher impact to minority populations. Given the increased availability of effective oral therapeutics, optimal and timely disease control in the outpatients setting can potentially prevent or decrease hospitalizations and reduce economic burden on healthcare. Future studies are needed to explore the reason for admission, clinical outcomes, and potential preventive interventions. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Chanan-Khan: Alpha2 Pharmaceuticals: Patents & Royalties: Tabi; Ascentage, Starton, Cellectar, NonoDev, Alpha2 Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BeiGene, Jansen, Ascentage: Honoraria; Cellectar: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Ascentage: Research Funding; Alpha2 Pharmaceuticals, NonoDev, Starton: Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company; BieGene, Jansen, Ascentage: Consultancy. Yang: BeiGene, Ltd.: Current Employment. Liu: BeiGene, Ltd.: Current Employment. Cao: Premier, Inc.: Current Employment; BeiGene, Ltd.: Consultancy. Baumer: BeiGene, Ltd.: Consultancy; Premier, Inc.: Current Employment. Krishnaswami: BeiGene, Ltd.: Consultancy; Premier, Inc.: Current Employment. Tang: BeiGene, Ltd.: Current Employment. Ailawadhi: Karyopharm: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; GSK: Consultancy, Research Funding; Xencor: Research Funding; Cellectar: Research Funding; Medimmune: Research Funding; Ascentage: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; BeiGene, Ltd.: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy; Oncopeptides: Consultancy.

Abstract Introduction: Clinical availability of highly effective novel agents (including Bruton tyrosine kinase [BTK] and B-cell lymphoma 2 [BCL-2] inhibitors) is rapidly altering the therapeutic landscape of chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) necessitating a review of treatment guidelines. However, there is limited real-world data to validate if the availability of these novel agents has translated to a true shift in treatment paradigm for patients treated in the community. As the majority of CLL patients are treated in non-academic community-based settings, we investigated the clinical adoption trends of commercially available FDA approved novel agents for treatment of CLL patients. In addition, given that the COVID-19 pandemic led to major alteration in clinical oncology practices, we further studied if this contributed to an alteration in the selection of therapeutic agents resulting in changes of CLL treatment patterns and the utilization of novel agents in the real-world setting. Thus, the objectives of this study were to examine the utilization pattern of various CLL therapies, as well as evaluate the pattern of adoption of novel agents for treatment and the impact of COVID. Methods: A retrospective observational study was conducted using the Flatiron Health database that comprised EHR-derived de-identified data. Adult patients (≥18 years) with newly diagnosed CLL from January 2014 to May 2021, with no prior treatment and who were continuously enrolled for at least 6 months before and 3 months after the index date, defined as the first date of CLL/SLL diagnosis were included. Treatment regimens were classified into seven mutually exclusive categories: bendamustine-based chemotherapy, other chemotherapy, anti-CD20-based therapy, ibrutinib, idelalisib, acalabrutinib and venetoclax. Further treatment categorization included chemotherapy vs. targeted therapy, and traditional IV vs. novel oral agents. The impact of the pandemic was examined by comparing the pre- and post-COVID cohorts (defined as 15 months pre- and post- of March 1, 2021). Descriptive analyses were conducted to examine the frequency of use of treatment regimens by quarter in each year, line of therapy and between different age, gender, US geographical region, insurance status, and race/ethnicity subgroups. Multivariable regression was conducted to examine factors associated with the likelihood of adoption of novel and oral agents. Statistical significance was determined at a p-value of less than 0.05. Results: A total of 3,037 newly diagnosed CLL patients (median age =73) were included in the study. Over half were male (62.3%), white (74.6%) and commercially-insured (54.1%). Patients were primarily treated in community practices (92%). Overall, a significant trend in adoption of novel agents was observed throughout the years following their approval (Figure 1A). Across the evaluation period, a significant decrease in chemotherapy use was observed from 61.3% (quarter 1, 2014) to 20% (quarter 2, 2021) in favor of targeted therapy as first-line therapy (Figure 1B). In contrast, the utilization of novel oral agents (vs. traditional IV agents) for first-line therapy increased from 9.5% to 70.9% for the same period (Figure 1C). Similar trends were observed for second-line and third-line therapies. Encouragingly, this change in treatment patterns was adopted comparably in all sociodemographic subgroups with no evidence of disparity. While there was no statistically significant difference between the pre- and post-COVID treatment landscape, the adoption of target and novel oral agents has been more pronounced with the COVID pandemic. Conclusions: Results from real-world data suggest that there is a clear shift towards the adoption of novel therapies with preference given to targeted agents and oral therapies in the US since 2014. Further research examining real-world outcomes associated with treatment regimens are needed to inform decision makers. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Chanan-Khan: Cellectar: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Alpha2 Pharmaceuticals, NonoDev, Starton: Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company; Ascentage: Research Funding; Alpha2 Pharmaceuticals: Patents & Royalties: Tabi; Ascentage, Starton, Cellectar, NonoDev, Alpha2 Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BeiGene, Jansen, Ascentage: Honoraria; BieGene, Jansen, Ascentage: Consultancy. Yang: BeiGene, Ltd.: Current Employment. Liu: BeiGene, Ltd.: Current Employment. Zimmerman: BeiGene, Ltd.: Current Employment. Tang: BeiGene, Ltd.: Current Employment. Ailawadhi: Karyopharm: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; GSK: Consultancy, Research Funding; Xencor: Research Funding; Cellectar: Research Funding; Medimmune: Research Funding; Ascentage: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; BeiGene, Ltd.: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy; Oncopeptides: Consultancy.