Manuela Schmidinger1, Renate Pichler2, Wolfgang Loidl3, Thomas Bauernhofer4, Matthias Kretz5, Christoph Tinchon6, Dora Niedersüß-Beke7, Gottfried Pfleger8, Clemens Georg Wiesinger9, Ursula Vogl10, Michael Mitterberger11, Herbert Stöger4, Gennadi Tulchiner2, Franz Kratochvill12, Hanno Gerritsmann12, Bernhard Mraz12, Martin Marszalek13. 1. Medical Oncology, Vienna General Hospital (AKH)-Medizinische Universität Wien, Vienna, Austria. Electronic address: manuela.schmidinger@meduniwien.ac.at. 2. Department of Urology, Medical University Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria. 3. Department of Urology, Ordensklinikum Linz, Barmherzige Schwestern, Linz, Austria. 4. Division of Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Medical University Graz, Graz, Austria. 5. Department of Urology, Salzkammergut-Klinikum Vöcklabruck, Voecklabruck, Austria. 6. Department of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Landeskrankenhaus Leoben, Leoben, Austria. 7. Department of Hematology and Oncology, Wilhelminenspital, Vienna, Austria. 8. Department of Urology, LKH Oberwart, Oberwart, Austria. 9. Department of Urology, Klinikum Wels-Grieskirchen, Wels, Austria. 10. Department of Oncology, St Joseph's Hospital, Vienna, Austria. 11. Department of Urology, University Clinic Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria. 12. Novartis Pharma GmbH, Vienna, Austria. 13. Department of Urology and Andrology, Donauspital, Vienna, Austria.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Treatment decisions in routine clinical practice are based on reports of clinical trials, which represent highly selected populations. Limited studies reported real-world evidences representing routine clinical practices in patients with renal-cell carcinoma (RCC) in Europe. The aim of this retrospective, noninterventional chart review was to collect data on the treatment landscape for patients with advanced/metastatic RCC in routine clinical practice in a broader patient population in Austria. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with advanced/metastatic RCC receiving systemic treatment between June 2010 and June 2016 across 12 centers in Austria were included. Parameters were entered into an electronic case report form from the participating sites via the application Hermesoft electronic data capture system. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were the 2 primary end points. RESULTS: The median PFS and OS were 12 months and 44 months, respectively (first-line PFS was 14 months for pazopanib and 13 months for sunitinib; first-line OS was 44 months for pazopanib and 48 months for sunitinib). Factors influencing the OS were sex, with female patients at a significantly higher risk than male patients (hazard ratio = 1.719), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status > 0 increased the risk twice (hazard ratio = 2.048), and number of metastases > 3 before the first line doubled the risk compared to metastases (hazard ratio = 2.064). CONCLUSION: OS in this retrospective chart review was considerably longer than the previous reports in real-world patients, underlining the benefit of current RCC treatment options in routine clinical practice.
BACKGROUND: Treatment decisions in routine clinical practice are based on reports of clinical trials, which represent highly selected populations. Limited studies reported real-world evidences representing routine clinical practices in patients with renal-cell carcinoma (RCC) in Europe. The aim of this retrospective, noninterventional chart review was to collect data on the treatment landscape for patients with advanced/metastatic RCC in routine clinical practice in a broader patient population in Austria. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with advanced/metastatic RCC receiving systemic treatment between June 2010 and June 2016 across 12 centers in Austria were included. Parameters were entered into an electronic case report form from the participating sites via the application Hermesoft electronic data capture system. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were the 2 primary end points. RESULTS: The median PFS and OS were 12 months and 44 months, respectively (first-line PFS was 14 months for pazopanib and 13 months for sunitinib; first-line OS was 44 months for pazopanib and 48 months for sunitinib). Factors influencing the OS were sex, with female patients at a significantly higher risk than male patients (hazard ratio = 1.719), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status > 0 increased the risk twice (hazard ratio = 2.048), and number of metastases > 3 before the first line doubled the risk compared to metastases (hazard ratio = 2.064). CONCLUSION: OS in this retrospective chart review was considerably longer than the previous reports in real-world patients, underlining the benefit of current RCC treatment options in routine clinical practice.
Authors: S A van Laar; K B Gombert-Handoko; R H H Groenwold; T van der Hulle; L E Visser; D Houtsma; H J Guchelaar; J Zwaveling Journal: Front Pharmacol Date: 2022-03-23 Impact factor: 5.810