These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed


  • Title: A nomogram including baseline prognostic factors to estimate the activity of second-line therapy for advanced urothelial carcinoma.
    Author: Pond GR, Agarwal N, Bellmunt J, Choueiri TK, Qu A, Fougeray R, Vaughn D, James ND, Salhi Y, Albers P, Niegisch G, Galsky MD, Wong YN, Ko YJ, Stadler WM, O'Donnell PH, Sridhar SS, Vogelzang NJ, Necchi A, Di Lorenzo G, Sternberg CN, Mehta A, Sonpavde G.
    Journal: BJU Int; 2014 May; 113(5b):E137-43. PubMed ID: 24219029.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVE: To study the impact of the prognostic factors liver metastasis (LM), anaemia (haemoglobin [Hb] <10 g/dL), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG-PS) ≥1 and time from previous chemotherapy (TFPC) on the activity of second-line therapy for advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Twelve phase II trials evaluating second-line chemotherapy and/or biological characteristics (n = 748) in patients with progressive disease were pooled. Progression-free survival (PFS) was defined as tumour progression or death from any cause. The PFS rate at 6 months (PFS6) was defined from the date of registration and calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Response rate (RR) was defined using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) 1.0. A nomogram predicting PFS6 was constructed using the rms software package in R (http://www.r-project.org). RESULTS: Data regarding progression, anaemia, LM, ECOG-PS and TFPC were available from 570 patients in nine phase II trials. The overall median PFS was 2.7 months, PFS6 was 22.2% (95% confidence interval 18.8-25.9) and the RR was 17.5% (95% CI: 14.5-20.9%). For every unit increase in risk group, the hazard of progression in 6 months increased by 41% and the odds of response decreased by 48%. A nomogram was constructed to predict PFS6 on an individual patient level. The model was internally validated and was shown to have acceptable calibration performance. CONCLUSIONS: The RR and PFS6 vary as a function of baseline prognostic factors in patients receiving second-line therapy for advanced UC. A nomogram incorporating prognostic factors facilitates the evaluation of outcomes across phase II trials enrolling heterogeneous populations and helps select suitable agents for phase III testing.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]