Real-World Data from a Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Community-Academic Registry: Comparative Outcomes of Progression Free Survival and Overall Survival

IF 1.1 Q4 ONCOLOGY Kidney Cancer Pub Date : 2019-01-01 DOI:10.3233/KCA-190059
S. Ramalingam, M. Walker, D. George, M. Harrison
{"title":"Real-World Data from a Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Community-Academic Registry: Comparative Outcomes of Progression Free Survival and Overall Survival","authors":"S. Ramalingam, M. Walker, D. George, M. Harrison","doi":"10.3233/KCA-190059","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: No studies have looked at comparative outcomes in the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) between academic and community practice settings. Methods: We created a joint academic (ACAD) and community (COMM) retrospective registry of patients treated for mRCC. This registry represents a collaboration of an academic research network (Duke Oncology Network; Durham, NC) and a community-based oncology network (ACORN Research; Memphis, TN) of multiple member practices. We compared progression free survival and overall survival between these centers. We included patients diagnosed with mRCC after January 1, 2007 and before February 7, 2011. Results: Four hundred and fifty-five patients were captured in the registry including N = 255 COMM patients and N = 200 ACAD patients. Initial analysis of COMM patients showed a median PFS of 6.24 months [95% CI, 5.4, 7.5], 3.88 months [95% CI, 3.0, 4.8], and 3.35 months [95% CI 2.9, 4.4] with first, second, and third line systemic therapy. ACAD patients had longer median PFS estimates of 11.3 months [95% CI, 7.5, 13.6], 4.4 months [95% CI, 2.7, 8.9], and 5.22 months [95% CI, 2.7, 6.3] respectively. Median OS was 12.06 months [95 % CI 8.7, 15.4] among COMM patients and 36.73 months [95% CI, 26.2, 42.2) among ACAD patients. Differences persisted with inclusion of well-established prognostic models and predictive factors such as treatment exposures. Conclusions: There may be differences between outcomes for mRCC patients in community versus academic settings; however, selection most likely plays a role and we need further studies to determine reasons for these potential disparities. A prospective metastatic renal cell carcinoma (MaRCC) registry has been accrued encompassing sixty academic and community treatment sites across the United States, with the goal of examining real-world treatment patterns and outcomes; MaRCC may shed further light on any potential outcomes differences.","PeriodicalId":17823,"journal":{"name":"Kidney Cancer","volume":"4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.3233/KCA-190059","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kidney Cancer","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3233/KCA-190059","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: No studies have looked at comparative outcomes in the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) between academic and community practice settings. Methods: We created a joint academic (ACAD) and community (COMM) retrospective registry of patients treated for mRCC. This registry represents a collaboration of an academic research network (Duke Oncology Network; Durham, NC) and a community-based oncology network (ACORN Research; Memphis, TN) of multiple member practices. We compared progression free survival and overall survival between these centers. We included patients diagnosed with mRCC after January 1, 2007 and before February 7, 2011. Results: Four hundred and fifty-five patients were captured in the registry including N = 255 COMM patients and N = 200 ACAD patients. Initial analysis of COMM patients showed a median PFS of 6.24 months [95% CI, 5.4, 7.5], 3.88 months [95% CI, 3.0, 4.8], and 3.35 months [95% CI 2.9, 4.4] with first, second, and third line systemic therapy. ACAD patients had longer median PFS estimates of 11.3 months [95% CI, 7.5, 13.6], 4.4 months [95% CI, 2.7, 8.9], and 5.22 months [95% CI, 2.7, 6.3] respectively. Median OS was 12.06 months [95 % CI 8.7, 15.4] among COMM patients and 36.73 months [95% CI, 26.2, 42.2) among ACAD patients. Differences persisted with inclusion of well-established prognostic models and predictive factors such as treatment exposures. Conclusions: There may be differences between outcomes for mRCC patients in community versus academic settings; however, selection most likely plays a role and we need further studies to determine reasons for these potential disparities. A prospective metastatic renal cell carcinoma (MaRCC) registry has been accrued encompassing sixty academic and community treatment sites across the United States, with the goal of examining real-world treatment patterns and outcomes; MaRCC may shed further light on any potential outcomes differences.
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
来自转移性肾细胞癌社区学术登记处的真实世界数据:无进展生存期和总生存期的比较结果
背景:没有研究观察学术和社区实践环境中转移性肾细胞癌(mRCC)治疗的比较结果。方法:我们建立了一个联合学术(ACAD)和社区(COMM)的mRCC患者回顾性登记。该注册表代表了学术研究网络(杜克肿瘤网络;Durham, NC)和基于社区的肿瘤学网络(ACORN Research;孟菲斯,田纳西州)的多个成员的做法。我们比较了这些中心的无进展生存期和总生存期。我们纳入了2007年1月1日之后和2011年2月7日之前诊断为mRCC的患者。结果:共纳入455例患者,其中COMM患者255例,ACAD患者200例。初步分析COMM患者的中位PFS为6.24个月[95% CI, 5.4, 7.5], 3.88个月[95% CI, 3.0, 4.8]和3.35个月[95% CI 2.9, 4.4],采用一线、二线和三线全身治疗。ACAD患者的中位PFS估计分别为11.3个月[95% CI, 7.5, 13.6]、4.4个月[95% CI, 2.7, 8.9]和5.22个月[95% CI, 2.7, 6.3]。COMM患者的中位OS为12.06个月[95% CI, 8.7, 15.4], ACAD患者的中位OS为36.73个月[95% CI, 26.2, 42.2]。由于纳入了完善的预后模型和治疗暴露等预测因素,差异仍然存在。结论:社区与学术环境中mRCC患者的预后可能存在差异;然而,选择最有可能发挥作用,我们需要进一步的研究来确定这些潜在差异的原因。一项前瞻性转移性肾细胞癌(MaRCC)登记已经累积,包括美国60个学术和社区治疗点,目的是检查现实世界的治疗模式和结果;MaRCC可能会进一步阐明任何潜在的结果差异。
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
Kidney Cancer
Kidney Cancer Multiple-
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
8.30%
发文量
23
期刊最新文献
Emerging Antibody-Drug Conjugate Therapies and Targets for Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Genomic and Transcriptomic Characteristics of Tumors of Patients with Metastatic Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma Clinically Benefiting from First-Line Treatment with Ipilimumab Plus Nivolumab Nephrotoxicity Associated with Contemporary Renal Cell Carcinoma Regimens: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Targeted Literature Review of Outcomes to Initial Systemic Therapy for Advanced/Metastatic Non-Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma in Observational Studies Fibrinogen Levels in Patients with Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Treated with Nivolumab: Results of a Multicenter Prospective Trial
×
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