Cargando…

Influence of treatment access on survival of metastatic renal cell carcinoma in brazilian cancer center

BACKGROUND: Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) and immunotherapy improved survival in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Disparities in treatment access are present in healthcare systems globally. The aim of this study was to analyze survival outcomes of mRCC patients treated with first-line TKIs...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Leite, Luciana de M., Bergerot, Paulo G., Dettino, Aldo L. A., Augusto R., José, Zequi, Stenio de C., Formiga, Maria Nirvana da C.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7993945/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33621005
http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2020.0443
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) and immunotherapy improved survival in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Disparities in treatment access are present in healthcare systems globally. The aim of this study was to analyze survival outcomes of mRCC patients treated with first-line TKIs in the public (PHS) and private (PrS) health system in a Brazilian Cancer Center. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Records from all mRCC patients treated with first-line TKIs from 2007-2018 were reviewed retrospectively. Categorial variables were compared by Fisher's exact test. Survival was estimated by Kaplan-Maier method and survival curves were compared using the log-rank test. Prognostic factors were adjusted by Cox regression model. RESULTS: Of the 171 eligible patients, 37 (21.6%) were PHS patients and 134 (78.4%) were PrS patients. There were no difference in age, gender, or sites of metastasis. PHS patients had worse performance status (ECOG ≥2, 35.1% vs. 13.5%, p=0.007), poorer risk score (IMDC poor risk, 32.4% vs. 16.4%, p=0.09), and less nephrectomies (73% vs. 92.5%, p=0.003) than PrS patients. Median lines of therapy was one for PHS versus two for PrS patients (p=0.03). Median overall survival (OS) was 16.5 versus 26.5 months (p=0.002) and progression-free survival (PFS), 8.4 versus 11 months (p=0.01) for PHS and PrS patients, respectively. After adjusting for known prognostic factors on multivariate analysis, PHS patients still had a higher risk of death (HR: 1.61, 95% CI: 1.01-2.56, p=0.047). CONCLUSION: Patients with mRCC treated via the PHS had worse overall survival, possibly due to poorer prognosis at presentation and less drug access.