Abstract A45: Treatment patterns and outcomes among platinum-refractory/resistant ovarian cancer patients
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background: Real-world evidence on current treatment patterns and outcomes is limited for patients with platinum-refractory/resistant epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer (PRROC). This study aimed to describe the treatment patterns and outcomes of patients with PRROC in the United States (US), the United Kingdom (UK), and Canada (CA). Methods: Physicians retrospectively reviewed medical records of females aged ≥18 years diagnosed with PRROC from January 2010 to June 2014. Follow-up data available through October 2016 were extracted. Patient characteristics, initial PRROC treatment regimens, and associated health care utilization were assessed descriptively; clinical outcomes were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional-hazards methods. Results: Data were obtained on 392 US, 296 UK, and 82 CA patients. At initial diagnosis of epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or peritoneal cancer, 65.8% (US), 93.3% (UK), and 82.9% (CA) of patients had stage III/IV disease and 43.6% (US), 73.7% (UK), and 56.1% (CA) had high-grade tumors. Most patients were diagnosed with PRROC in 2013 or 2014 (US: 64.8%, UK: 72.3%, CA: 64.6%) and mean age at PRROC diagnosis was 57 years in the US and CA and 59 years in the UK. The proportion of patients with ECOG performance status (PS) ≤1 at PRROC diagnosis was 57.7% in the US, 80.1% in the UK, and 36.6% in CA. Most patients received systemic treatment after PRROC diagnosis (US 71.4%; UK 83.1%; CA 81.7%). Most of the patients received only one treatment line at the time of extraction (US: 64.3%, UK: 75.6%, CA: 70.2%). Bevacizumab ± chemotherapy (US 41.4%; UK 12.6%; CA 35.8%) and pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) monotherapy (US 18.6%; UK 50.0%; CA 34.3%) were the most common initial therapies. Common subsequent treatments varied between the countries, including topotecan, gemcitabine, PLD, paclitaxel. During initial treatment for PRROC, 80.7%, 59.8%, and 44.8% of patients had at least one office visit and 18.9%, 7.3%, and 19.4% of patients had at least one emergency department visit in the US, UK, and CA, respectively. Hospitalizations during initial treatment for PRROC were observed among 17.5% of patients in the US, 10.2% in the UK, and 14.9% in CA. Treatment toxicity was the most common reason for hospitalization (US 75.5%; UK 64.0%; CA 80.0%). Median progression-free survival (PFS; 95% confidence interval) was 6.4 (5.4-9.3), 8.0 (6.8-9.2), and 5.6 (4.9-6.2) months in the US, UK, and CA, respectively. The Cox proportional-hazards model showed that stage III/IV, high-grade tumors, and poorer PS were associated with shorter survival. Conclusions: Even though bevacizumab ± chemotherapy and PLD were the most common initial PRROC treatments in the three countries, relatively higher utilization of bevacizumab ± chemotherapy was observed in the US and CA than the UK, plausibly due to lack of bevacizumab reimbursement in the UK for the treatment of PRROC. Limited PFS and a high prevalence of hospitalization due to treatment toxicity observed with initial treatments suggest a continued need for more effective and tolerable treatment strategies for PRROC. Citation Format: Rohan Parikh, Samantha Kurosky, Margarita Udall, Jane Chang, Joseph C. Cappelleri, Jim P. Doherty, James A. Kaye. Treatment patterns and outcomes among platinum-refractory/resistant ovarian cancer patients. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR Conference: Addressing Critical Questions in Ovarian Cancer Research and Treatment; Oct 1-4, 2017; Pittsburgh, PA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Clin Cancer Res 2018;24(15_Suppl):Abstract nr A45.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».