| Literature DB >> 29056540 |
Peng-Peng Xu1, Jie Xiong1, Shu Cheng1, Xia Zhao2, Chao-Fu Wang3, Gang Cai4, Hui-Juan Zhong1, Heng-Ye Huang5, Jia-Yi Chen4, Wei-Li Zhao6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A phase II study of methotrexate, etoposide, dexamethasone, and pegaspargase (MESA) sandwiched with radiotherapy for newly diagnosed, stage IE-IIE extranodal natural-killer/T-cell lymphoma, nasal-type (ENKTL) was conducted to explore its clinical efficacy and safety, as well as novel serum biomarkers upon anti-metabolic treatment.Entities:
Keywords: Asparaginase; Extranodal natural-killer/T-cell lymphoma, nasal type; Metabolomic profile; Prognosis
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29056540 PMCID: PMC5704067 DOI: 10.1016/j.ebiom.2017.10.011
Source DB: PubMed Journal: EBioMedicine ISSN: 2352-3964 Impact factor: 8.143
Characteristics of the ENKTL patients and univariate analysis of predictors of progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in the validation group.
| Characteristics | Training group | Validation group | P value | P value | P value for PFS | P value for OS | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Stage I/II (n = 40) | Stage I/II (n = 39) | Stage III/IV (n = 24) | |||||
| Sex | |||||||
| Male | 33/40 (82.5%) | 33/39 (84.6%) | 16/24 (66.7%) | 1.000 | 0.223 | 0.760 | 0.936 |
| Female | 7/40 (17.5%) | 6/39 (15.4%) | 8/24 (33.3%) | ||||
| Age (years) | |||||||
| ≤ 60 | 34/40 (85.0%) | 32/39 (82.1%) | 17/24 (70.8%) | 0.770 | 0.208 | 0.096 | 0.111 |
| > 60 | 6/40 (15.0%) | 7/39 (17.9%) | 7/24 (29.2%) | ||||
| Performance status (ECOG) | |||||||
| 0–1 | 37/40 (92.5%) | 37/39 (94.9%) | 10/24 (41.7%) | 1.000 | < 0.001 | 0.002 | < 0.001 |
| 2 | 3/40 (7.5%) | 2/39 (5.1%) | 14/24 (58.3%) | ||||
| Lactic dehydrogenase | |||||||
| Normal | 25/40 (62.5%) | 22/39 (56.4%) | 10/24 (41.7%) | 0.650 | 0.126 | < 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Elevated | 15/40 (37.5%) | 17/39 (43.6%) | 14/24 (58.3%) | ||||
| B symptom | |||||||
| Yes | 24/40 (60.0%) | 24/39 (61.5%) | 19/24 (79.2%) | 1.000 | 0.170 | 0.757 | 0.977 |
| No | 16/40 (40.0%) | 15/39 (38.5%) | 5/24 (20.8%) | ||||
| Distant lymph node involvement | |||||||
| Yes | 18/40 (45.0%) | 17/39 (43.6%) | 14/24 (58.3%) | 1.000 | 0.439 | 0.627 | 0.406 |
| No | 22/40 (55.0%) | 22/39 (56.4%) | 10/24 (41.7%) | ||||
| Epstein-Barr Virus DNA (copies/ml) | |||||||
| ≥ 1000 | 9/40 (22.5%) | 12/39 (30.8%) | 12/24 (50.0%) | 0.453 | 0.030 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| < 1000 | 31/40 (77.5%) | 27/39 (69.2%) | 12/24 (50.0%) | ||||
| International prognostic index (IPI) | |||||||
| Low risk (0–1) | 35/40 (87.5%) | 34/39 (87.2%) | 3/24 (12.5%) | 0.966 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
| Low/intermediate risk (2) | 5/40 (12.5%) | 5/39 (12.8%) | 4/24 (16.7%) | ||||
| Intermediate/high risk (3) | 0/40 (0%) | 0/39 (0%) | 7/24 (29.2%) | ||||
| High risk (4–5) | 0/40 (0%) | 0/39 (0%) | 10/24 (41.7%) | ||||
| Prognostic index of natural-killer lymphoma (PINK) | |||||||
| Low risk (0) | 18/40 (45.0%) | 17/39 (43.6%) | 0/24 (0%) | 0.903 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
| Intermediate risk (1) | 20/40 (50.0%) | 20/39 (51.3%) | 2/24 (8.3%) | ||||
| High risk (2–4) | 2/40 (5.0%) | 2/39 (5.1%) | 22/24 (91.7%) | ||||
| Prognostic index of natural-killer lymphoma- Epstein-Barr Virus (PINK-E) | |||||||
| Low risk (0–1) | 32/40 (80.0%) | 30/39 (76.9%) | 1/24 (4.2%) | 0.741 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
| Intermediate risk (2) | 8/40 (20.0%) | 9/39 (23.1%) | 5/24 (20.8%) | ||||
| High risk (3–5) | 0/40 (0%) | 0/39 (0%) | 18/24 (75.0%) | ||||
| Treatment | |||||||
| MESA | 40/40 (100%) | 8/24 (33.3%) | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | |||
| CHOPE-L | 16/39 (41.0%) | 5/24 (20.8%) | |||||
| Hyper-CVAD-L | 13/39 (33.3%) | ||||||
| ESA | 10/39 (25.6%) | ||||||
| SMILE | 8/24 (33.3%) | ||||||
| GLIDE | 3/24 (12.5%) | ||||||
| Complete response | |||||||
| Yes | 34/38 (89.4%) | 32/39 (82.1%) | 11/24 (45.8%) | 0.517 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
| No | 4/38 (10.5%) | 7/39 (17.9%) | 13/24 (54.2%) | ||||
| Asparagine-associated metabolic (AspM) score (μg/mL) | |||||||
| ≥ 209 | 12/24 (50.0%) | 17/39 (43.6%) | 13/24 (54.2%) | 0.796 | 1.000 | 0.044 | 0.048 |
| < 209 | 12/24 (50.0%) | 22/39 (53.8%) | 11/24 (45.8%) | ||||
ECOG, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group.
CHOPE-L: cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisone, etoposide, and pegaspargase.
Hyper-CVAD-L: cyclophosphamide, vincristine, doxorubicin,dexamethasone, and pegaspargase (course A); methotrexate and cytarabine (course B).
ESA: etoposide, dexamethasone, and pegaspargase.
SMILE: methotrexate, ifosfamide, dexamethasone, etoposide, and pegaspargase.
GLIDE: gemcitabine, pegaspargase, ifosfamide, dexamethasone, and etoposide.
P value indicated difference between training group and stage I/II validation group.
P value indicated difference between training group and stage III/IV validation group.
Fig. 1Flow chart of the study.
ENKTL: extranodal natural-killer/T-Cell lymphoma, nasal-type, MESA: methotrexate, etoposide, dexamethasone, and pegaspargase.
Fig. 2Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) curves of patients with ENKTL treated by MESA.
(A) PFS and OS of the patients; (B) PFS and OS according to international prognostic index (IPI); (C) PFS and OS according to prognostic index of natural-killer lymphoma-Epstein-Barr Virus (PINK-E); (D) PFS and OS according to prognostic index of natural-killer lymphoma (PINK).
Toxicities of the major regimens in treating ENKTL.
| SMILE (ref. 8) Kwong et al. | SMILE (ref. 10) Yamaguchi M et al. | AspMetDex (ref. 9) Jaccard A et al. | RT-2/3DeVIC (ref. 26) Yamaguchi M et al. | CCRT-VIPD (ref. 27) Kim et al. | CCRT-VIPL (ref. 28) Kim et al. | MESA Xu et al. | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Patients | Newly diagnosed or refractory/relapsed, any stage | Newly diagnosed stage IV, relapsed/refractory | Relapsed/refractory, any stage | Newly diagnosed stage IE to IIE | Newly diagnosed stage IE to IIE | Newly diagnosed stage IE to IIE | Newly diagnosed stage IE to IIE |
| Number | 87 | 38 | 19 | 33 | 30 | 30 | 40 |
| Regimen | |||||||
| Methotrexate | 2000 mg/m2 day 1 | 2000 mg/m2 day 1 | 3000 mg/m2 day 1 | 1000 mg/m2 day 1 | |||
| Etoposide: | 100 mg/m2 days 2–4 | 100 mg/m2 days 2–4 | Level 1: 67 mg/m2 days 1–3 | 100 mg/m2 days 1–3 | 100 mg/m2 days 1–3 | 100 mg days 2–4 | |
| Dexamethasone | 40 mg days 2–4 | 40 mg days 2–4 | 40 mg days 1–4 | 40 mg days 1–3 | 40 mg days 1–4 | 40 mg days 1–3 | 40 mg days 2–4 |
| 6000 U/m2 days 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, and 20 | 6000 U/m2 days 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, and 20 | 6000 U/m2 days 2, 4, 6, and 8 | 4000 U/m2 days 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, and 20 | Pegaspargase 2500 U/m2 day 4 | |||
| Ifosfamide | 1500 mg/m2 days 2–4 | 1500 mg/m2 days 2–4 | Level 1: 1000 mg/m2 days 1–3 | 1200 mg/m2 days 1–3 | 1200 mg/m2 days 1–3 | ||
| Carboplatin | Level 1:200 mg/m2 day 1 | ||||||
| Cisplatin | 30 mg/m2 weekly during CCRT; 33 mg/m2 days 1–3 after CCRT | 30 mg/m2 weekly for 4 weeks during CCRT | |||||
| G-CSF prophylaxis | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | No | No | No |
| Anti-infection prophylaxis | Yes | Yes | Yes | NR | NR | NR | No |
| Hematological toxicity | |||||||
| Neutropenia | 66.7% (58 cases) | 100.0% (38 cases) | 42.1% (8 cases) | 90.9% (30 cases) | 46.7% (14 cases) | Leukopenia: 80.0% (24 cases) | 52.5% (21 cases) |
| Thrombocytopenia | 41.4% (36 cases) | 63.2% (24 cases) | 5.3% (1 case) | 18.2% (6 cases) | 23.3% (7 cases) | 13.3% (4 cases) | 7.5% (3 cases) |
| Anemia | NR | 50.0% (19 cases) | 21.1% (4 cases) | 24.2% (8 cases) | 26.7% (8 cases) | 10.0% (3 cases) | 12.5% (5 cases) |
| Non-hematological toxicity | |||||||
| Nausea | NR | 13.2% (5 cases) | NR | NR | 3.3% (1 case) | 10.0% (3 cases) | 10.0% (4 cases) |
| Vomiting | NR | 13.2% (5 cases) | NR | NR | 3.3% (1 case) | 0% | 10.0% (4 cases) |
| Diarrhea | NR | 10.5% (4 cases) | NR | NR | 0% | 0% | 0% |
| Hepatotoxicity | 6.9% (6 cases) | Hypoalbuminemia 15.8% (6 cases) | 15.8% (3 cases) | NR | NR | Transaminase elevation: 10.0% (3 cases) | Hyperbilirubinemia: 10.0% (4 cases) |
| Nephrotoxicity | 1.1% (1 case) | 5.3% (2 cases) | 0% | NR | NR | NR | 0% |
| Allergy | 1.1% (1 case) | 2 allergies, grading unknown | 5.3% (1 case) | NR | NR | NR | 0% |
| Infection | 31% (27 cases) for serious infection, grading unknown | 60.5% (23 cases) | 10.5% (2 cases) | Infection with grade 3 or 4 neutropenia: 12.1% (4 cases); | Two deaths were associated with infection | NR | 15.0% (6 cases) |
| Mucositis | NR | 13.2% (5 cases) | NR | Mucositis related to radiation: 36.4% (12 cases) | Stomatitis: 0% | Stomatitis during CCRT: 16.7% (5 cases) | Mucositis related to radiation:22.5% (9 cases) |
| Amylase | NR | 18.4% (7 cases) | NR | NR | NR | NR | 7.5% (3 cases, all grade 3 pancreatitis) |
G-CSF, granulocyte-colony stimulating factor.
NR: not reported.
RT: radiotherapy.
CCRT: concurrent chemoradiotherapy.
Supplemental Fig. 1Metabolomic profile in patients with ENKTL. (A) Representative base peak intensity chromatograms of the ENKTL patients and the healthy volunteers detected by liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry under electrosprary ionization (ESI) + and ESI − mode. Different peaks were marked by arrows. (B) The score plots of the principal component analysis model and orthogonal projections to latent structures discriminant analysis model set up using data under ESI + and ESI − mode discriminated the ENKTL group (red plots) from the healthy volunteers (dark blue plots). (C) The orthogonal projections to latent structures discriminant analysis model set up using data under ESI + and ESI − mode discriminated the ENKTL group (light blue plots) from the healthy volunteers (purple plots).
Fig. 3Asparaginase-associated metabolic (AspM) score in ENKTL.
(A) Heatmap showed four differentially expressed serum metabolites involved in asparaginase-associated metabolism in ENKTL with good and poor prognosis, as compared to healthy control. (B) Patients with good prognosis displayed higher AspM score than those with poor prognosis. (C) Progression-free survival and overall survival curves of patients according to the AspM score.
A panel of 4 metabolites with prognostic value for ENKTL.
| Regression weight | Median, range, μg/mL | |
|---|---|---|
| Alanine | 0.758 | 67.441 (27.439–201.343) |
| Aspartic acid | 0.212 | 14.002 (4.259–48.182) |
| Glutamate | 0.857 | 57.086 (18.656–133.300) |
| Succinic acid | 0.740 | 119.600 (15.000–306.800) |
AspM score of each sample is calculated according to followed equation: 0.758 ∗ alanine + 0.212 ∗ aspartic acid + 0.857 ∗ + 0.740 ∗ succinic acid.
The weight of the first principal component in PCA model.
Fig. 4Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) curves of the validation cohort of ENKTL.
(A) PFS and OS according to asparaginase-associated metabolic (AspM) score in all the patients; (B) PFS and OS according to the AspM score in early-stage patients; (C) PFS and OS according to the AspM score in advanced-stage patients.
Multivariate analysis of predictors of progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with ENKTL (validation group) controlled by international prognostic index (IPI), prognostic index of natural-killer lymphoma (PINK), and prognostic index of natural-killer lymphoma- Epstein-Barr Virus (PINK-E).
| Variable | RR | PFS | P value | RR | OS | P value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 95% CI | 95% CI | |||||
| IPI | ||||||
| 0-1/2/3/4-5 | 2.454 | 1.705–3.531 | < 0.001 | 2.641 | 1.793–3.890 | < 0.001 |
| AspM score | ||||||
| High vs low | 0.455 | 0.185–1.116 | 0.086 | 0.453 | 0.174–1.182 | 0.106 |
| PINK | ||||||
| 0/1/2–4 | 6.757 | 2.895–15.769 | < 0.001 | 7.214 | 2.910–17.885 | < 0.001 |
| AspM score | ||||||
| High vs low | 0.243 | 0.096–0.616 | 0.003 | 0.241 | 0.091–0.644 | 0.004 |
| PINK-E | ||||||
| 0–1/2/3–5 | 3.946 | 2.284–6.818 | < 0.001 | 4.294 | 2.396–7.693 | < 0.001 |
| AspM score | ||||||
| High vs low | 0.265 | 0.106–0.661 | 0.004 | 0.252 | 0.096–0.659 | 0.005 |