{"title":"IV期合并小细胞肺癌的临床特征和预后因素:倾向评分匹配分析","authors":"Shanshan Cai, Weichang Yang, Hongdan Luo, Zhouhua Li, Xiaotian Huang, Jinbo Li, Xiaoqun Ye","doi":"10.1371/journal.pone.0313221","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Nowadays, the characteristics and treatment of combined small-cell lung carcinoma (CSCLC) remain controversial. This study aimed to analyze the features of clinical demographics, survival outcomes and treatment modalities among IV CSCLC, IV SCLC and IV NSCLC, to provide more evidence for the study of IV CSCLC.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>All CSCLC, SCLC and NSCLC patient data were obtained from the SEER database (2010-2020). Pearson's χ2 test was used to compare the differences in clinical characteristics. Propensity score matching (PSM) was utilized to balance the bias of the variables between patients. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression analyses were performed to identify prognostic factors. KM analysis was used to calculate survival. Adjusted analyses for the primary outcome of different treatment modalities of IV CSCLC, IV SCLC and IV NSCLC were performed using Cox regression models.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 493 patients with IV CSCLC, 35503 patients with SCLC, 122807 patients with IV NSCLC were included in this study. The demographic characteristics and tumor characteristics of the three groups were different. Before PSM, there were significant differences in OS and CSS among IV CSCLC, IV SCLC and IV NSCLC, After PSM, there was a significant difference in OS and CSS between the IV CSCLC and IV NSCLC. Risk/protective factors for OS and CSS were different in three groups. Chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and surgery can improve IV CSCLC's survival time. The combination of surgery and chemoradiotherapy treatment group for patients with IV CSCLC demonstrated best OS compared to control treatment groups, and the surgery combined chemotherapy treatment group exhibited the best CSS. Additionally, for select patients with stage IV CSCLC who have missed the window for surgical intervention at the time of initial diagnosis, chemoradiotherapy presents a viable and effective treatment option.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The clinical characteristics IV CSCLC, IV SCLC and IV NSCLC were significantly different. The prognosis for IV CSCLC is notably poorer than IV NSCLC, similar to IV SCLC. Surgery combined therapy emerged as the preferred treatment modalities and chemoradiotherapy was a good choice for patients who have lost the indication of surgery for patients diagnosed with IV CSCLC.</p>","PeriodicalId":20189,"journal":{"name":"PLoS ONE","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Clinical features and prognostic factors of IV combined small cell lung cancer: A propensity score matching analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Shanshan Cai, Weichang Yang, Hongdan Luo, Zhouhua Li, Xiaotian Huang, Jinbo Li, Xiaoqun Ye\",\"doi\":\"10.1371/journal.pone.0313221\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Nowadays, the characteristics and treatment of combined small-cell lung carcinoma (CSCLC) remain controversial. This study aimed to analyze the features of clinical demographics, survival outcomes and treatment modalities among IV CSCLC, IV SCLC and IV NSCLC, to provide more evidence for the study of IV CSCLC.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>All CSCLC, SCLC and NSCLC patient data were obtained from the SEER database (2010-2020). Pearson's χ2 test was used to compare the differences in clinical characteristics. Propensity score matching (PSM) was utilized to balance the bias of the variables between patients. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression analyses were performed to identify prognostic factors. KM analysis was used to calculate survival. Adjusted analyses for the primary outcome of different treatment modalities of IV CSCLC, IV SCLC and IV NSCLC were performed using Cox regression models.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 493 patients with IV CSCLC, 35503 patients with SCLC, 122807 patients with IV NSCLC were included in this study. The demographic characteristics and tumor characteristics of the three groups were different. Before PSM, there were significant differences in OS and CSS among IV CSCLC, IV SCLC and IV NSCLC, After PSM, there was a significant difference in OS and CSS between the IV CSCLC and IV NSCLC. Risk/protective factors for OS and CSS were different in three groups. Chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and surgery can improve IV CSCLC's survival time. The combination of surgery and chemoradiotherapy treatment group for patients with IV CSCLC demonstrated best OS compared to control treatment groups, and the surgery combined chemotherapy treatment group exhibited the best CSS. Additionally, for select patients with stage IV CSCLC who have missed the window for surgical intervention at the time of initial diagnosis, chemoradiotherapy presents a viable and effective treatment option.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The clinical characteristics IV CSCLC, IV SCLC and IV NSCLC were significantly different. The prognosis for IV CSCLC is notably poorer than IV NSCLC, similar to IV SCLC. Surgery combined therapy emerged as the preferred treatment modalities and chemoradiotherapy was a good choice for patients who have lost the indication of surgery for patients diagnosed with IV CSCLC.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20189,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"PLoS ONE\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"PLoS ONE\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"103\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0313221\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"综合性期刊\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PLoS ONE","FirstCategoryId":"103","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0313221","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"综合性期刊","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:目前,合并小细胞肺癌(CSCLC)的特征和治疗仍存在争议。本研究旨在分析IV型CSCLC、IV型SCLC和IV型NSCLC的临床人口统计学特征、生存结果和治疗方式,为IV型CSCLC的研究提供更多证据:所有 CSCLC、SCLC 和 NSCLC 患者数据均来自 SEER 数据库(2010-2020 年)。采用皮尔逊χ2检验比较临床特征的差异。采用倾向评分匹配(PSM)来平衡患者间变量的偏差。为确定预后因素,进行了单变量和多变量考克斯比例危险回归分析。KM 分析用于计算存活率。使用Cox回归模型对IV CSCLC、IV SCLC和IV NSCLC不同治疗方式的主要结果进行了调整分析:本研究共纳入了 493 例 IV 型 CSCLC 患者、35503 例 SCLC 患者和 122807 例 IV 型 NSCLC 患者。三组患者的人口统计学特征和肿瘤特征存在差异。PSM前,IV CSCLC、IV SCLC和IV NSCLC的OS和CSS有显著差异;PSM后,IV CSCLC和IV NSCLC的OS和CSS有显著差异。三组患者 OS 和 CSS 的风险/保护因素不同。化疗、放疗和手术可以延长 IV 型 CSCLC 的生存时间。与对照治疗组相比,IV期CSCLC患者手术和放化疗联合治疗组的OS最佳,手术联合化疗治疗组的CSS最佳。此外,对于初诊时错过手术治疗窗口期的IV期CSCLC患者,化疗放疗也是一种可行且有效的治疗方案:结论:IV期CSCLC、IV期SCLC和IV期NSCLC的临床特征存在显著差异。IV CSCLC的预后明显差于IV NSCLC,与IV SCLC相似。手术联合治疗成为首选的治疗方式,对于失去手术指征的 IV 型 CSCLC 患者来说,化放疗是一个不错的选择。
Clinical features and prognostic factors of IV combined small cell lung cancer: A propensity score matching analysis.
Background: Nowadays, the characteristics and treatment of combined small-cell lung carcinoma (CSCLC) remain controversial. This study aimed to analyze the features of clinical demographics, survival outcomes and treatment modalities among IV CSCLC, IV SCLC and IV NSCLC, to provide more evidence for the study of IV CSCLC.
Methods: All CSCLC, SCLC and NSCLC patient data were obtained from the SEER database (2010-2020). Pearson's χ2 test was used to compare the differences in clinical characteristics. Propensity score matching (PSM) was utilized to balance the bias of the variables between patients. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression analyses were performed to identify prognostic factors. KM analysis was used to calculate survival. Adjusted analyses for the primary outcome of different treatment modalities of IV CSCLC, IV SCLC and IV NSCLC were performed using Cox regression models.
Results: A total of 493 patients with IV CSCLC, 35503 patients with SCLC, 122807 patients with IV NSCLC were included in this study. The demographic characteristics and tumor characteristics of the three groups were different. Before PSM, there were significant differences in OS and CSS among IV CSCLC, IV SCLC and IV NSCLC, After PSM, there was a significant difference in OS and CSS between the IV CSCLC and IV NSCLC. Risk/protective factors for OS and CSS were different in three groups. Chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and surgery can improve IV CSCLC's survival time. The combination of surgery and chemoradiotherapy treatment group for patients with IV CSCLC demonstrated best OS compared to control treatment groups, and the surgery combined chemotherapy treatment group exhibited the best CSS. Additionally, for select patients with stage IV CSCLC who have missed the window for surgical intervention at the time of initial diagnosis, chemoradiotherapy presents a viable and effective treatment option.
Conclusions: The clinical characteristics IV CSCLC, IV SCLC and IV NSCLC were significantly different. The prognosis for IV CSCLC is notably poorer than IV NSCLC, similar to IV SCLC. Surgery combined therapy emerged as the preferred treatment modalities and chemoradiotherapy was a good choice for patients who have lost the indication of surgery for patients diagnosed with IV CSCLC.
期刊介绍:
PLOS ONE is an international, peer-reviewed, open-access, online publication. PLOS ONE welcomes reports on primary research from any scientific discipline. It provides:
* Open-access—freely accessible online, authors retain copyright
* Fast publication times
* Peer review by expert, practicing researchers
* Post-publication tools to indicate quality and impact
* Community-based dialogue on articles
* Worldwide media coverage