Hideaki Bando1,2,3, Larry Rubinstein4, Pamela Harris5, Takayuki Yoshino6, Toshihiko Doi6, Atsushi Ohtsu6,7, John Welch8, Naoko Takebe5. 1. Investigational Drug Branch, Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program, Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Bethesda, MD, 20892, USA. hbando@east.ncc.go.jp. 2. Department of Gastroenterology and Gastrointestinal Oncology, National Cancer Center Hospital East, 6-5-1 Kashiwanoha, Kashiwa, Chiba, 277-8577, Japan. hbando@east.ncc.go.jp. 3. Course of Advanced Clinical Research of Cancer, Juntendo University Graduate School of Medicine, 2-1-1, Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8421, Japan. hbando@east.ncc.go.jp. 4. Biometric Research Program, Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Bethesda, MD, 20892, USA. 5. Investigational Drug Branch, Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program, Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Bethesda, MD, 20892, USA. 6. Department of Gastroenterology and Gastrointestinal Oncology, National Cancer Center Hospital East, 6-5-1 Kashiwanoha, Kashiwa, Chiba, 277-8577, Japan. 7. Course of Advanced Clinical Research of Cancer, Juntendo University Graduate School of Medicine, 2-1-1, Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8421, Japan. 8. Center for Global Health, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Bethesda, MD, 20892, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In phase 1 trials, an important entry criterion is life expectancy predicted to be more than 90 days, which is generally difficult to predict. The Royal Marsden Hospital (RMH) prognostic score that is determined by lactate dehydrogenase level, albumin level, and number of metastatic sites of disease was developed to help project patient outcomes. There have been no systematic analyses to evaluate the utility of the RMH prognostic score for esophagogastric cancer patients. METHODS: All nonpediatric phase 1 oncology trials sponsored by the National Cancer Institute Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program that began between 2001 and 2013 were considered in this review. RESULTS: Of 4722 patients with solid tumors, 115 patients were eligible for our analysis; 54 (47 %) with cancer of the esophagus, 14 (12 %) with cancer of the esopagogastric junction, and 47 (41 %) with stomach cancer. Eighty-six patients (75 %) had a good RMH prognostic score (0 or 1) and 29 patients (25 %) had a poor RMH prognostic score (2 or 3). Disease control rates were significantly different between patients with good and poor RMH prognostic scores (49 % vs 17 %; two-sided Fisher's exact test P = 0.004). The median treatment duration and overall survival for good and poor RMH prognostic score patients were significantly different (median treatment duration 2.1 months vs 1.2 months respectively, P = 0.016; median overall survival 10.9 months vs 2.1 months respectively, P < 0.001). In the multivariate analysis, age (60 years or older), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (2 or greater), and the RMH prognostic score (2 or 3) were significant predictors of poor survival. CONCLUSIONS: The RMH prognostic score is a strong tool to predict the prognosis of esophagogastric cancer patients who might participate in a phase 1 trial.
BACKGROUND: In phase 1 trials, an important entry criterion is life expectancy predicted to be more than 90 days, which is generally difficult to predict. The Royal Marsden Hospital (RMH) prognostic score that is determined by lactate dehydrogenase level, albumin level, and number of metastatic sites of disease was developed to help project patient outcomes. There have been no systematic analyses to evaluate the utility of the RMH prognostic score for esophagogastric cancerpatients. METHODS: All nonpediatric phase 1 oncology trials sponsored by the National Cancer Institute Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program that began between 2001 and 2013 were considered in this review. RESULTS: Of 4722 patients with solid tumors, 115 patients were eligible for our analysis; 54 (47 %) with cancer of the esophagus, 14 (12 %) with cancer of the esopagogastric junction, and 47 (41 %) with stomach cancer. Eighty-six patients (75 %) had a good RMH prognostic score (0 or 1) and 29 patients (25 %) had a poor RMH prognostic score (2 or 3). Disease control rates were significantly different between patients with good and poor RMH prognostic scores (49 % vs 17 %; two-sided Fisher's exact test P = 0.004). The median treatment duration and overall survival for good and poor RMH prognostic score patients were significantly different (median treatment duration 2.1 months vs 1.2 months respectively, P = 0.016; median overall survival 10.9 months vs 2.1 months respectively, P < 0.001). In the multivariate analysis, age (60 years or older), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (2 or greater), and the RMH prognostic score (2 or 3) were significant predictors of poor survival. CONCLUSIONS: The RMH prognostic score is a strong tool to predict the prognosis of esophagogastric cancerpatients who might participate in a phase 1 trial.
Entities:
Keywords:
Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program; Esophagogastric cancer; National Cancer Institute; Phase 1 trials; Royal Marsden Hospital prognostic score
Authors: Peter C Thuss-Patience; Albrecht Kretzschmar; Dmitry Bichev; Tillman Deist; Axel Hinke; Kirstin Breithaupt; Yasemin Dogan; Bernhard Gebauer; Guido Schumacher; Peter Reichardt Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2011-10 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: David M Hyman; Anne A Eaton; Mrinal M Gounder; Gary L Smith; Erika G Pamer; Martee L Hensley; David R Spriggs; Percy Ivy; Alexia Iasonos Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2014-01-13 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Jung Hun Kang; Soon Il Lee; Do Hyoung Lim; Keon-Woo Park; Sung Yong Oh; Hyuk-Chan Kwon; In Gyu Hwang; Sang-Cheol Lee; Eunmi Nam; Dong Bok Shin; Jeeyun Lee; Joon Oh Park; Young Suk Park; Ho Yeong Lim; Won Ki Kang; Se Hoon Park Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2012-03-12 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Hendrik-Tobias Arkenau; David Olmos; Joo Ern Ang; Jorge Barriuso; Vasilios Karavasilis; Sue Ashley; Johann de Bono; Ian Judson; Stan Kaye Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2008-06-10 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Jacques Ferlay; Isabelle Soerjomataram; Rajesh Dikshit; Sultan Eser; Colin Mathers; Marise Rebelo; Donald Maxwell Parkin; David Forman; Freddie Bray Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2014-10-09 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Khurum Khan; Joo Ern Ang; Naureen Starling; Francesco Sclafani; Krunal Shah; Ian Judson; L Rhoda Molife; Udai Banerji; Johann S de Bono; David Cunningham; Stan B Kaye Journal: Gastric Cancer Date: 2014-01-21 Impact factor: 7.370