# Economic and clinical outcomes among patients with cholangiocarcinoma receiving pemigatinib with or without history of cancer of unknown primary

**Authors:** Sumit Verma, Alejandro Hughes, Nicole M Engel-Nitz, Christina Steiger, Shreekant Parasuraman, Milind Javle, Sunyoung S Lee, Fen Saj, Michael Blecker

PMC · DOI: 10.1093/oncolo/oyaf352 · The Oncologist · 2025-11-08

## TL;DR

This study compares the health outcomes and costs of patients with cholangiocarcinoma who received pemigatinib, with or without a history of cancer of unknown primary.

## Contribution

The study provides new insights into the economic and clinical differences between CUP and non-CUP patients treated with pemigatinib.

## Key findings

- Patients with CUP had higher healthcare resource use and costs compared to non-CUP patients.
- CUP patients had significantly shorter overall survival (10.2 vs 30.7 months).
- CUP patients were more likely to have metastatic disease at treatment start.

## Abstract

There is limited evidence regarding the economic burden, treatment patterns, and overall survival (OS) of patients with cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) and cancer of unknown primary (CUP) who initiated the FGFR inhibitor pemigatinib.

We used the Komodo Healthcare Map to identify patients with CCA who initiated pemigatinib between 4/17/2020 and 5/31/2023. Follow-up began at initiation and lasted ≥ 1 month. Outcomes included health care resource utilization (HCRU), costs, treatment patterns, and OS.

Two hundred twenty-one patients were included: 78 patients (35.3%) with CUP (median follow-up, 5.9 months) and 143 patients (64.7%) without CUP (median follow-up, 7.3 months). Pemigatinib was similarly well-tolerated in CUP vs non-CUP. Discontinuation was observed in 43.6% vs 49.0% (P = .445). Medication possession ratio ≥ 0.80 was achieved by 71.6% vs 67.2% (P = .504). CUP was associated with significantly higher prevalence of metastatic disease (100.0% vs 63.6%), per patient per month (PPPM) ambulatory HCRU (8.2 vs 5.5), and ambulatory costs ($8584 vs $5308). Medical costs averaged $13 444 vs $9881 PPPM for CUP and non-CUP, respectively (P = .066). Median OS was significantly shorter with CUP (10.2 vs 30.7 months).

Although pemigatinib was similarly well-tolerated regardless of CUP status, patients with CUP incurred greater ambulatory burden and had poorer OS. Patients with CUP were more likely to have evidence of metastatic disease at pemigatinib initiation, which may help explain these results. With the advent of targeted treatments for gene-altered CCA, reflexive genomic testing should be encouraged for all patients with CUP.

Graphical Abstract

## Linked entities

- **Chemicals:** pemigatinib (PubChem CID 86705695)
- **Diseases:** cholangiocarcinoma (MONDO:0019087), metastatic disease (MONDO:0024883)

## Full-text entities

- **Diseases:** CCA (MESH:D018281), CUP (MESH:D009369)
- **Chemicals:** Pemigatinib (MESH:C000705477)
- **Species:** Homo sapiens (human, species) [taxon 9606]

## Full text

_Full body text omitted from this summary view._ Fetch the complete paper as Markdown: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12611303/full.md

## Figures

5 figures with captions in the complete paper: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12611303/full.md

## References

37 references — full list in the complete paper: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12611303/full.md

---
Source: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12611303