Duke Cancer Institute, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina.
Duke Cancer Institute, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina.
J Thorac Oncol. 2018 Dec;13(12):1842-1850. doi: 10.1016/j.jtho.2018.09.007. Epub 2018 Oct 9.
Although metastatic NSCLC is widely treated in both academic centers (ACs) and community-based centers (CCs), it is unclear whether outcomes are similar across both settings. A growing variety of chemotherapies and targeted agents for an increasingly histology- and molecular-based treatment strategy could provide an advantage to patients treated in ACs. Using the National Cancer Database, we investigated whether treatment at ACs was associated with a survival advantage in metastatic NSCLC.
We conducted a retrospective analysis of the National Cancer Database after the introduction of novel NSCLC chemotherapy agents from 1998 to 2010. The primary outcome was 2-year survival, which was analyzed by using a multivariable regression model controlling for age, year of diagnosis, sex, primary payer, histologic type, facility type (AC versus CC), and an interaction term allowing a time-based comparison of survival between ACs and CCs. Alpha was set to 0.001 because of the size of the data set.
There were 193,279 patients included in this study. The percentage of patients achieving 2-year survival was higher in ACs versus in CCs in 1998 (11.5% versus 9.2% [+2.3%]), and by 2010, the difference had increased to 17.4% versus 13.1% (+4.3%). Multivariable analysis confirmed a significant relative increase in 2-year survival associated with ACs versus with CCs from 1998 to 2010 (p = 0.0005). A histology-dependent survival difference was also noted in adenocarcinoma versus in squamous cell carcinoma (10.2% versus 9.9% in 1998 [+0.3%], increasing to 17.3% versus 10.1% in 2010 [+7.2%]). Adenocarcinoma survival also varied by treatment facility, with the difference in 2-year survival in ACs versus in CCs increasing from 12.3% versus 9.1% (+3.2%) in 1998 to 20.5% versus 15.5% (+5%) in 2010, with a trend toward significance in our multivariable model (p = 0.005).
A greater increase in survival was noted in ACs than in CCs over this time period, and it was particularly pronounced among patients with adenocarcinoma versus in those with squamous cell carcinoma. Given the known advances in adenocarcinoma treatment compared with in squamous cell lung cancer over this time period, our study suggests that potential treatment-related disparities may exist between ACs and CCs. Further study will be needed to validate this disparity in health care and address opportunities to improve survival in patients with stage IV NSCLC across treatment settings.
尽管转移性非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)在学术中心(AC)和社区基础中心(CC)中均得到广泛治疗,但两种治疗环境下的疗效是否相似尚不清楚。越来越多的化疗药物和靶向药物用于基于组织学和分子的治疗策略,这可能为 AC 治疗的患者带来优势。本研究使用国家癌症数据库(National Cancer Database),调查转移性 NSCLC 患者在 AC 治疗是否与生存获益相关。
本研究在新型 NSCLC 化疗药物于 1998 年至 2010 年上市后,对国家癌症数据库进行了回顾性分析。主要结局为 2 年生存率,通过多变量回归模型进行分析,模型中控制了年龄、诊断年份、性别、主要支付者、组织学类型、治疗机构类型(AC 与 CC)以及允许 AC 与 CC 之间基于时间的生存比较的交互项。由于数据集较大,α 值设定为 0.001。
本研究共纳入 193279 例患者。1998 年,AC 组患者的 2 年生存率高于 CC 组(11.5%比 9.2%[+2.3%]),到 2010 年,这一差异增加到 17.4%比 13.1%(+4.3%)。多变量分析证实,1998 年至 2010 年,AC 治疗与 CC 治疗相比,2 年生存率显著升高(p=0.0005)。腺癌与鳞状细胞癌之间也存在生存差异(1998 年腺癌为 10.2%,鳞状细胞癌为 9.9%[+0.3%],到 2010 年腺癌为 17.3%,鳞状细胞癌为 10.1%[+7.2%])。腺癌的生存也因治疗机构而异,AC 与 CC 之间 2 年生存率的差异从 1998 年的 12.3%比 9.1%(+3.2%)增加到 2010 年的 20.5%比 15.5%(+5%),在多变量模型中具有统计学意义(p=0.005)。
与 CC 相比,AC 治疗的患者生存率在这一时期有更大的提高,在腺癌患者中比在鳞状细胞癌患者中更为显著。鉴于在此期间,与鳞状细胞肺癌相比,腺癌的治疗有了显著的进步,我们的研究表明,AC 和 CC 之间可能存在潜在的治疗相关差异。需要进一步的研究来验证这种医疗保健方面的差异,并确定改善 IV 期 NSCLC 患者治疗环境下生存的机会。