Literature DB >> 15597098

CYFRA 21-1 level predicts survival in non-small-cell lung cancer patients receiving gefitinib as third-line therapy.

F Barlési1, C Tchouhadjian, C Doddoli, J-P Torre, P Astoul, J-P Kleisbauer.   

Abstract

Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) as gefitinib emerged as an accepted treatment in second- or third-line setting in NSCLC. However, clinical surrogate markers of EGFR-TKI activity in NSCLC patients remain to be identified and we studied the prognostic value of CYFRA 21-1 in this setting. Serum samples from 53 patients with NSCLC receiving gefitinib after failure of at least a platinum-containing regimen were prospectively collected from January 2002 to December 2003. Multivariate analysis demonstrated an independent negative impact on survival for a level of CYFRA 21-1 higher than 3.5 ng ml(-1) (HR=2.45, 95% CI 1.13-5.29; P=0.02). In conclusion, CYFRA 21-1 is a tool available to predict the survival of NSCLC patients receiving gefitinib as third-line therapy in an independent manner. In case of a CYFRA 21-1 level higher than 3.5 ng ml(-1), treatment with gefitinib needs further evaluation giving its relative poor effect on survival.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15597098      PMCID: PMC2361739          DOI: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6602296

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Cancer        ISSN: 0007-0920            Impact factor:   7.640


The prognostic value of CYFRA 21-1 for non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients was recently definitively demonstrated in a meta-analysis in 2063 patients (Pujol ). In the same time, epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) as gefitinib emerged as an accepted treatment in second- or third-line setting in NSCLC (Pfister ). However, clinical surrogate markers of EGFR-TKI activity in NSCLC patients after failure of platinum-containing regimen remain to be identified. So, we conducted a study of the prognostic value of CYFRA 21-1 in NSCLC patients receiving gefitinib after failure of platinum-containing regimen in an expanded access program.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Serum samples from patients with NSCLC receiving gefitinib after failure of at least a platinum-containing regimen were prospectively collected from January 2002 to December 2003. Histological subclassification was carried out according to the World Health Organization classification. Performance Status was estimated using the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) scale. Clinical examination, chest, abdomen and brain-computed tomographic scan were carried out systematically. Serum samples were obtained from each patient before gefitinib therapy. Fresh serum was collected and cooled after sampling, and then stored at −20°C until analysis. All assays were performed using commercial kit (ELSA CYFRA 21-1 CisBiointernational™) blind to clinical information. Serum level of CYFRA 21-1 was considered as elevated when it was superior or equal to 3.5 ng ml−1. Cutoff value of 3.5 ng ml−1 for CYFRA 21-1 was based on previously published results (Reinmuth ). All patients consented to treatment with gefitinib. Survival data were updated in June 2004. One patient was lost. Probability of survival was estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method. Differences between survival were tested by means of log-rank test. A multivariate regression analysis was carried out with Cox's regression using the forward maximum-likelihood method. All variables with a P-value less than 0.20 at the time of univariate analysis were entered into the model. A P-value less than 0.05 was considered as significant.

RESULTS

In all, 53 patients were included in the study (Table 1). Two patients did not received gefitinib due to disease progression and were excluded from analysis. The median age of the 51 patients was 60 years (38–78 years). All the patients were current or former smokers. All the patients received a two-drugs platinum-containing regimen as first line of treatment. A total of 47 (92.1%) received a third-generation drug regimen (gemcitabine, docetaxel or paclitaxel) in both first- and second-line therapy. A skin toxicity of grade 1 and 2 occurred for 11 (21.6%) and two (3.9%) patients, respectively. Diarrhoea occurred for eight patients (15.7%). The median duration of treatment was 3.3 months. The disease control rate was 70.6%, with 11.7% of partial response and 58.9% of stable disease. At the time of analysis, 33 patients were deceased. The median survival time was 4 months (1 to 20+ months).
Table 1

Major clinical and biological factors of the study population

  n (%)
Age <70/⩾70 years38 (74.5)/13(25.5)
Gender women/men16 (31.4)/35 (68.6)
Performance status 0–1/⩾2 (ECOG)37 (72.5)/14 (27.5)
>5% weight loss11 (21.6)
Histology
 Squamous cell carcinoma15 (29.4)
 Adenocarcinoma24 (47.1)
 Large-cell carcinoma12 (23.5)
  
Stagea IIIB/V13 (25.5)/38 (74.5)
Chemotherapy regimens before gefitinib
 230 (58.8)
 315 (29.4)
 ⩾46 (11.8)
  
Leucocytes (G l−1) <10.5/⩾10.542 (82.4)/9 (17.6)
LDH (IU l−1) <500/⩾50037 (72.5)/14 (27.5)
Calcium level (mmol l−1) <2.75/⩾2.7548 (94.1)/3 (5.9)
Hepatic enzymes level (UI l−1) <2 × ULN/⩾2 × ULN46 (90.2)/5 (9.8)
CYFRA 21-1 level (ng ml−1) <3.5/⩾3.538 (74.5)/13 (25.5)

UICC classification; LDH=lactate dehydrogenase; ULN=upper limit of the normal range; ECOG=Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group.

The principal results of univariate analysis are shown in Table 2. Multivariate analysis demonstrated an independent favourable impact on survival for occurrence of a skin reaction (HR=0.28, 95% CI 0.12–0.66; P=0.004) and an independent negative impact on survival for a level of CYFRA 21-1 higher than 3.5 ng ml−1 (HR=2.45, 95% CI 1.13–5.29; P=0.02).
Table 2

Results of univariate analysis (only factors with P<0.02 were reported)

  Median survival (months) P-value
PS <2/⩾27/20.0541
Weight loss (yes/no)2/60.0568
Hepatic enzymes level <2 × ULN/⩾2 × ULN4/20.1165
CYFRA 21-1 level (ng ml−1) <3.5/⩾3.57/20.0208
Leucocytes (G l−1) <10.5/⩾10.54/20.1723
Skin reaction (yes/no)15/30.0056

PS=performance status (ECOG); ULN=upper limit of the normal range.

DISCUSSION

This study highlights the role of CYFRA 21-1 level in assessing prognosis of NSCLC patients receiving gefitinib as third-line therapy (HR for death is 2.45 for patients with CYFRA 21-1 level higher than 3.5 ng ml−1, P=0.02). Giving this result, CYFRA 21-1 could be used as a help in determining patients who beneficiate from treatment with gefitinib. This could be of a paramount importance giving the lack of clinical factors in this setting. Whereas genetic mutations on EGFR gene receptor were identified in tumours of patients responding to gefitinib (Lynch ; Paez ), we also need more easily assessable and clinically available predictive factors for response to gefitinib for daily practice. Using commercial kit, CYFRA 21-1 is easily assessable and its role as prognostic marker alone (Pujol ) or in combination (Barlési ) has been demonstrated. Furthermore, the prognostic value of CYFRA 21-1 in the present study was higher than that of clinical (performance status, weight loss) or biological (leucocytes, liver enzymes) traditional prognostic markers. In addition, previous studies interested in clinical (gender, Karnofsky index) or biological (EGFR expression, HER2 expression) factors predictive for response or survival for patients treated with gefitinib reported contradictive or negative results, except for those with adenocarcinoma histological subtype and nonsmoking history, which predict a better survival (Miller ). Likewise, skin rash has been suggested to predict response to gefitinib as we have shown in our multivariate analysis; however, available data do not definitively support this hypothesis (van Zandwijk, 2003). In conclusion, CYFRA 21-1 is a tool available to predict survival of NSCLC patients receiving gefitinib as third-line therapy in an independent manner. So, CYFRA 21-1 should be integrated in the biological assessment of NSCLC patients prior to receiving gefitinib. In case of a CYFRA 21-1 level higher than 3.5 ng ml−1, treatment with gefitinib needs further evaluation giving its relative poor effect on survival.
  8 in total

Review 1.  American Society of Clinical Oncology treatment of unresectable non-small-cell lung cancer guideline: update 2003.

Authors:  David G Pfister; David H Johnson; Christopher G Azzoli; William Sause; Thomas J Smith; Sherman Baker; Jemi Olak; Diane Stover; John R Strawn; Andrew T Turrisi; Mark R Somerfield
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2003-12-22       Impact factor: 44.544

2.  Prognostic impact of Cyfra21-1 and other serum markers in completely resected non-small cell lung cancer.

Authors:  Niels Reinmuth; Burkhard Brandt; Michael Semik; Wolf-Peter Kunze; Richard Achatzy; Hans H Scheld; Petra Broermann; Wolfgang E Berdel; Hans N Macha; Michael Thomas
Journal:  Lung Cancer       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 5.705

3.  Prognostic value of combination of Cyfra 21-1, CEA and NSE in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

Authors:  Fabrice Barlési; Céline Gimenez; Jean-Philippe Torre; Christophe Doddoli; Julien Mancini; Laurent Greillier; François Roux; Jean-Pierre Kleisbauer
Journal:  Respir Med       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 3.415

4.  EGFR mutations in lung cancer: correlation with clinical response to gefitinib therapy.

Authors:  J Guillermo Paez; Pasi A Jänne; Jeffrey C Lee; Sean Tracy; Heidi Greulich; Stacey Gabriel; Paula Herman; Frederic J Kaye; Neal Lindeman; Titus J Boggon; Katsuhiko Naoki; Hidefumi Sasaki; Yoshitaka Fujii; Michael J Eck; William R Sellers; Bruce E Johnson; Matthew Meyerson
Journal:  Science       Date:  2004-04-29       Impact factor: 47.728

5.  Activating mutations in the epidermal growth factor receptor underlying responsiveness of non-small-cell lung cancer to gefitinib.

Authors:  Thomas J Lynch; Daphne W Bell; Raffaella Sordella; Sarada Gurubhagavatula; Ross A Okimoto; Brian W Brannigan; Patricia L Harris; Sara M Haserlat; Jeffrey G Supko; Frank G Haluska; David N Louis; David C Christiani; Jeff Settleman; Daniel A Haber
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2004-04-29       Impact factor: 91.245

6.  Bronchioloalveolar pathologic subtype and smoking history predict sensitivity to gefitinib in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

Authors:  Vincent A Miller; Mark G Kris; Neelam Shah; Jyoti Patel; Christopher Azzoli; Jorge Gomez; Lee M Krug; William Pao; Naiyer Rizvi; Barbara Pizzo; Leslie Tyson; Ennapadam Venkatraman; Leah Ben-Porat; Natalie Memoli; Maureen Zakowski; Valerie Rusch; Robert T Heelan
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2004-03-15       Impact factor: 44.544

Review 7.  Tolerability of gefitinib in patients receiving treatment in everyday clinical practice.

Authors:  N van Zandwijk
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 7.640

8.  CYFRA 21-1 is a prognostic determinant in non-small-cell lung cancer: results of a meta-analysis in 2063 patients.

Authors:  J-L Pujol; O Molinier; W Ebert; J-P Daurès; F Barlesi; G Buccheri; M Paesmans; E Quoix; D Moro-Sibilot; M Szturmowicz; J-M Bréchot; T Muley; J Grenier
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2004-06-01       Impact factor: 7.640

  8 in total
  12 in total

1.  Factors that predict progression-free survival in Chinese lung adenocarcinoma patients treated with epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors.

Authors:  Shaohua Cui; Liwen Xiong; Yuqing Lou; Huangping Shi; Aiqin Gu; Yizhuo Zhao; Tianqing Chu; Huimin Wang; Wei Zhang; Lili Dong; Liyan Jiang
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 2.895

2.  Prognostic and predictive value of CEA and CYFRA 21-1 levels in advanced non-small cell lung cancer patients treated with gefitinib or erlotinib.

Authors:  Minkyu Jung; Se Hyun Kim; Young Joo Lee; Soojung Hong; Young Ae Kang; Se Kyu Kim; Joon Chang; Sun Young Rha; Joo Hang Kim; Dae Joon Kim; Byoung Chul Cho
Journal:  Exp Ther Med       Date:  2011-05-12       Impact factor: 2.447

3.  CEA serum level as early predictive marker of outcome during EGFR-TKI therapy in advanced NSCLC patients.

Authors:  Francesco Facchinetti; Raffaella Aldigeri; Rosalia Aloe; Beatrice Bortesi; Andrea Ardizzoni; Marcello Tiseo
Journal:  Tumour Biol       Date:  2015-03-03

Review 4.  History, molecular features, and clinical importance of conventional serum biomarkers in lung cancer.

Authors:  Haruhiko Nakamura; Toshihide Nishimura
Journal:  Surg Today       Date:  2017-02-22       Impact factor: 2.549

5.  Elevated serum levels of TPS and CYFRA 21-1 predict poor prognosis in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer patients treated with gefitinib.

Authors:  Fengsheng Chen; Xi Luo; Jinbiao Zhang; Yang Lu; Rongcheng Luo
Journal:  Med Oncol       Date:  2009-10-15       Impact factor: 3.064

6.  CYFRA 21-1 is an early predictor of chemotherapeutic effectiveness in advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer: An observational study.

Authors:  Tongwei Zhao; Ying Jin; Guangyun Mao; Yaping Wei; Guoqing Wu; Xiao Ye; Yonglie Zhou; Guorong Yuan; Liang Gao; Yupeng Hong; Yun Chen; Chaojin Hong; Hongying Zhou; Dan Su; Zhiquan Qin; Liqin Lu
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2016-12       Impact factor: 1.889

7.  The important role of circulating CYFRA21-1 in metastasis diagnosis and prognostic value compared with carcinoembryonic antigen and neuron-specific enolase in lung cancer patients.

Authors:  Li Zhang; Dan Liu; Lei Li; Dan Pu; Ping Zhou; Yuting Jing; He Yu; Yanwen Wang; Yihan Zhu; Yanqi He; Yalun Li; Shuang Zhao; Zhixin Qiu; Weimin Li
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2017-02-02       Impact factor: 4.430

8.  Prognostic and predictive value of carcinoembryonic antigen and cytokeratin-19 fragments levels in advanced non-small cell lung cancer patients treated with gefitinib or erlotinib.

Authors:  Minkyu Jung; Se Hyun Kim; Soojung Hong; Young Ae Kang; Se Kyu Kim; Joon Chang; Sun Young Rha; Joo Hang Kim; Dae Joon Kim; Byoung Chul Cho
Journal:  Yonsei Med J       Date:  2012-09       Impact factor: 2.759

9.  Prognostic impact of serum CYFRA 21-1 in patients with advanced lung adenocarcinoma: a retrospective study.

Authors:  Akira Ono; Toshiaki Takahashi; Keita Mori; Hiroaki Akamatsu; Takehito Shukuya; Tetsuhiko Taira; Hirotsugu Kenmotsu; Tateaki Naito; Haruyasu Murakami; Takashi Nakajima; Masahiro Endo; Nobuyuki Yamamoto
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2013-07-23       Impact factor: 4.430

10.  Correlation between EGFR gene mutation, cytologic tumor markers, 18F-FDG uptake in non-small cell lung cancer.

Authors:  Arthur Cho; Jin Hur; Yong Wha Moon; Sae Rom Hong; Young Joo Suh; Yun Jung Kim; Dong Jin Im; Yoo Jin Hong; Hye-Jeong Lee; Young Jin Kim; Hyo Sup Shim; Jae Seok Lee; Joo-Hang Kim; Byoung Wook Choi
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2016-03-16       Impact factor: 4.430

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.