学术与非学术医疗中心IV期肾细胞癌的生存与治疗

Bob Weng, Marco Braaten, Jenna Lehn, Reid Morrissey, Muhammad Sohaib Asghar, Peter Silberstein, Ali Bin Abdul Jabbar, Abraham Mathews, Abubakar Tauseef, Mohsin Mirza
{"title":"学术与非学术医疗中心IV期肾细胞癌的生存与治疗","authors":"Bob Weng, Marco Braaten, Jenna Lehn, Reid Morrissey, Muhammad Sohaib Asghar, Peter Silberstein, Ali Bin Abdul Jabbar, Abraham Mathews, Abubakar Tauseef, Mohsin Mirza","doi":"10.5527/wjn.v14.i2.103923","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is treated with surgical resection as the gold standard, as it is notoriously resistant to systemic therapy. Advancements with targeted therapies contribute to declining mortality, but metastatic RCC (mRCC) survival remains poor. One possible factor is treatment at academic centers, which employ advanced providers and novel therapies. This study compared outcomes of mRCC in patients treated at academic/research facilities compared to those treated at non-academic centers.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To compare survival outcomes of mRCC and their various etiologies between academic and non-academic centers.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The National Cancer Database was used to identify mRCC patients including all histology subtypes and stage IV disease. Descriptive statistics and Kaplan-Meier curves measured survival outcomes for user file facility types sorted into a binary academic/research and non-academic research variable. Multivariate logistic regression and Cox proportional hazard testing generated odds ratio and hazard ratio. Data was analyzed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences version 29.0 using a significance level of <i>P</i> < 0.05.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Overall, academic facility patients experienced greater 5-year and 10-year overall survival than non-academic facility patients. Treatment at non-academic facilities was associated with increased odds of death that persisted even after controlling for age, tumor size, sex, and distance traveled to treatment center. In comparison, non-academic facility patients also experienced greater risk of hazard.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Patients with mRCC treated at academic/research facilities experienced increased survival compared to patients treated at non-academic facilities, were more likely to be younger, carry private insurance, and come from a large metropolitan area. They also were significantly more likely to receive surgery and adjuvant immunotherapy.</p>","PeriodicalId":94272,"journal":{"name":"World journal of nephrology","volume":"14 2","pages":"103923"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12001218/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Survival and treatment of stage IV renal cell carcinoma in academic <i>vs</i> non-academic medical centers.\",\"authors\":\"Bob Weng, Marco Braaten, Jenna Lehn, Reid Morrissey, Muhammad Sohaib Asghar, Peter Silberstein, Ali Bin Abdul Jabbar, Abraham Mathews, Abubakar Tauseef, Mohsin Mirza\",\"doi\":\"10.5527/wjn.v14.i2.103923\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is treated with surgical resection as the gold standard, as it is notoriously resistant to systemic therapy. Advancements with targeted therapies contribute to declining mortality, but metastatic RCC (mRCC) survival remains poor. One possible factor is treatment at academic centers, which employ advanced providers and novel therapies. This study compared outcomes of mRCC in patients treated at academic/research facilities compared to those treated at non-academic centers.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To compare survival outcomes of mRCC and their various etiologies between academic and non-academic centers.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The National Cancer Database was used to identify mRCC patients including all histology subtypes and stage IV disease. Descriptive statistics and Kaplan-Meier curves measured survival outcomes for user file facility types sorted into a binary academic/research and non-academic research variable. Multivariate logistic regression and Cox proportional hazard testing generated odds ratio and hazard ratio. Data was analyzed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences version 29.0 using a significance level of <i>P</i> < 0.05.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Overall, academic facility patients experienced greater 5-year and 10-year overall survival than non-academic facility patients. Treatment at non-academic facilities was associated with increased odds of death that persisted even after controlling for age, tumor size, sex, and distance traveled to treatment center. In comparison, non-academic facility patients also experienced greater risk of hazard.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Patients with mRCC treated at academic/research facilities experienced increased survival compared to patients treated at non-academic facilities, were more likely to be younger, carry private insurance, and come from a large metropolitan area. They also were significantly more likely to receive surgery and adjuvant immunotherapy.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94272,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"World journal of nephrology\",\"volume\":\"14 2\",\"pages\":\"103923\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12001218/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"World journal of nephrology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5527/wjn.v14.i2.103923\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World journal of nephrology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5527/wjn.v14.i2.103923","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:肾细胞癌(RCC)的治疗以手术切除为金标准,因为它对全身治疗是出了名的抵抗。靶向治疗的进步有助于降低死亡率,但转移性RCC (mRCC)的生存率仍然很低。一个可能的因素是学术中心的治疗,这些中心采用先进的提供者和新颖的治疗方法。本研究比较了在学术/研究机构治疗的mRCC患者与在非学术中心治疗的患者的结果。目的:比较学术和非学术中心mRCC的生存结局及其各种病因。方法:使用国家癌症数据库识别mRCC患者,包括所有组织学亚型和IV期疾病。描述性统计和Kaplan-Meier曲线测量了用户文件设施类型的生存结果,这些类型分为二元学术/研究和非学术研究变量。多因素logistic回归和Cox比例风险检验生成优势比和风险比。使用Statistical Package for Social Sciences version 29.0对数据进行分析,显著性水平P < 0.05。结果:总体而言,学术设施患者的5年和10年总生存率高于非学术设施患者。在非学术机构治疗与死亡几率增加有关,即使在控制了年龄、肿瘤大小、性别和到治疗中心的距离后,这种情况仍然存在。相比之下,非学术设施患者也经历了更大的危险。结论:与在非学术机构治疗的患者相比,在学术/研究机构治疗的mRCC患者的生存率更高,更有可能是年轻人,携带私人保险,来自大城市地区。他们也更有可能接受手术和辅助免疫治疗。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Survival and treatment of stage IV renal cell carcinoma in academic vs non-academic medical centers.

Background: Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is treated with surgical resection as the gold standard, as it is notoriously resistant to systemic therapy. Advancements with targeted therapies contribute to declining mortality, but metastatic RCC (mRCC) survival remains poor. One possible factor is treatment at academic centers, which employ advanced providers and novel therapies. This study compared outcomes of mRCC in patients treated at academic/research facilities compared to those treated at non-academic centers.

Aim: To compare survival outcomes of mRCC and their various etiologies between academic and non-academic centers.

Methods: The National Cancer Database was used to identify mRCC patients including all histology subtypes and stage IV disease. Descriptive statistics and Kaplan-Meier curves measured survival outcomes for user file facility types sorted into a binary academic/research and non-academic research variable. Multivariate logistic regression and Cox proportional hazard testing generated odds ratio and hazard ratio. Data was analyzed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences version 29.0 using a significance level of P < 0.05.

Results: Overall, academic facility patients experienced greater 5-year and 10-year overall survival than non-academic facility patients. Treatment at non-academic facilities was associated with increased odds of death that persisted even after controlling for age, tumor size, sex, and distance traveled to treatment center. In comparison, non-academic facility patients also experienced greater risk of hazard.

Conclusion: Patients with mRCC treated at academic/research facilities experienced increased survival compared to patients treated at non-academic facilities, were more likely to be younger, carry private insurance, and come from a large metropolitan area. They also were significantly more likely to receive surgery and adjuvant immunotherapy.

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
3.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信