Impact of Timing of Immunotherapy and Cytoreductive Nephrectomy in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: Real-World Data on Survival Outcomes from the CKCis Database.

IF 2.8 4区 医学 Q2 ONCOLOGY
Changsu Lawrence Park, Feras Ayman Moria, Sunita Ghosh, Lori Wood, Georg A Bjarnason, Bimal Bhindi, Daniel Yick Chin Heng, Vincent Castonguay, Frederic Pouliot, Christian K Kollmannsberger, Dominick Bosse, Naveen S Basappa, Antonio Finelli, Nazanin Fallah-Rad, Rodney H Breau, Aly-Khan A Lalani, Simon Tanguay, Jeffrey Graham, Ramy R Saleh
{"title":"Impact of Timing of Immunotherapy and Cytoreductive Nephrectomy in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: Real-World Data on Survival Outcomes from the CKCis Database.","authors":"Changsu Lawrence Park, Feras Ayman Moria, Sunita Ghosh, Lori Wood, Georg A Bjarnason, Bimal Bhindi, Daniel Yick Chin Heng, Vincent Castonguay, Frederic Pouliot, Christian K Kollmannsberger, Dominick Bosse, Naveen S Basappa, Antonio Finelli, Nazanin Fallah-Rad, Rodney H Breau, Aly-Khan A Lalani, Simon Tanguay, Jeffrey Graham, Ramy R Saleh","doi":"10.3390/curroncol31080351","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Immunotherapy-based systemic treatment (ST) is the standard of care for most patients diagnosed with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN) has historically shown benefit for select patients with mRCC, but its role and timing are not well understood in the era of immunotherapy. The primary objective of this study is to assess outcomes in patients who received ST only, CN followed by ST (CN-ST), and ST followed by CN (ST-CN). The Canadian Kidney Cancer information system (CKCis) database was queried to identify patients with de novo mRCC who received immunotherapy-based ST between January 2014 and June 2023. These patients were classified into three categories as described above. Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess the impact of the timing of ST and CN on overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), after adjusting for the International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) risk group, age, and comorbidities. Best overall response and complications of ST and CN for these cohorts were collected. A total of 588 patients were included in this study: 331 patients received ST only, 215 patients received CN-ST, and 42 patients received ST-CN. Patient and disease characteristics including age, gender, performance status, IMDC risk category, comorbidity, histology, type of ST, and metastatic sites are reported. OS analysis favored patients who received ST-CN (hazard ratio [HR] 0.30, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.13-0.68) and CN-ST (HR 0.68, CI 0.47-0.97) over patients who received ST only. PFS analysis showed a similar trend for ST-CN (HR 0.45, CI 0.26-0.77) and CN-ST (HR 0.9, CI 0.68-1.17). This study examined baseline features and outcomes associated with the use and timing of CN and ST using real-world data via a large Canadian real-world cohort. Patients selected to receive CN after ST demonstrated improved outcomes. There were no appreciable differences in perioperative complications across groups. Limitations include the small number of patients in the ST-CN group and residual confounding and selection biases that may influence the outcomes in patients undergoing CN.</p>","PeriodicalId":11012,"journal":{"name":"Current oncology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11353225/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/curroncol31080351","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Immunotherapy-based systemic treatment (ST) is the standard of care for most patients diagnosed with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN) has historically shown benefit for select patients with mRCC, but its role and timing are not well understood in the era of immunotherapy. The primary objective of this study is to assess outcomes in patients who received ST only, CN followed by ST (CN-ST), and ST followed by CN (ST-CN). The Canadian Kidney Cancer information system (CKCis) database was queried to identify patients with de novo mRCC who received immunotherapy-based ST between January 2014 and June 2023. These patients were classified into three categories as described above. Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess the impact of the timing of ST and CN on overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), after adjusting for the International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) risk group, age, and comorbidities. Best overall response and complications of ST and CN for these cohorts were collected. A total of 588 patients were included in this study: 331 patients received ST only, 215 patients received CN-ST, and 42 patients received ST-CN. Patient and disease characteristics including age, gender, performance status, IMDC risk category, comorbidity, histology, type of ST, and metastatic sites are reported. OS analysis favored patients who received ST-CN (hazard ratio [HR] 0.30, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.13-0.68) and CN-ST (HR 0.68, CI 0.47-0.97) over patients who received ST only. PFS analysis showed a similar trend for ST-CN (HR 0.45, CI 0.26-0.77) and CN-ST (HR 0.9, CI 0.68-1.17). This study examined baseline features and outcomes associated with the use and timing of CN and ST using real-world data via a large Canadian real-world cohort. Patients selected to receive CN after ST demonstrated improved outcomes. There were no appreciable differences in perioperative complications across groups. Limitations include the small number of patients in the ST-CN group and residual confounding and selection biases that may influence the outcomes in patients undergoing CN.

转移性肾细胞癌免疫疗法和细胞切除肾切除术时机的影响:来自 CKCis 数据库的真实世界生存结果数据。
基于免疫疗法的全身治疗(ST)是大多数确诊为转移性肾细胞癌(mRCC)患者的标准治疗方法。细胞肾切除术(CN)历来对部分mRCC患者有益,但在免疫疗法时代,CN的作用和时机尚不十分明确。本研究的主要目的是评估仅接受ST、CN后接受ST(CN-ST)和ST后接受CN(ST-CN)的患者的预后。研究人员查询了加拿大肾癌信息系统(CKCis)数据库,以确定在2014年1月至2023年6月期间接受了基于免疫疗法的ST治疗的新发mRCC患者。这些患者被分为上述三类。在调整国际转移性RCC数据库联盟(IMDC)的风险组别、年龄和合并症后,采用Cox比例危险模型评估ST和CN的时机对总生存期(OS)和无进展生存期(PFS)的影响。此外,还收集了这些组群的最佳总体反应以及ST和CN的并发症。本研究共纳入了 588 例患者:331名患者仅接受了ST治疗,215名患者接受了CN-ST治疗,42名患者接受了ST-CN治疗。报告了患者和疾病特征,包括年龄、性别、表现状态、IMDC风险类别、合并症、组织学、ST类型和转移部位。OS分析显示,接受ST-CN(危险比[HR] 0.30,95%置信区间[CI] 0.13-0.68)和CN-ST(HR 0.68,CI 0.47-0.97)治疗的患者优于仅接受ST治疗的患者。PFS分析显示,ST-CN(HR 0.45,CI 0.26-0.77)和CN-ST(HR 0.9,CI 0.68-1.17)的趋势相似。本研究利用加拿大大型真实世界队列的真实数据,研究了与CN和ST的使用和时机相关的基线特征和结果。选择在ST后接受CN治疗的患者的预后有所改善。各组围术期并发症无明显差异。不足之处包括ST-CN组患者人数较少,残余混杂因素和选择偏差可能会影响接受CN治疗的患者的预后。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
Current oncology
Current oncology ONCOLOGY-
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
7.70%
发文量
664
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Current Oncology is a peer-reviewed, Canadian-based and internationally respected journal. Current Oncology represents a multidisciplinary medium encompassing health care workers in the field of cancer therapy in Canada to report upon and to review progress in the management of this disease. We encourage submissions from all fields of cancer medicine, including radiation oncology, surgical oncology, medical oncology, pediatric oncology, pathology, and cancer rehabilitation and survivorship. Articles published in the journal typically contain information that is relevant directly to clinical oncology practice, and have clear potential for application to the current or future practice of cancer medicine.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信