2010年至2021年芬兰西南部晚期肾细胞癌系统治疗进展的观察研究。

IF 2.6 4区 医学 Q2 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY Therapeutic Advances in Urology Pub Date : 2023-11-05 eCollection Date: 2023-01-01 DOI:10.1177/17562872231206243
Olivia Hölsä, Kaisa Teittinen, Anna Anttalainen, Liisa Ukkola-Vuoti, Milla Summanen, Kalle E Mattila
{"title":"2010年至2021年芬兰西南部晚期肾细胞癌系统治疗进展的观察研究。","authors":"Olivia Hölsä, Kaisa Teittinen, Anna Anttalainen, Liisa Ukkola-Vuoti, Milla Summanen, Kalle E Mattila","doi":"10.1177/17562872231206243","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Novel receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors and immune checkpoint inhibitors have been introduced to the treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC) during the past decade. However, the adoption of novel treatments into clinical practice has been unknown in Finland.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Our aim was to evaluate the use of systemic treatments and treatment outcomes of aRCC patients in Southwest Finland during 2010-2021.</p><p><strong>Design and methods: </strong>Clinical characteristics, treatments for aRCC, healthcare resource utilization, and overall survival (OS) were retrospectively obtained from electronic medical records. Patients were stratified using the International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) risk classification.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 1112 RCC patients were identified, 336 (30%) patients presented with aRCC, and 57% of them (<i>n</i> = 191) had received systemic treatment. Pre-2018, sunitinib (79%) was the most common first-line treatment, and pazopanib (17%), axitinib (17%), and cabozantinib (5%) were frequently used in the second-line. Post-2018, sunitinib (52%), cabozantinib (31%), and the combination of ipilimumab and nivolumab (10%) were most commonly used in the first-line, and cabozantinib (23%) in the second-line. Median OS for patients with favorable, intermediate, and poor risk were 61.9, 28.6, and 8.1 months, respectively. A total of 73%, 74%, and 35% of the patients with favorable, intermediate, and poor risk had received second-line systemic treatment. In poor-risk patients, the number of hospital inpatient days was twofold higher compared to intermediate and fourfold higher compared to favorable-risk patients.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>New treatment options were readily adopted into routine clinical practice after becoming reimbursed in Finland. OS and the need for hospitalization depended significantly on the IMDC risk category. Upfront combination treatments are warranted for poor-risk patients as the proportion of patients receiving second-line treatment is low.</p><p><strong>Registration: </strong>Clinical trial identifier: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05363072.</p>","PeriodicalId":23010,"journal":{"name":"Therapeutic Advances in Urology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10629305/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Observational study on the evolution of systemic treatments for advanced renal cell carcinoma in Southwest Finland between 2010 and 2021.\",\"authors\":\"Olivia Hölsä, Kaisa Teittinen, Anna Anttalainen, Liisa Ukkola-Vuoti, Milla Summanen, Kalle E Mattila\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/17562872231206243\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Novel receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors and immune checkpoint inhibitors have been introduced to the treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC) during the past decade. However, the adoption of novel treatments into clinical practice has been unknown in Finland.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Our aim was to evaluate the use of systemic treatments and treatment outcomes of aRCC patients in Southwest Finland during 2010-2021.</p><p><strong>Design and methods: </strong>Clinical characteristics, treatments for aRCC, healthcare resource utilization, and overall survival (OS) were retrospectively obtained from electronic medical records. Patients were stratified using the International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) risk classification.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 1112 RCC patients were identified, 336 (30%) patients presented with aRCC, and 57% of them (<i>n</i> = 191) had received systemic treatment. Pre-2018, sunitinib (79%) was the most common first-line treatment, and pazopanib (17%), axitinib (17%), and cabozantinib (5%) were frequently used in the second-line. Post-2018, sunitinib (52%), cabozantinib (31%), and the combination of ipilimumab and nivolumab (10%) were most commonly used in the first-line, and cabozantinib (23%) in the second-line. Median OS for patients with favorable, intermediate, and poor risk were 61.9, 28.6, and 8.1 months, respectively. A total of 73%, 74%, and 35% of the patients with favorable, intermediate, and poor risk had received second-line systemic treatment. In poor-risk patients, the number of hospital inpatient days was twofold higher compared to intermediate and fourfold higher compared to favorable-risk patients.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>New treatment options were readily adopted into routine clinical practice after becoming reimbursed in Finland. OS and the need for hospitalization depended significantly on the IMDC risk category. Upfront combination treatments are warranted for poor-risk patients as the proportion of patients receiving second-line treatment is low.</p><p><strong>Registration: </strong>Clinical trial identifier: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05363072.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23010,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Therapeutic Advances in Urology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10629305/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Therapeutic Advances in Urology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/17562872231206243\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Therapeutic Advances in Urology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17562872231206243","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:在过去的十年中,新型受体酪氨酸激酶抑制剂和免疫检查点抑制剂已被引入晚期肾细胞癌(aRCC)的治疗中。然而,在芬兰,新的治疗方法在临床实践中的应用尚不清楚。目的:我们的目的是评估2010-2021年芬兰西南部aRCC患者的系统治疗使用和治疗结果。设计和方法:临床特征、aRCC的治疗、医疗资源利用,和总生存率(OS)是从电子医疗记录中回顾性获得的。使用国际转移性RCC数据库联盟(IMDC)风险分类对患者进行分层。结果:总共发现1112例RCC患者,336例(30%)患者出现aRCC,其中57%(n = 191)接受了系统治疗。在2018年之前,舒尼替尼(79%)是最常见的一线治疗,帕唑帕尼(17%)、阿西替尼(17%)和卡博扎替尼(5%)经常用于二线治疗。2018年后,舒尼替尼(52%)、卡博扎替尼(31%)以及易普利木单抗和尼沃单抗的组合(10%)在一线最常用,卡博扎替尼(23%)在二线最常用。具有良好、中等和较差风险的患者的中位OS分别为61.9、28.6和8.1 月。共有73%、74%和35%的高危、中危和低危患者接受了二线系统治疗。在低风险患者中,住院天数是中等风险患者的两倍,是高风险患者的四倍。结论:在芬兰报销后,新的治疗方案很容易被纳入常规临床实践。OS和住院需求在很大程度上取决于IMDC风险类别。由于接受二线治疗的患者比例较低,因此有必要对低风险患者进行前期联合治疗。注册:临床试验标识符:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05363072。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

摘要图片

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
Observational study on the evolution of systemic treatments for advanced renal cell carcinoma in Southwest Finland between 2010 and 2021.

Background: Novel receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors and immune checkpoint inhibitors have been introduced to the treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC) during the past decade. However, the adoption of novel treatments into clinical practice has been unknown in Finland.

Objectives: Our aim was to evaluate the use of systemic treatments and treatment outcomes of aRCC patients in Southwest Finland during 2010-2021.

Design and methods: Clinical characteristics, treatments for aRCC, healthcare resource utilization, and overall survival (OS) were retrospectively obtained from electronic medical records. Patients were stratified using the International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) risk classification.

Results: In total, 1112 RCC patients were identified, 336 (30%) patients presented with aRCC, and 57% of them (n = 191) had received systemic treatment. Pre-2018, sunitinib (79%) was the most common first-line treatment, and pazopanib (17%), axitinib (17%), and cabozantinib (5%) were frequently used in the second-line. Post-2018, sunitinib (52%), cabozantinib (31%), and the combination of ipilimumab and nivolumab (10%) were most commonly used in the first-line, and cabozantinib (23%) in the second-line. Median OS for patients with favorable, intermediate, and poor risk were 61.9, 28.6, and 8.1 months, respectively. A total of 73%, 74%, and 35% of the patients with favorable, intermediate, and poor risk had received second-line systemic treatment. In poor-risk patients, the number of hospital inpatient days was twofold higher compared to intermediate and fourfold higher compared to favorable-risk patients.

Conclusion: New treatment options were readily adopted into routine clinical practice after becoming reimbursed in Finland. OS and the need for hospitalization depended significantly on the IMDC risk category. Upfront combination treatments are warranted for poor-risk patients as the proportion of patients receiving second-line treatment is low.

Registration: Clinical trial identifier: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05363072.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
39
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊介绍: Therapeutic Advances in Urology delivers the highest quality peer-reviewed articles, reviews, and scholarly comment on pioneering efforts and innovative studies across all areas of urology. The journal has a strong clinical and pharmacological focus and is aimed at clinicians and researchers in urology, providing a forum in print and online for publishing the highest quality articles in this area. The editors welcome articles of current interest across all areas of urology, including treatment of urological disorders, with a focus on emerging pharmacological therapies.
期刊最新文献
Clinical use of nadofaragene firadenovec-vncg Effect of surgical, medical, and behavioral weight loss on hormonal and sexual function in men: a contemporary narrative review Proceedings from the Second International Urology Cancer Summit, 27th September, Portsmouth, UK PARP inhibitors alone or in combination for prostate cancer. Comparison of ureteoroscopy and laser stone fragmentation between Holmium: YAG laser with MOSES versus non-MOSES technology: a prospective single-center propensity score-matched analysis using similar laser settings.
×
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