Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 5 de 5
Filtrar
1.
Eur J Cancer ; 191: 112966, 2023 09.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37542936

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: In patients with advanced ovarian cancer, the modelled CA-125 ELIMination rate constant K (KELIM) is an early indicator of the tumour intrinsic chemosensitivity. We assessed the prognostic and surrogate values of KELIM with respect to those of surgery outcome (based on post-operative residual lesions) in the Gynaecologic Cancer Intergroup (GCIG) individual patient data meta-analysis MAOV (Meta-Analysis in OVarian cancer) built before the emergence of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors. METHODS: The dataset was split into learning and validation cohorts (ratio 1:2). The individual modelled KELIM values were estimated, standardised by the median value, then scored as unfavourable (<1.0) or favourable (≥1.0). Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) analyses were performed with a two-step meta-analytic approach and surrogacy through a two-level meta-analytic model. RESULTS: KELIM was assessed in 5884 patients from eight first-line trials (learning, 1962; validation, 3922). A favourable KELIM score was significantly associated with longer OS (validation set, median, 78.8 versus 28.4 months, hazard-ratios [HR] 0.46, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.41-0.50, C-index 0.68), and longer PFS (validation set, median 30.5 versus 9.8 months, HR 0.49, 95% CI, 0.45-0.54, C-index 0.68), as were International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage and debulking surgery outcome. Three prognostic groups were identified based on the surgery outcome and KELIM score, with large differences in OS (105.1, ∼45.0, and 22.1 months) and PFS (58.1, ∼15.0, and 8.0 months). Surrogacy for OS and for PFS was not established. CONCLUSION: KELIM is an independent prognostic biomarker for survival, complementary to surgery outcome, representing a new determinant of first-line treatment success.


Assuntos
Antineoplásicos , Neoplasias Ovarianas , Humanos , Feminino , Inibidores de Poli(ADP-Ribose) Polimerases/uso terapêutico , Antígeno Ca-125 , Intervalo Livre de Doença , Antineoplásicos/uso terapêutico , Neoplasias Ovarianas/tratamento farmacológico , Neoplasias Ovarianas/cirurgia
2.
Cancers (Basel) ; 15(6)2023 Mar 17.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36980708

RESUMO

(1) Background: Cancer antigen 125 (CA-125) is a protein produced by ovarian cancer cells that is used for patients' monitoring. However, the best ways to analyze its decline and prognostic role are poorly quantified. (2) Methods: We leveraged individual patient data from the Gynecologic Cancer Intergroup (GCIG) meta-analysis (N = 5573) to compare different approaches summarizing the early trajectory of CA-125 before the prediction time (called the landmark time) at 3 or 6 months after treatment initiation in order to predict overall survival. These summaries included observed and estimated measures obtained by a linear mixed model (LMM). Their performances were evaluated by 10-fold cross-validation with the Brier score and the area under the ROC (AUC). (3) Results: The estimated value and the last observed value at 3 months were the best measures used to predict overall survival, with an AUC of 0.75 CI 95% [0.70; 0.80] at 24 and 36 months and 0.74 [0.69; 0.80] and 0.75 [0.69; 0.80] at 48 months, respectively, considering that CA-125 over 6 months did not improve the AUC, with 0.74 [0.68; 0.78] at 24 months and 0.71 [0.65; 0.76] at 36 and 48 months. (4) Conclusions: A 3-month surveillance provided reliable individual information on overall survival until 48 months for patients receiving first-line chemotherapy.

3.
JAMA Netw Open ; 3(1): e1918939, 2020 01 03.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31922558

RESUMO

Importance: The Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup (GCIG) recommended that progression-free survival (PFS) can serve as a primary end point instead of overall survival (OS) in advanced ovarian cancer. Evidence is lacking for the validity of PFS as a surrogate marker of OS in the modern era of different treatment types. Objective: To evaluate whether PFS is a surrogate end point for OS in patients with advanced ovarian cancer. Data Sources: In September 2016, a comprehensive search of publications in MEDLINE was conducted for randomized clinical trials of systematic treatment in patients with newly diagnosed ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer. The GCIG groups were also queried for potentially completed but unpublished trials. Study Selection: Studies with a minimum sample size of 60 patients published since 2001 with PFS and OS rates available were eligible. Investigational treatments considered included initial, maintenance, and intensification therapy consisting of agents delivered at a higher dose and/or frequency compared with that in the control arm. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Using the meta-analytic approach on randomized clinical trials published from January 1, 2001, through September 25, 2016, correlations between PFS and OS at the individual level were estimated using the Kendall τ model; between-treatment effects on PFS and OS at the trial level were estimated using the Plackett copula bivariate (R2) model. Criteria for PFS surrogacy required R2 ≥ 0.80 at the trial level. Analysis was performed from January 7 through March 20, 2019. Main Outcomes and Measures: Overall survival and PFS based on measurement of cancer antigen 125 levels confirmed by radiological examination results or by combined GCIG criteria. Results: In this meta-analysis of 17 unique randomized trials of standard (n = 7), intensification (n = 5), and maintenance (n = 5) chemotherapies or targeted treatments with data from 11 029 unique patients (median age, 58 years [range, 18-88 years]), a high correlation was found between PFS and OS at the individual level (τ = 0.724; 95% CI, 0.717-0.732), but a low correlation was found at the trial level (R2 = 0.24; 95% CI, 0-0.59). Subgroup analyses led to similar results. In the external validation, 14 of the 16 hazard ratios for OS in the published reports fell within the 95% prediction interval from PFS. Conclusions and Relevance: This large meta-analysis of individual patient data did not establish PFS as a surrogate end point for OS in first-line treatment of advanced ovarian cancer, but the analysis was limited by the narrow range of treatment effects observed or by poststudy treatment. These results suggest that if PFS is chosen as a primary end point, OS must be measured as a secondary end point.


Assuntos
Intervalo Livre de Doença , Neoplasias Ovarianas/mortalidade , Intervalo Livre de Progressão , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Biomarcadores/análise , Feminino , Humanos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Neoplasias Ovarianas/terapia , Modelos de Riscos Proporcionais , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Adulto Jovem
4.
JAMA Oncol ; 6(2): 206-216, 2020 02 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31830233

RESUMO

Importance: Both α-emitting and ß-emitting bone-targeted radioisotopes (RIs) have been developed to treat men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). Only 1 phase 3 randomized clinical trial has demonstrated an overall survival (OS) benefit from an α-emitting RI, radium 223 (223Ra), vs standard of care. Yet no head-to-head comparison has been done between α-emitting and ß-emitting RIs. Objective: To assess OS in men with bone metastases from CRPC treated with bone-targeted RIs and to compare the effects of α-emitting RIs with ß-emitting RIs. Data Sources: PubMed, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, and meeting proceedings between January 1993 and June 2013 were reviewed. Key terms included randomized trials, radioisotopes, radiopharmaceuticals, and prostate cancer. Data were collected, checked, and analyzed from February 2017 to October 2018. Study Selection: Selected trials included patients with prostate cancer, recruited more than 50 patients from January 1993 to June 2013, compared RI use with no RI use (placebo, external radiotherapy, or chemotherapy), and were randomized. Patients were diagnosed with histologically proven prostate cancer and disease progression after both surgical or chemical castration and have evidence of bone metastasis. Nine randomized clinical trials were identified as eligible, but 3 were excluded for insufficient data. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Individual patient data were requested for each eligible trial, and all data were checked with a standard procedure. The log-rank test stratified by trial was used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs), and a similar fixed-effects (FE) model was used to estimate odds ratios (ORs). The between-trial heterogeneity of treatment effects was evaluated by Cochran test and I2 and was accounted by a random-effects (RE) model. Main Outcomes and Measures: Overall survival; secondary outcomes were symptomatic skeletal event (SSE)-free survival and adverse events. Results: Based on 6 randomized clinical trials including 2081 patients, RI use was significantly associated with OS compared with no RI use (HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.77-0.95; P = .004) with high heterogeneity (χ25 = 24.46; P < .001; I2 = 80%), but this association disappeared when using an RE model (HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.61-1.06; P = .12; τ2 = 0.08). The heterogeneity is explained both by the type of RI and by the inclusion of 2 outlier trials that included 275 patients; the OS benefit was significantly higher with the α-emitting RI 223Ra (HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.58-0.83) but not significant with the ß-emitting RI strontium-89 (HR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.84-1.10) (P for interaction = .004). Excluding the outlier trials led to an overall HR of 0.82 (95% CI, 0.73-0.92; P < .001) (between-trial heterogeneity: χ23 = 6.51; P = .09; I2 = 54%) using an FE model and an HR of 0.80 (95% CI, 0.65-0.99; P = .04; τ2 = 0.02) using an RE model. The HR for SSE-free survival was 0.81 (95% CI, 0.69-0.93; P = .004) (between-trial heterogeneity: χ23 = 6.71; P = .08; I2 = 55%) when using an FE model and was 0.76 (95% CI, 0.58-1.01; P = .06; τ2 = 0.04) when using an RE model. There were more hematological toxic effects with RI use compared with no RI use (OR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.17-1.88; P = .001). Conclusions and Relevance: In metastatic CRPC, a significant improvement of OS and SSE-free survival was obtained with bone-targeted α-emitting but not ß-emitting RIs. Caution is necessary for generalizability of these results, given the between-trial heterogeneity.


Assuntos
Neoplasias Ósseas/mortalidade , Neoplasias de Próstata Resistentes à Castração/mortalidade , Radioisótopos/uso terapêutico , Compostos Radiofarmacêuticos/uso terapêutico , Neoplasias Ósseas/radioterapia , Neoplasias Ósseas/secundário , Humanos , Masculino , Neoplasias de Próstata Resistentes à Castração/patologia , Neoplasias de Próstata Resistentes à Castração/radioterapia , Radioisótopos/efeitos adversos , Compostos Radiofarmacêuticos/efeitos adversos , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Análise de Sobrevida , Resultado do Tratamento
5.
Clin Cancer Res ; 26(4): 787-792, 2020 02 15.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31757876

RESUMO

The generation of antibodies following exposure to therapeutic drugs has been widely studied, however in oncology, data in relation to their clinical relevance are limited. Antidrug antibodies (ADAs) can cause a decrease in the amount of drug available, resulting in some cases in decreased antitumor activity and a consequent impact on clinical outcomes. Several immunologic factors can influence the development of ADAs, and in addition, the sensitivity of the different testing methods used in different studies can vary, representing an additional potential confounding factor. The reported frequency of ADA-positive patients following treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors varies from as low as 1.5% for pembrolizumab to 54% for atezolizumab. This latter drug is the only immune checkpoint inhibitor to have undergone an expanded analysis of the clinical implications of ADAs, but with discordant results. Given that immune checkpoint inhibitors can modify the immune response and potentially impact ADA formation, data from published as well as prospective trials need to be evaluated for a better understanding of the clinical implications of ADAs in this setting.


Assuntos
Anticorpos Monoclonais/imunologia , Anticorpos/imunologia , Antineoplásicos Imunológicos/imunologia , Neoplasias/tratamento farmacológico , Neoplasias/imunologia , Anticorpos Monoclonais/administração & dosagem , Formação de Anticorpos/efeitos dos fármacos , Antineoplásicos Imunológicos/administração & dosagem , Resistencia a Medicamentos Antineoplásicos , Humanos , Neoplasias/patologia , Prognóstico
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA