Dataset Information

Racial disparities in overall survival among renal cell carcinoma patients with young age and small tumors.

ABSTRACT: We examined the overall survival of a population-based cohort of black and white patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) to better understand the paradox of poorer RCC survival despite more frequent diagnosis at lower stage among blacks. Renal cell carcinoma patients (699 white, 252 black) diagnosed between 2002 and 2007 in metropolitan Detroit were followed for vital status in the Detroit Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) registry. Hazard ratios (HR) of death for black versus white race and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using Cox proportional hazard models stratified by demographic and prognostic factors, and in models successively adjusted for clinical factors, comorbidities, and socioeconomic factors. Mean follow-up time was 88.4 months for white patients and 89.6 months for black patients (P = 0.49), with 202 white deaths and 89 black deaths (P = 0.06). While black race was weakly associated with poorer overall survival (P = 0.053), black patients <65 years at diagnosis or with tumors <4 cm in size had significantly poorer survival than their white counterparts (HR = 1.46, 95% CI 1.06-2.01 and HR = 2.15, 95% CI 1.51-3.06, respectively). The racial disparities within these two subgroups were minimally affected by adjustment for clinical/treatment factors (HR = 1.49, 95% CI 1.01-2.19 and HR = 1.95, 95% CI 1.27-2.99), but were substantially reduced when renal-relevant comorbidities were added (HR = 1.30, 95% CI 0.89-1.91 and HR = 1.76, 95% CI 1.16-2.66). After further adjustment for socioeconomic factors, the survival disparities were essentially null (HR = 1.14, 95% CI 0.71-1.85 and HR = 1.15, 95% CI 0.67-1.98). In this population-based sample of RCC patients, younger black patients and those with small tumors had poorer overall survival than whites. The disparity was explained primarily by racial differences in renal-relevant comorbidities, particularly chronic renal failure, and socioeconomic deprivation. Future research should focus on younger patients and those with smaller tumors to better understand how these factors may contribute to the survival disparity.

SUBMITTER: Schwartz K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4735764 | biostudies-other | 2016 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Kidney cancer ranks among the top 10 cancers in the United States. Although it affects both male and female populations, it is more common in males. The prevalence rate of renal cell carcinoma (RCC), which represents about 85% of kidney cancers, has been increasing gradually in many developed countries. Family history has been considered as one of the most relevant risk factors for kidney cancer, although most forms of an inherited predisposition for RCC only account for less than four percent. Lifestyle and other factors such as occupational exposure, high blood pressure, poor diet, and heavy cigarette smoking are highly associated with its incidence and mortality rates. In the United States, White populations have the lowest prevalence of RCC compared to other ethnic groups, while Black Americans suffer disproportionally from the adverse effects of RCC. Hence, this review article aims at identifying the major risk factors associated with RCC and highlighting the new therapeutic approaches for its control/prevention. To achieve this specific aim, articles in peer-reviewed journals with a primary focus on risk factors related to kidney cancer and on strategies to reduce RCC were identified. The review was systematically conducted by searching the databases of MEDLINE, PUBMED Central, and Google Scholar libraries for original articles. From the search, we found that the incidence and mortality rates of RCC are strongly associated with four main risk factors, including family history (genetics), lifestyle (poor diet, cigarette smoking, excess alcohol drinking), environment (community where people live), and occupation (place where people work). In addition, unequal access to improvement in RCC cancer treatment, limited access to screening and diagnosis, and limited access to kidney transplant significantly contribute to the difference observed in survival rate between African Americans and Caucasians. There is also scientific evidence suggesting that some physicians contribute to racial disparities when performing kidney transplant among minority populations. New therapeutic measures should be taken to prevent or reduce RCC, especially among African Americans, the most vulnerable population group.

Project description:Renal-cell carcinoma (RCC) affects over 330,000 new patients every year, of whom 1/3 present with metastatic RCC (mRCC) at diagnosis. Most mRCC patients treated with a first-line agent relapse within 1 year and need second-line therapy. The present study aims to compare overall survival (OS) between nivolumab and cabozantinib from two recent pivotal studies comparing, respectively, each one of the two emerging treatments against everolimus in patients who relapse following first-line treatment. Comparison is traditionally carried out using the Bucher method, which assumes proportional hazard. Since OS curves intersected in one of the pivotal studies, models not assuming proportional hazards were also considered to refine the comparison. Four Bayesian parametric survival network meta-analysis models were implemented on overall survival (OS) data digitized from the Kaplan-Meier curves reported in the studies. Three models allowing hazard ratios (HR) to vary over time were assessed against a fixed-HR model. The Bucher method favored cabozantinib, with a fixed HR for OS vs. nivolumab of 1.09 (95% confidence interval: [0.77, 1.54]). However, all models with time-varying HR showed better fits than the fixed-HR model. The log-logistic model fitted the data best, exhibiting a HR for OS initially favoring cabozantinib, the trend inverting to favor nivolumab after month 5 (95% credible interval <1 from 10 months). The initial probability of cabozantinib conferring superior OS was 54%, falling to 41.5% by month 24. Numerical differences in study-adjusted OS estimates between the two treatments remained small. This study evidences that HR for OS of nivolumab vs. cabozantinib varies over time, favoring cabozantinib in the first months of treatment but nivolumab afterwards, a possible indication that patients with poor prognosis benefit more from cabozantinib in terms of survival, nivolumab benefiting patients with better prognosis. More evidence, including real-world observational data, is needed to compare effectiveness between cabozantinib and nivolumab.

Dataset Information

Racial disparities in overall survival among renal cell carcinoma patients with young age and small tumors.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets