Overall survival benefits of advances in NSCLC systemic treatments: Younger versus older adults.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
93 Background: Historically, there has been limited systemic therapy options for older adults with cancer attributed to underlying frailty, co-morbidities, poor functional status, and limited social supports. In the past decade, treatment for advanced NSCLC has changed with increasing availability of novel therapeutics associated with improved tolerability and efficacy, such as targeted therapy and immunotherapy. The study goal is to compare the difference in overall survival (OS) between younger adults and older adults with the introduction of novel therapeutic options. Methods: All patients with stage IV NSCLC referred to BC Cancer in 2009, 2011, 2015 and 2017 were included in the study. One-year time points were chosen based on molecular testing implementation and provincial formulary listing: baseline (2009), EGFR testing (2011), ALK testing (2015) and immunotherapy listing (2017). Age was categorized as younger (< 70 years) and older (≥70 years) adults. Baseline demographics, simplified comorbidity score (SCS ≥9 associated with poor prognosis), disease characteristics, and systemic therapy details (agent, duration, line of therapy) were collected retrospectively. Univariate analysis using X 2 and Fisher’s exact tests were used to compare age groups. OS was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using the log-rank test. Results: 3325 patients with stage IV NSCLC were identified. Baseline characteristics for patients < 70 y; female 51%, non-squamous 62%, ECOG ≥2 50%, SCS ≥9 29% vs patients ≥70 y; female 49%, non-squamous 57%, ECOG ≥2 61%, SCS ≥9 58%. In the four time cohorts 2009/2011/2015/2017, systemic treatment was delivered to < 70 y 44/53/51/52 % vs ≥70 y 23/25/28/30 %. Median OS with BSC for < 70 y 3.1/2.8/2.8/2.5 m vs ≥70 y 3.8/3.3/3.4/3.1 m (p = 0.10). Median OS with systemic treatment for < 70 y 9.0/10.9/13.9/15.5 m (p < 0.001) vs ≥70 y 11.4/11.7/13.9/14.9 m (p < 0.001). Median OS by type of treatment BSC/chemotherapy only/targeted therapy/immunotherapy; < 70 y 2.8/8.9/21.4/20.2 m vs ≥70 y 3.1/10.1/21.5/20.1 m (p < 0.001). Conclusions: In this real-world retrospective review of patients with advanced NSCLC, there was an increased uptake of systemic therapy for both age groups with the introduction of novel therapeutics. Although there was a smaller proportion of older adults who received systemic therapy, those who received treatment had comparable OS to their young counterpart. The benefit of systemic therapy in both age groups was seen across the different types of treatments. This suggests with careful assessment and selection of appropriate candidates, older adults with advanced NSCLC should receive equitable access to systemic therapy.
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 | 0,001 | 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 ».