Changing treatment patterns for hepatocellular carcinoma: A Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare study.

IF 6.1 2区 医学 Q1 ONCOLOGY Cancer Pub Date : 2024-11-12 DOI:10.1002/cncr.35649
Franklin Iheanacho, Angela C Tramontano, Thomas Adam Abrams, Christopher R Manz
{"title":"Changing treatment patterns for hepatocellular carcinoma: A Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare study.","authors":"Franklin Iheanacho, Angela C Tramontano, Thomas Adam Abrams, Christopher R Manz","doi":"10.1002/cncr.35649","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>From 2007 to 2017, sorafenib was the sole systemic therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), but nine new therapies were approved from 2017 to 2022. No studies have yet examined population-level treatment patterns for HCC since these approvals.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>For this retrospective cohort, Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare data were used to identify patients who had HCC diagnosed between 2014 and 2019 with claims through 2020. The authors examined patient characteristics, comorbidities, and receipt of local (e.g., transplantation, resection, embolization) and systemic (e.g., sorafenib, lenvatinib, atezolizumab plus bevacizumab) therapies. Cohort characteristics, treatment patterns, and overall survival (OS) were analyzed, and χ<sup>2</sup> tests and t-tests were used to compare treatments between the 2014-2017 and 2018-209 cohorts. Adjusted Cox models were used to compare median OS between treatment groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 11,766 patients (men, 69.2%; White, 76.9%; median age, 71 years), 60.5% received treatment within 1 year, which remained stable over time (2014-2017, 60.4%; 2018-2019, 61.0%; p = .84). The use of local therapy also remained stable (2014-2017, 52.1%; 2018-2019, 52.8%; p = .43), whereas the use of systemic therapy slightly decreased (2014-2017, 17.0%; 2018-2019, 15.2%; p = .01). First-line systemic treatments shifted significantly, with sorafenib use dropping from 84.5% (2014-2017) to 41.3% (2018-2019). The median OS among patients who received no treatment, systemic therapies first, or local therapies first was 2.2, 12.0, and 23.6 months, respectively. Patients who were diagnosed in 2019 had better OS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.80; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.74-0.86) as did those who received systemic therapy first (HR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.18-0.61), but survival was worse for those who received local therapy first (HR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.08-1.84) compared with those who were diagnosed in 2014.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Local therapy patterns remained stable, but novel therapies replaced sorafenib as the preferred first-line treatment, improving survival.</p>","PeriodicalId":138,"journal":{"name":"Cancer","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cancer","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.35649","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: From 2007 to 2017, sorafenib was the sole systemic therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), but nine new therapies were approved from 2017 to 2022. No studies have yet examined population-level treatment patterns for HCC since these approvals.

Methods: For this retrospective cohort, Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare data were used to identify patients who had HCC diagnosed between 2014 and 2019 with claims through 2020. The authors examined patient characteristics, comorbidities, and receipt of local (e.g., transplantation, resection, embolization) and systemic (e.g., sorafenib, lenvatinib, atezolizumab plus bevacizumab) therapies. Cohort characteristics, treatment patterns, and overall survival (OS) were analyzed, and χ2 tests and t-tests were used to compare treatments between the 2014-2017 and 2018-209 cohorts. Adjusted Cox models were used to compare median OS between treatment groups.

Results: Among 11,766 patients (men, 69.2%; White, 76.9%; median age, 71 years), 60.5% received treatment within 1 year, which remained stable over time (2014-2017, 60.4%; 2018-2019, 61.0%; p = .84). The use of local therapy also remained stable (2014-2017, 52.1%; 2018-2019, 52.8%; p = .43), whereas the use of systemic therapy slightly decreased (2014-2017, 17.0%; 2018-2019, 15.2%; p = .01). First-line systemic treatments shifted significantly, with sorafenib use dropping from 84.5% (2014-2017) to 41.3% (2018-2019). The median OS among patients who received no treatment, systemic therapies first, or local therapies first was 2.2, 12.0, and 23.6 months, respectively. Patients who were diagnosed in 2019 had better OS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.80; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.74-0.86) as did those who received systemic therapy first (HR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.18-0.61), but survival was worse for those who received local therapy first (HR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.08-1.84) compared with those who were diagnosed in 2014.

Conclusions: Local therapy patterns remained stable, but novel therapies replaced sorafenib as the preferred first-line treatment, improving survival.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
肝细胞癌治疗模式的变化:监测、流行病学和最终结果--医疗保险研究。
背景:从2007年到2017年,索拉非尼是治疗肝细胞癌(HCC)的唯一系统疗法,但从2017年到2022年,又有9种新疗法获批。自这些疗法获批以来,尚未有研究对人群水平的 HCC 治疗模式进行研究:在这项回顾性队列研究中,使用了监测、流行病学和最终结果(SEER)--医疗保险数据来识别在 2014 年至 2019 年期间确诊为 HCC 并在 2020 年之前报销的患者。作者研究了患者的特征、合并症以及接受局部(如移植、切除、栓塞)和全身(如索拉非尼、来伐替尼、阿特珠单抗加贝伐单抗)治疗的情况。对队列特征、治疗模式和总生存期(OS)进行了分析,并使用χ2检验和t检验来比较2014-2017年队列和2018-209年队列之间的治疗方法。调整后的Cox模型用于比较治疗组间的中位OS.结果:在11766名患者中(男性,69.2%;白人,76.9%;中位年龄,71岁),60.5%的患者在1年内接受了治疗,这一比例随着时间的推移保持稳定(2014-2017年,60.4%;2018-2019年,61.0%;P = .84)。局部治疗的使用率也保持稳定(2014-2017 年,52.1%;2018-2019 年,52.8%;p = .43),而全身治疗的使用率略有下降(2014-2017 年,17.0%;2018-2019 年,15.2%;p = .01)。一线系统治疗发生了显著变化,索拉非尼的使用率从84.5%(2014-2017年)降至41.3%(2018-2019年)。未接受治疗、首先接受系统治疗或首先接受局部治疗的患者的中位OS分别为2.2个月、12.0个月和23.6个月。与2014年确诊的患者相比,2019年确诊的患者具有更好的OS(危险比[HR],0.80;95%置信区间[CI],0.74-0.86),先接受全身治疗的患者也是如此(HR,0.33;95% CI,0.18-0.61),但先接受局部治疗的患者生存率更差(HR,1.41;95% CI,1.08-1.84):结论:局部治疗模式保持稳定,但新型疗法取代索拉非尼成为首选一线治疗方法,从而提高了生存率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Cancer
Cancer 医学-肿瘤学
CiteScore
13.10
自引率
3.20%
发文量
480
审稿时长
2-3 weeks
期刊介绍: The CANCER site is a full-text, electronic implementation of CANCER, an Interdisciplinary International Journal of the American Cancer Society, and CANCER CYTOPATHOLOGY, a Journal of the American Cancer Society. CANCER publishes interdisciplinary oncologic information according to, but not limited to, the following disease sites and disciplines: blood/bone marrow; breast disease; endocrine disorders; epidemiology; gastrointestinal tract; genitourinary disease; gynecologic oncology; head and neck disease; hepatobiliary tract; integrated medicine; lung disease; medical oncology; neuro-oncology; pathology radiation oncology; translational research
期刊最新文献
A systematic review and meta-analysis of patient-relevant outcomes in comprehensive cancer centers versus noncomprehensive cancer centers. American Society of Clinical Oncology guideline update on palliative care for patients with cancer: Addressing the reality gap. Embrace with caution: The limitations of generative artificial intelligence in responding to patient health care queries. Expression of Concern. Global disparities in cancer care: Bridging the gap in affordability and access to medications between high and low-income countries.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1