Real-world outcomes of nivolumab and cabozantinib in metastatic renal cell carcinoma: results from the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium.

Objectives: In the present study, we explored the real-world efficacy of the immuno-oncology checkpoint inhibitor nivolumab and the tyrosine kinase inhibitor cabozantinib in the second-line setting. Methods: Using the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (imdc) dataset, a retrospective analysis of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mrcc) treated with nivolumab or cabozantinib in the second line after prior therapy targeted to the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (vegfr) was performed. Baseline characteristics and imdc risk factors were collected. Overall survival (os) and time to treatment failure (ttf) were calculated using Kaplan-Meier curves. Overall response rates (orrs) were determined for each therapy. Multivariable Cox regression analysis was performed to determine survival differences between cabozantinib and nivolumab treatment. Results: The analysis included 225 patients treated with nivolumab and 53 treated with cabozantinib. No significant difference in median os was observed: 22.10 months [95% confidence interval (ci): 17.18 months to not reached] with nivolumab and 23.70 months (95% ci: 15.52 months to not reached) with cabozantinib (p = 0.61). The ttf was also similar at 6.90 months (95% ci: 4.60 months to 9.20 months) with nivolumab and 7.39 months (95% ci: 5.52 months to 12.85 months) with cabozantinib (p = 0.20). The adjusted hazard ratio (hr) for nivolumab compared with cabozantinib was 1.30 (95% ci: 0.73 to 2.3), p = 0.38. When adjusted by imdc criteria and age, the hr was 1.32 (95% ci: 0.74 to 2.38), p = 0.35. Conclusions: Real-world imdc data indicate comparable os and ttf for nivolumab and cabozantinib. Both agents are reasonable therapeutic options for patients progressing after initial first-line vegfr-targeted therapy.

The physician's Achilles heel-surviving an adverse event.

Background: Of hospitalized patients in Canada, 7.5% experience an adverse event (ae). Physicians whose patients experience aes often become second victims of the incident. The present study is the first to evaluate how physicians in Canada cope with aes occurring in their patients. Methods: Survey participants included oncologists, surgeons, and trainees at the Foothills Medical Centre, Calgary, AB. The surveys were administered through REDCap (Research Electronic Data Capture, version 9.0: REDCap Consortium, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, U.S.A.). The Brief cope (Coping Orientation to Problems Experienced) Inventory, the ies-r (Impact of Event Scale-Revised), the Causal Dimension Scale, and the Institutional Punitive Response scale were used to evaluate coping strategies, prevalence of post-traumatic stress, and institutional culture with respect to aes. Results: Of 51 responses used for the analysis, 30 (58.8%) came from surgeons and 21 (41.2%) came from medical specialists. On the ies-r, 54.9% of respondents scored 24 or higher, which has been correlated with clinically concerning post-traumatic stress. Individuals with a score of 24 or higher were more likely to report self-blame (p = 0.00026) and venting (p = 0.042). Physicians who perceive institutional support to be poor reported significant post-traumatic stress (p = 0.023). On multivariable logistic regression modelling, self-blame was associated with an ies-r score of 24 or higher (p = 0.0031). No significant differences in ies-r scores of 24 or higher were observed between surgeons and non-surgeons (p = 0.15).The implications of aes for physicians, patients, and the health care system are enormous. More than 50% of our respondents showed emotional pathology related to an ae. Higher levels of self-blame, venting, and perception of inadequate institutional support were factors predicting increased post-traumatic stress after a patient ae. Conclusions: Our study identifies a desperate need to establish effective institutional supports to help health care professionals recognize and deal with the emotional toll resulting from aes.