FDA last week approved AstraZeneca's cancer drug Imjudo for treating advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), in today's bite-sized hospital and health industry news from Delaware, the District of Columbia, and Pennsylvania.

• Delaware: FDA last week approved AstraZeneca's cancer drug Imjudo for treating metastatic NSCLC—the most common type of lung cancer. Specifically, the drug was approved for use in combination with another AstraZeneca immunotherapy and chemotherapy. Imjudo, which belongs to a class of drugs called checkpoint inhibitors, blocks the proteins tumors use to evade the immune system. Compared to chemotherapy alone, the combination of treatments reduced the risk of disease progression or death by 28% in Imjudo's Phase 3 trial, which included over 1,000 patients with metastatic NSCLC. According to Melissa Johnson, director of lung cancer research at the Sarah Cannon Research Institute at Tennessee Oncology, and a lead investigator in the study, the combination of drugs provides benefits from two approaches to checkpoint inhibition. "Metastatic non-small cell lung cancer remains a significant treatment challenge because many patients' tumors do not respond well to standard therapies, including checkpoint inhibitors," Johnson said. "The approval of this dual immunotherapy regimen with chemotherapy introduces a new, generally well-tolerated treatment option for patients with this devastating disease and gives them the chance to benefit from the long-term survival advantage seen with CTLA-4 inhibition." (Vinluan, MedCity News, 11/13)

• District of Columbia: The Supreme Court is currently hearing Health and Hospital Corporation of Marion County v. Talevski—a case centered around a nursing home resident who was allegedly illegally transferred and over-medicated in a nursing home. "Since it was a public nursing home run by a county, the patient's estate sued under [Section 1983 of U.S. Code chapter 42] in federal court. The case was thrown out in district court, but then the circuit court reinstated the case," said Timothy Jost, emeritus professor of law at Washington and Lee University. While the case could erode Medicaid's authority, Jost noted that the justices' oral arguments indicate that may not be the most likely outcome. "It seemed like the justices understood" the implications of ruling for the plaintiffs "probably because of all the amicus briefs filed in the case describing who would be affected by the decision to take [Section] 1983 rights away from Medicaid recipients," Jost said. "The state and the nursing home argued that rights under federal spending programs can never be enforced under Section 1983, and that argument is, I find, a little bizarre; I think some justices did too," he added. (Frieden, MedPage Today, 11/11)

• Pennsylvania: Lehigh Valley Health Network (LVHN) on Thursday announced that it will no longer accept Aetna insurance, starting March 13, 2023. According to a source familiar with the situation, the move could increase out-of-pocket costs for thousands of individuals who will no longer be in-network with their providers. In a letter informing employees of the change, LVHN alleged that Aetna refused to pay for services provided to its members and regularly denied or delayed care for patients in the last five years. In addition, the letter said that LVHN has made attempts to resolve these problems since 2017. However, Alex Kepnes, spokesperson for Aetna, said the health insurer plans to continue negotiating with the network. "Aetna is dedicated to providing our members with access to affordable care that is local, convenient and helps achieve better health," Kepnes said. "Lehigh Valley Health Network is a valued partner to us in this endeavor. For our clients and members, we will continue to negotiate in good faith with Lehigh Valley Health Network with an eye toward reaching a mutually satisfactory resolution for all." (Greiss, Morning Call, 11/10)