Dataset Information

Overall survival according to immunotherapy and radiation treatment for metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer: a National Cancer Database analysis.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Preclinical studies suggest enhanced anti-tumor activity with combined radioimmunotherapy. We hypothesized that radiation (RT)?+?immunotherapy would associate with improved overall survival (OS) compared to immunotherapy or chemotherapy alone for patients with newly diagnosed metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS:The National Cancer Database was queried for patients with stage IV NSCLC receiving chemotherapy or immunotherapy from 2013 to 2014. RT modality was classified as stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) to intra- and/or extracranial sites or non-SRT external beam RT (EBRT). OS was analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS:In total, 44,498 patients were included (13% immunotherapy, 46.8% EBRT, and 4.7% SRT). On multivariate analysis, immunotherapy (hazard ratio [HR]:0.81, 95% confidence interval [CI]:0.78-0.83) and SRT (HR:0.78, 95%CI:0.70-0.78) independently associated with improved OS; however, the interaction term for SRT?+?immunotherapy was insignificant (p?=?0.89). For immunotherapy patients, the median OS for no RT, EBRT, and SRT was 14.5, 10.9, and 18.2?months, respectively (p?< 0.0001), and EBRT (HR:1.37, 95%CI:1.29-1.46) and SRT (HR:0.78, 95%CI:0.66-0.93) associated with OS on multivariate analysis. In the SRT subset, median OS for immunotherapy and chemotherapy was 18.2 and 14.3?months, respectively (p?=?0.004), with immunotherapy (HR:0.82, 95%CI:0.69-0.98) associating with OS on multivariate analysis. Furthermore, for patients receiving SRT, biologically effective dose (BED)?>?60?Gy was independently associated with improved OS (HR:0.79, 95%CI:0.70-0.90, p?< 0.0001) on multivariate analysis with a significant interaction between BED and systemic treatment (p?=?0.008). CONCLUSIONS:Treatment with SRT associated with improved OS for patients with metastatic NSCLC irrespective of systemic treatment. The high survival for patients receiving SRT?+?immunotherapy strongly argues for evaluation in randomized trials.

SUBMITTER: Foster CC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6348608 | biostudies-other | 2019 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Overall survival according to immunotherapy and radiation treatment for metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer: a National Cancer Database analysis.

Foster Corey C CC Sher David J DJ Rusthoven Chad G CG Verma Vivek V Spiotto Michael T MT Weichselbaum Ralph R RR Koshy Matthew M

Radiation oncology (London, England) 20190128 1

<h4>Background</h4>Preclinical studies suggest enhanced anti-tumor activity with combined radioimmunotherapy. We hypothesized that radiation (RT) + immunotherapy would associate with improved overall survival (OS) compared to immunotherapy or chemotherapy alone for patients with newly diagnosed metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).<h4>Methods</h4>The National Cancer Database was queried for patients with stage IV NSCLC receiving chemotherapy or immunotherapy from 2013 to 2014. RT modali ...[more]

PMID: 30691492

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeImmunotherapy (IO) has significantly improved outcomes in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Preclinical evidence suggests that responses to IO may be potentiated via immunomodulatory effects of stereotactic radiation therapy (SRT). We hypothesized that clinical outcomes from the National Cancer Database (NCDB) would demonstrate improved overall survival (OS) in patients with mRCC receiving IO + SRT versus IO alone.Methods and materialsPatients with mRCC receiving first-line IO ± SRT were identified from the NCDB. Conventional radiation therapy was allowed in the IO alone cohort. The primary endpoint was OS stratified by the receipt of SRT (IO + SRT vs IO alone). Secondary endpoints included OS stratified by the presence of brain metastases (BM) and timing of SRT (before or after IO). Survival was estimated using Kaplan-Meier methodology and compared via the log-rank test.ResultsOf 644 eligible patients, 63 (9.8%) received IO + SRT, and 581 (90.2%) received IO alone. Median follow-up time was 17.7 months (range, 2-24 months). Sites treated with SRT included the brain (71.4%), lung/chest (7.9%), bones (7.9%), spine (6.3%), and other (6.3%). OS was 74.4% versus 65.0% at 1 year and 71.0% versus 59.4% at 2 years for the IO + SRT and IO alone groups, respectively, although this difference did not reach statistical significance (log-rank P = .1077). In patients with BM, however, 1-year OS (73.0% vs 54.7%) and 2-year OS (70.8% vs 51.4%) was significantly higher in those receiving IO + SRT versus IO alone, respectively (pairwise P = .0261). Timing of SRT (before or after IO) did not influence OS (log-rank P = .3185).ConclusionsPatients with BM secondary to mRCC had prolonged OS with the addition of SRT to IO. Factors such as International mRCC Database Consortium risk stratification, oligometastatic tumor burden, SRT dose/fractionation, and utilization of doublet therapy should be considered in future analyses to better identify patients who may benefit from combined IO + SRT. Further prospective studies are warranted.

Project description:ImportanceCancer registries are important real-world data sources consisting of data abstraction from the medical record; however, patients with unknown or missing data are underrepresented in studies that use such data sources.ObjectiveTo assess the prevalence of missing data and its association with overall survival among patients with cancer.Design, setting, and participantsIn this retrospective cohort study, all variables within the National Cancer Database were reviewed for missing or unknown values for patients with the 3 most common cancers in the US who received diagnoses from January 1, 2006, to December 31, 2015. The prevalence of patient records with missing data and the association with overall survival were assessed. Data analysis was performed from February to August 2020.ExposuresAny missing data field within a patient record among 63 variables of interest from more than 130 total variables in the National Cancer Database.Main outcomes and measuresPrevalence of missing data in the medical records of patients with cancer and associated 2-year overall survival.ResultsA total of 1 198 749 patients with non-small cell lung cancer (mean [SD] age, 68.5 [10.9] years; 628 811 men [52.5%]), 2 120 775 patients with breast cancer (mean [SD] age, 61.0 [13.3] years; 2 101 758 women [99.1%]), and 1 158 635 patients with prostate cancer (mean [SD] age, 65.2 [9.0] years; 100% men) were included in the analysis. Among those with non-small cell lung cancer, 851 295 patients (71.0%) were missing data for variables of interest; 2-year overall survival was 33.2% for patients with missing data and 51.6% for patients with complete data (P < .001). Among those with breast cancer, 1 161 096 patients (54.7%) were missing data for variables of interest; 2-year overall survival was 93.2% for patients with missing data and 93.9% for patients with complete data (P < .001). Among those with prostate cancer, 460 167 patients (39.7%) were missing data for variables of interest; 2-year overall survival was 91.0% for patients with missing data and 95.6% for patients with complete data (P < .001).Conclusions and relevanceThis study found that within a large cancer registry-based real-world data source, there was a high prevalence of missing data that were unable to be ascertained from the medical record. The prevalence of missing data among patients with cancer was associated with heterogeneous differences in overall survival. Improvements in documentation and data quality are necessary to make optimal use of real-world data for clinical advancements.

Project description:ObjectiveThere are no randomized data to support the use of postoperative radiation for salivary gland malignancies. This study uses the National Cancer Database (NCDB) to describe the epidemiology of salivary gland cancer patients and to investigate whether treatment with adjuvant radiation improves overall survival.Methods and materialsA total of 8243 patients diagnosed with a major salivary gland cancer were identified from the NCDB. All patients received primary surgical resection of their malignancy. Patients were risk-stratified by adverse features, and overall survival rates were determined. Patients were considered high risk if they had extracapsular extension and/or positive margin after resection. Patients were considered intermediate risk if they did not meet the criteria for high risk but had pT3-T4 disease, pN+ disease, lymphovascular space invasion, adenoid cystic histology, or grade 2-3 disease. Patients who did not meet criteria for high or intermediate risk were considered low risk. Overall patient demographics, disease characteristics, treatment factors, and outcomes were summarized with descriptive statistics and analyzed with STATA.ResultsMedian follow-up in this cohort was 42.4 months, with the median age of 58 years. Patients in the high-risk group had greater survival (hazard ratio [HR], 0.76; P = .002; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.64-0.91) if they received adjuvant radiation therapy. In contrast, patients in the intermediate- (HR, 1.01; P = .904; 95% CI, 0.85-1.20) and low-risk groups (HR, 0.85; P = .427; 95% CI, 0.57-1.26) did not experience a survival benefit with adjuvant radiation therapy.ConclusionsThis large analysis compared survival outcomes between observation and adjuvant radiation alone in risk-stratified patients after resection of major salivary glands using a national database. The use of adjuvant radiation for high-risk major salivary gland cancers appears to offer a survival benefit. Although an overall survival benefit was not seen in low- and intermediate-risk salivary gland cancers, this study could not address impact on local control because of the limitations of the NCDB.

Project description:Surgery remains the foundation of curative therapy for non-metastatic breast cancer, but many patients do not undergo surgery. Evidence is limited regarding this population. We sought to assess factors associated with lack of surgery and overall survival (OS) in patients not receiving breast cancer surgery. Retrospective cohort study of patients in the US National Cancer Database treated in 2004-2016. The dataset comprised 2,696,734 patients; excluding patients with unknown surgical status or stage IV, cT0, cTx, or pIS, metastatic or recurrent disease resulted in 1,192,294 patients for analysis. Chi-square and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were used to assess differences between groups. OS was analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method with a Cox proportional hazards model performed to assess associated factors. In total 50,626 (4.3%) did not undergo surgery. Black race, age >50 years, lower income, uninsured or public insurance, and lower education were more prevalent in the non-surgical cohort; this group was also more likely to have more comorbidities, higher disease stage, and more aggressive disease biology. Only 3,689 non-surgical patients (7.3%) received radiation therapy (RT). Median OS time for the non-surgical patients was 58 months (3-year and 5-year OS rates 63% and 49%). Median OS times were longer for patients who received chemotherapy (80 vs 50 (no-chemo) months) and RT (85 vs 56 (no-RT) months). On multivariate analysis, age, race, income, insurance status, comorbidity score, disease stage, tumor subtype, treatment facility type and location, and receipt of RT were associated with OS. On subgroup analysis, receipt of chemotherapy improved OS for patients with triple negative (HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.59-0.75, P < 0.001) and HER2+ (HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.65-0.84, P < 0.001) subgroups while RT improved OS for ER+ (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.64-0.82, P < 0.001) and favorable-disease (ER+, early-stage, age >60) (HR 0.61, 95% CI 0.45-0.83, P = 0.002) subgroups. Approximately 4% of women with breast cancer do not undergo surgery, particularly those with more aggressive disease and lower socioeconomic status. Despite its benefits, RT was underutilized. This study provides a benchmark of survival outcomes for patients who do not undergo surgery and highlights a potential role for use of RT.

Project description:ImportanceUncertainty remains about the relative benefits of primary cytoreductive surgery (PCS) vs neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) for advanced-stage epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC).ObjectiveTo compare overall survival of PCS vs NACT in a large national population of women with advanced-stage EOC.Design, setting, and participantsRetrospective cohort study of women with stage IIIC and IV EOC diagnosed between 2003 and 2011 treated at hospitals across the United States reporting to the National Cancer Data Base. We focused on patients 70 years or younger with a Charlson comorbidity index of 0 who were likely candidates for either treatment.ExposuresInitial treatment approach of PCS vs NACT, examined using an intent-to-treat analysis.Main outcomes and measuresOverall survival, defined as months from cancer diagnosis to death or date of the last contact. We used propensity score matching to compare similar women who underwent PCS and NACT. The association of treatment approach with overall survival was assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method and the log-rank test. We assessed whether the findings were influenced by differences in the prevalence of an unobserved confounder, such as limited performance status (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group 1-2), preoperative disease burden, and BRCA status.ResultsAmong 22 962 patients (mean [SD] age, 56.12 [9.38] years), 19 836 (86.4%) received PCS and 3126 (13.6%) underwent NACT. We matched 2935 patients treated with NACT with similar patients who received PCS. The median follow-up was 56.5 (95% CI, 54.5-59.2) months in the PCS group and 56.3 (95% CI, 54.5-59.8) months in the NACT group in the propensity-matched cohort. Among propensity score-matched groups, the median overall survival was 37.3 (95% CI, 35.2-38.7) months in the PCS group and 32.1 (95% CI, 30.8-34.1) months in the NACT group (P < .001). However, if the NACT group had a higher proportion of women with performance statuses of 1 to 2 compared with those who underwent PCS (60% vs 50%), the association of PCS and improved survival would not be statistically significant.Conclusions and relevancePrimary cytoreductive surgery was associated with improved survival compared with NACT in otherwise healthy women with advanced-stage epithelial ovarian cancer aged 70 years or younger. The lower survival in women who received NACT could be explained by a higher prevalence of limited performance status in women undergoing NACT.

Project description:BackgroundFor metastatic prostate cancer (mPCa), radical prostatectomy (RP) and radiation therapy (RT) may improve overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS). Compared with RT, RP shows significant advantages in improving patient outcomes. External beam radiation therapy (EBRT) even slightly elevates CSM with no statistical difference in OS compared with no local treatment (NLT).ObjectiveTo evaluate OS and CSS after local treatment (LT) (including RP and RT) versus NLT in mPCa. Design, setting, and participants Within the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database (2000-2018), 20098 patients with metastatic prostate cancer were selected in this study, of which 19433 patients had no local treatment, 377 patients with radical prostate treatment, and 288 patients with RT.Outcome measurements and statistical analysisMultivariable competing risks regression analysis after propensity score matching (PSM) was used to calculate CSM. Multivariable Cox regression analysis was used to identify the risk factors. Kaplan-Meier methods were used to calculate OS.Results and limitationsA total of 20098 patients were included: NLT (n = 19433), RP (n=377) and RT (n=288). In a competing risk regression analysis after PSM (ratio 1:1), RP resulted in a significantly lower CSM (hazard ratio [HR] 0.36, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.29-0.45) than NLT, while RT showed a slightly lower CSM (HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.63-0.95). In a competing risk regression analysis after PSM (ratio 1:1), RP led to a lower CSM (HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.41-0.76) versus RT. As for all-cause mortality (ACM), RP (HR 0.37, 95% CI 0.31-0.45) and RT (HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.56-0.79). also showed a downward trend. In terms of OS, RP and RT significantly improved the survival probability compared with NLT, with the effect of RP being more pronounced. Obviously, older age, Gleason scores ≥8, AJCC T3-T4 stage, AJCC N1, AJCC M1b-M1c were all associated with higher CSM (P <0.05). The same results held true for ACM. The limitation of this article is that it is not possible to assess the effect of differences in systemic therapy on CSM in mPCa patients and clinical trials are needed to verify the results.ConclusionsFor patients with mPCa, both RP and RT are beneficial to patients, and the efficacy of RP is better than RT from the perspective of CSM and ACM. Older age, higher gleason scores and the more advanced AJCC TNM stage all put patients at higher risk of dying.Patient summaryA large population-based cancer database showed that in addition to first-line therapy (hormonal treatment), RP and radiotherapy can also benefit patients with mPCa.

Dataset Information

Overall survival according to immunotherapy and radiation treatment for metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer: a National Cancer Database analysis.

Publications

Overall survival according to immunotherapy and radiation treatment for metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer: a National Cancer Database analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets