Real-world treatment patterns, clinical outcomes, and health care resource utilization in extensive-stage small cell lung cancer in Canada.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
e20575 Background: Extensive stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) patients face a high risk of recurrence and a uniformly poor prognosis. Real-world evidence related to treatment patterns, clinical outcomes, and healthcare resource utilization is needed to highlight the unmet clinical need and demand for novel therapies within this patient population. Methods: A population-based, retrospective, longitudinal study of adult ES-SCLC patients diagnosed in the province of Alberta, Canada between January 2010 and December 2018 was conducted using provincial electronic medical records and administrative claims data. Results: A total of 1,941 ES-SCLC patients were included of which 1,465 (75%) initially presented with ES-SCLC and 476 (25%) had recurrent disease. Among newly diagnosed ES-SCLC patients, front-line therapy was as follows: 523 (35.7%) chemotherapy and radiotherapy, 280 (19.1%) chemotherapy alone, 133 (9.1%) radiotherapy alone, and 529 (36.1%) best supportive care. The primary sites of radiation were the chest (67.1%) and the brain (45.7%). Median age at diagnosis was 70 years (range: 39-94) and 50.2% were men. In contrast to the de novo patients, the majority of recurrent cases (71.6%) received no front-line therapy. In the full cohort (de novo and recurrent cases), 46.5% of patients initiated first-line, 8.7% second-line, and 1.4% third-line chemotherapy. The majority of patients received either carboplatin plus etoposide (49.5%) or cisplatin plus etoposide (43.0%) in first-line. Median overall survival was higher for patients who were treated with chemotherapy and radiotherapy (10.59 months; 95% CI: 10.03-11.61) compared to patients who received chemotherapy alone (5.65 months; 95% CI: 5.06-6.12), radiotherapy alone (3.02 months; 95% CI: 2.47-4.01), or best supportive care (0.82 months; 95% CI: 0.72-0.92; log-rank p-value < 0.001). Among patients who received first-line systemic therapy, the 1-year, 2-year and 5-year survival was 29.1% (95% CI: 26.3-32.3), 7.3% (95% CI: 5.7-9.2) and 2.9% (95% CI: 1.8-4.5), respectively and the average time spent in hospital was 17, 11, and 10 days per patient within years 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Conclusions: In a Canadian real-world setting, the initiation of first-line treatment in ES-SCLC was low with significant attrition in subsequent lines. It was evident that patients who received treatment had greater survival compared to those who do not. Collectively, these results underscore the need for effective front-line therapeutic options and highlight the potential for novel therapies to improve patient outcomes.
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 distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 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 tête enseignante, 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 ».