Literature DB >> 29174555

Predictive modeling for determination of microscopic residual disease at primary cytoreduction: An NRG Oncology/Gynecologic Oncology Group 182 Study.

Neil S Horowitz1, G Larry Maxwell2, Austin Miller3, Chad A Hamilton4, Bunja Rungruang5, Noah Rodriguez6, Scott D Richard7, Thomas C Krivak8, Jeffrey M Fowler9, David G Mutch10, Linda Van Le11, Roger B Lee12, Peter Argenta13, David Bender14, Krishnansu S Tewari15, David Gershenson16, James J Java17, Michael A Bookman18.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Microscopic residual disease following complete cytoreduction (R0) is associated with a significant survival benefit for patients with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). Our objective was to develop a prediction model for R0 to support surgeons in their clinical care decisions.
METHODS: Demographic, pathologic, surgical, and CA125 data were collected from GOG 182 records. Patients enrolled prior to September 1, 2003 were used for the training model while those enrolled after constituted the validation data set. Univariate analysis was performed to identify significant predictors of R0 and these variables were subsequently analyzed using multivariable regression. The regression model was reduced using backward selection and predictive accuracy was quantified using area under the receiver operating characteristic area under the curve (AUC) in both the training and the validation data sets.
RESULTS: Of the 3882 patients enrolled in GOG 182, 1480 had complete clinical data available for the analysis. The training data set consisted of 1007 patients (234 with R0) while the validation set was comprised of 473 patients (122 with R0). The reduced multivariable regression model demonstrated several variables predictive of R0 at cytoreduction: Disease Score (DS) (p<0.001), stage (p=0.009), CA125 (p<0.001), ascites (p<0.001), and stage-age interaction (p=0.01). Applying the prediction model to the validation data resulted in an AUC of 0.73 (0.67 to 0.78, 95% CI). Inclusion of DS enhanced the model performance to an AUC of 0.83 (0.79 to 0.88, 95% CI).
CONCLUSIONS: We developed and validated a prediction model for R0 that offers improved performance over previously reported models for prediction of residual disease. The performance of the prediction model suggests additional factors (i.e. imaging, molecular profiling, etc.) should be explored in the future for a more clinically actionable tool.
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Microscopic residual; Ovarian cancer

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29174555      PMCID: PMC5962447          DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2017.10.011

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gynecol Oncol        ISSN: 0090-8258            Impact factor:   5.482


  31 in total

1.  Does aggressive surgery improve outcomes? Interaction between preoperative disease burden and complex surgery in patients with advanced-stage ovarian cancer: an analysis of GOG 182.

Authors:  Neil S Horowitz; Austin Miller; Bunja Rungruang; Scott D Richard; Noah Rodriguez; Michael A Bookman; Chad A Hamilton; Thomas C Krivak; G Larry Maxwell
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2015-02-09       Impact factor: 44.544

2.  Survival impact of complete cytoreduction to no gross residual disease for advanced-stage ovarian cancer: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Suk-Joon Chang; Melissa Hodeib; Jenny Chang; Robert E Bristow
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2013-06-06       Impact factor: 5.482

Review 3.  Multivariable prognostic models: issues in developing models, evaluating assumptions and adequacy, and measuring and reducing errors.

Authors:  F E Harrell; K L Lee; D B Mark
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1996-02-28       Impact factor: 2.373

4.  Upper abdominal procedures in advanced stage ovarian or primary peritoneal carcinoma patients with minimal or no gross residual disease: an analysis of Gynecologic Oncology Group (GOG) 182.

Authors:  Noah Rodriguez; Austin Miller; Scott D Richard; Bunja Rungruang; Chad A Hamilton; Michael A Bookman; G Larry Maxwell; Neil S Horowitz; Thomas C Krivak
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2013-06-17       Impact factor: 5.482

Review 5.  A framework for a personalized surgical approach to ovarian cancer.

Authors:  Alpa M Nick; Robert L Coleman; Pedro T Ramirez; Anil K Sood
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2015-02-24       Impact factor: 66.675

6.  Definition of a dynamic laparoscopic model for the prediction of incomplete cytoreduction in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer: proof of a concept.

Authors:  M Petrillo; G Vizzielli; F Fanfani; V Gallotta; F Cosentino; V Chiantera; F Legge; V Carbone; G Scambia; A Fagotti
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2015-07-18       Impact factor: 5.482

7.  Development of a prediction model for residual disease in newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer.

Authors:  Jo Marie Tran Janco; Gretchen Glaser; Bohyun Kim; Michaela E McGree; Amy L Weaver; William A Cliby; Sean C Dowdy; Jamie N Bakkum-Gamez
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2015-04-22       Impact factor: 5.482

8.  The utility of computed tomography scans in predicting suboptimal cytoreductive surgery in women with advanced ovarian carcinoma.

Authors:  Sean C Dowdy; Sally A Mullany; Kathy R Brandt; Bonnie J Huppert; William A Cliby
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2004-07-15       Impact factor: 6.860

9.  A multicenter prospective trial evaluating the ability of preoperative computed tomography scan and serum CA-125 to predict suboptimal cytoreduction at primary debulking surgery for advanced ovarian, fallopian tube, and peritoneal cancer.

Authors:  Rudy S Suidan; Pedro T Ramirez; Debra M Sarasohn; Jerrold B Teitcher; Svetlana Mironov; Revathy B Iyer; Qin Zhou; Alexia Iasonos; Harold Paul; Masayoshi Hosaka; Carol A Aghajanian; Mario M Leitao; Ginger J Gardner; Nadeem R Abu-Rustum; Yukio Sonoda; Douglas A Levine; Hedvig Hricak; Dennis S Chi
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2014-07-11       Impact factor: 5.482

10.  Prediction of incomplete primary debulking surgery in patients with advanced ovarian cancer: An external validation study of three models using computed tomography.

Authors:  Iris J G Rutten; Rafli van de Laar; Roy F P M Kruitwagen; Frans C H Bakers; Marieke J M Ploegmakers; Teun W F Pappot; Regina G H Beets-Tan; Leon F A G Massuger; Petra L M Zusterzeel; Toon Van Gorp
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2015-11-24       Impact factor: 5.482

View more
  2 in total

1.  New Challenges in Tumor Mutation Heterogeneity in Advanced Ovarian Cancer by a Targeted Next-Generation Sequencing (NGS) Approach.

Authors:  Marica Garziera; Rossana Roncato; Marcella Montico; Elena De Mattia; Sara Gagno; Elena Poletto; Simona Scalone; Vincenzo Canzonieri; Giorgio Giorda; Roberto Sorio; Erika Cecchin; Giuseppe Toffoli
Journal:  Cells       Date:  2019-06-14       Impact factor: 6.600

2.  Machine learning methods to predict presence of residual cancer following hysterectomy.

Authors:  Reetam Ganguli; Jordan Franklin; Xiaotian Yu; Alice Lin; Daithi S Heffernan
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-02-17       Impact factor: 4.379

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.