| Literature DB >> 32154021 |
Lisa M Kopp1,2, Richard B Womer3, Cindy L Schwartz4, David H Ebb5, Vivian I Franco6, David Hall7, Donald A Barkauskas7,8, Mark D Krailo7,8, Holcombe E Grier9, Paul A Meyers10, Leonard H Wexler10, Neyssa M Marina11, Katherine A Janeway9, Richard Gorlick12, Mark L Bernstein13, Steven E Lipshultz6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Dexrazoxane protects from lower-cumulative-dose doxorubicin cardiotoxicity, but the effect of dexrazoxane in children with sarcoma treated with higher-cumulative-dose doxorubicin is unknown.Entities:
Keywords: Cardiotoxicity; Doxorubicin; Osteosarcoma; Pediatrics
Year: 2019 PMID: 32154021 PMCID: PMC7048050 DOI: 10.1186/s40959-019-0050-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cardiooncology ISSN: 2057-3804
SMNa Risk
| Treatment Arm | Dexrazoxane | Doxorubicin | Ifosfamide | Etoposide |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| AOST0121 HER2+ | 3.75 g/m2 | 375 mg/m2 | 51 g/m2 | 1.5 g/m2 |
| AOST0121 HER2- | 3.75 g/m2 | 375 mg/m2 | 51 g/m2 | 1.5 g/m2 |
| P9754 Pilot 1 Good Response | 4.5 g/m2 | 450 mg/m2 | ||
| P9754 Pilot 1 Standard Response | 6 g/m2 | 600 mg/m2 | ||
| P9754 Pilot 2 Good Response | 4.5 g/m2 | 450 mg/m2 | 27 g/m2 | |
| P9754 Pilot 2 Standard Response | 6 g/m2 | 600 mg/m2 | 45 g/m2 | |
| P9754 Pilot 3 Good Response | 4.5 g/m2 | 450 mg/m2 | 27 g/m2 | |
| P9754 Pilot 3 Standard Response | 4.5 g/m2 | 450 mg/m2 | 60 g/m2 | 1.5 g/m2 |
aSMN second malignant neoplasms
Patient Characteristics
| Study and Treatment Arm | Mean Age at Enrollmenta | Patient Sexb | Total | Expected Weeks | Dexc | Doxorubicin | Trastuzumab | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Male | Female | ||||||||
| AOST0121 | AOST0121 HER2 Negative | 15.1 (3.6) | 33 (60.0%) | 22 (40.0%) | 55 (100%) | 34 | 3.75 g/m2 | 375 mg/m2 | 70 mg/kg |
| AOST0121 HER2 Positive | 13.7 (2.7) | 19 (47.5%) | 21 (52.5%) | 40 (100%) | 34 | 3.75 g/m2 | 375 mg/m2 | ||
| P9754 | P9754 Pilot 1 Good Response | 13.5 (5.0) | 16 (47.1%) | 18 (52.9%) | 34 (100%) | 28 | 4.5 g/m2 | 450 mg/m2 | |
| P9754 Pilot 1 Standard Response | 13.9 (4.4) | 48 (62.3%) | 29 (37.7%) | 77 (100%) | 29 | 6 g/m2 | 600 mg/m2 | ||
| P9754 Pilot 2 Good Response | 13.9 (3.9) | 7 (33.3%) | 14 (66.7%) | 21 (100%) | 28 | 4.5 g/m2 | 450 mg/m2 | ||
| P9754 Pilot 2 Standard Response | 13.8 (4.5) | 20 (60.6%) | 13 (39.4%) | 33 (100%) | 31 | 6 g/m2 | 600 mg/m2 | ||
| P9754 Pilot 3 Good Response | 14.3 (4.0) | 12 (63.2%) | 7 (36.8%) | 19 (100%) | 28 | 4.5 g/m2 | 450 mg/m2 | ||
| P9754 Pilot 3 Standard Response | 13.4 (4.6) | 20 (54.1%) | 17 (45.9%) | 37 (100%) | 36 | 4.5 g/m2 | 450 mg/m2 | ||
aMean (SD), years
bNumber (%)
cDex, Dexrazoxane
Number of Patients with Data Available After METTa (28 weeks)
| Variable | LV Fractional Shortening | LV End-Diastolic Dimension | LV End-Diastolic Posterior Wall Thickness | LV Thickness to Dimension Ratio | End-Diastolic Septal Thickness | LV Mass | NT-proBNP |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | |||||||
| AOST0121 | |||||||
| P9754 |
aMETT minimum expected treatment time
Number of Patients with Data Available and Number Excluded due to Missing Dataa After METTb
| Variable | LV Fractional Shortening | LV End-Diastolic Dimension | LV End-Diastolic Posterior Wall Thickness | LV Thickness to Dimension Ratio | End-Diastolic Septal Thickness | LV Mass | NT-proBNP |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | |||||||
| ( | ( | ( | ( | ( | ( | ( | |
| AOST0121 | |||||||
| ( | ( | ( | ( | (n = 78) | ( | ( | |
| P9754 | |||||||
| ( | (n = 66) | ( | (n = 66) | ( | ( | ( |
aNumber of patients with missing data in parenthesis for each variable
bMETT minimum expected treatment time
Echocardiographic and NT-proBNP measurements of Patients Evaluated After METTa (28 weeks)
| Measurement | Group | N | Mean | 95% Confidence Interval for Mean |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NT-proBNP2 | All Patients | 59 | 47.3c | (36.3, 61.6)c | < 0.01 |
| LV End-Diastolic Posterior Wall Thickness Z-score | All Patients | 78 | −0.29 | (− 0.60, 0.02) | 0.06 |
| Female | 30 | − 0.57 | (−1.04, − 0.09) | 0.02 | |
| Male | 48 | −0.10 | (− 0.50, 0.30) | 0.63 | |
| End-Diastolic Septal Thickness Z-score | All Patients | 70 | −0.84 | (−1.2, − 0.48) | < 0.01 |
| Female | 27 | −1.20 | (−1.76, −0.64) | < 0.01 | |
| Male | 43 | −0.60 | (−1.06, − 0.15) | 0.01 | |
| LV Fractional Shortening | All Patients | 81 | −0.19 | (−0.54, 0.17) | 0.30 |
| Female | 32 | −0.46 | (−1.02, 0.10) | 0.10 | |
| Male | 49 | 0.00 | (−0.46, 0.47) | 0.99 | |
| LV Mass Z-score | All Patients | 74 | −0.74 | (−1.06, − 0.42) | < 0.01 |
| Female | 29 | −1.23 | (−1.71, −0.75) | < 0.01 | |
| Male | 45 | −0.39 | (−0.80, 0.01) | 0.06 |
aMETT minimal expected treatment time
bIn the Z-score columns, a Z-score of 0 represents the average value for a healthy child of the same age. Each P-value for the Z-score measurements is from the two-sided hypothesis test with the null hypothesis H0: the population mean for the Z-scores is 0. (A Z-score of 0 represents the average value for a healthy child of the same age.) The P-value for NT-proBNP is from the two-sided hypothesis test with null hypothesis H0: the population geometric mean is 100
NT-proBNP is a raw score. Analysis for the NT-proBNP was done using a natural log transformation to stabilize the variance. The back-transformed NT-proBNP numbers are presented here for ease of interpretability. Due to the back transformations, these represent geometric means
Cardiac and NT-proBNP Measurements
| Prediction Factor, Model |
|
|---|---|
| Left Ventricular End-Diastolic Dimension Z-Scores | |
| Univariate Model | |
| Sex | 0.04 |
| Final Model | |
| Assessment Pointb | 0.77 |
| Sex2 | 0.74 |
| Assessment Point* Sex Interaction Term | < 0.01 |
| Male Slopec | 0.02 |
| Female Slopec | 0.02 |
| NT pro-BNP, Both Studies Combined | |
| Sex | 0.02 |
| NT pro-BNP, P9754 | |
| Univariate Models | |
| Assessment Point | 0.02 |
| Sex | 0.02 |
| Final Model | |
| Assessment Point | < 0.01 |
| Sex | < 0.01 |
| Assessment Point * Sex Interaction Termd | 0.59 |
| NT pro-BNP, AOST0121e | |
| Final Model | |
| Assessment Pointf | 0.05 |
| Sex | 0.03 |
| Assessment Point * Sex Interaction Term | 0.03 |
| Male Slopec | 0.03 |
| Female Slopec,f | 0.08 |
aAll P-value are Type 3 p-values from models produced by Proc Mixed in SAS 9.4, unless otherwise specified
bThe main effects in the final model were not significant, but were kept because their interaction term was significant
cP-value obtained by a linear hypothesis H0: Slope = 0 using Proc Mixed in SAS 9.4
dThe interaction term for assessment point and sex was not found to be significant and was dropped from the final model
eNeither assessment point nor sex were significant in their respective univariate models
fMarginally significant
Fig. 1Changes in Left Ventricular End-Diastolic Dimension Z-scores in Patients, by Sex
Fig. 2Risk of Cardiomyopathy and Heart Failure, by NT-proBNP, among Patients Enrolled on P9754, by Time Since Completing Treatment and Sex. Cardiomyopathy and heart failure risk thresholds for this NT-proBNP assay in children with cardiomyopathy have been determined to be ≥100 pg/mL and ≥ 400 pg/mL, respectively [25, 26]. The y-axis of this figure shows the log transformed values of NT-proBNP. The horizontal lines indicating cardiomyopathy and heart failure thresholds correspond to 100 pg/mL and 400 pg/mL, respectively before they were log transformed
Fig. 3Risk of Cardiomyopathy and Heart Failure, as Assessed by by NT-proBNP, among Patients enrolled on the COG AOST0121 Study, by Sex.. Cardiomyopathy was defined by having a NT-proBNP ≥100 pg/mL and risk of heart failure was defined as an NT-proBNP ≥400 pg/mL [25, 26]. The y-axis of this figure shows the log [NT-proBNP]. The horizontal lines indicating cardiomyopathy and heart failure thresholds correspond to 100 pg/mL and 400 pg/mL, respectively before they were log transformed
Echocardiographic and NT-proBNP of Patients After METTa (28 weeks)b
| Variable | LV Fractional Shortening | LV End-Diastolic Dimension | LV End-Diastolic Posterior Wall Thickness | LV Thickness to Dimension Ratio | End-Diastolic Septal Thickness | LV Mass | NT-proBNPc |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | n = 81 | n = 78 | n = 78 | n = 82 | n = 70 | n = 74 | n = 59 |
| GM = 47.3 | |||||||
| (− 0.54, 0.17) | (− 0.76, − 0.21) | (− 0.60, 0.02) | (− 0.53, 0.07) | (− 1.2, − 0.48) | (− 1.06, − 0.42) | (36.3, 61.6) | |
| Sex | |||||||
| Female | n = 32 | n = 30 | n = 27 | ||||
| GM = 63.2 | |||||||
| (− 1.02, 0.10) | (−1.24, − 0.40) | (− 1.04, − 0.09) | (− 0.75, 0.16) | (−1.76, − 0.64) | (− 1.71, − 0.75) | (43.8, 91.4) | |
| Male | n = 48 | n = 49 | n = 45 | ||||
| GM = 36.1 | |||||||
| (− 0.46, 0.47) | (− 0.60, 0.08) | (− 0.50, 0.30) | (− 0.57, 0.21) | (− 1.06, − 0.15) | (−0.80, 0.01) | (25.3, 51.6) | |
| Study | |||||||
| AOST0121 | n = 8 | n = 5 | n = 5 | n = 5 | n = 5 | n = 15 | |
| GM = 60.5 | |||||||
| (−2.06, 0.67) | (−1.82, 0.59) | (− 2.06, 0.78) | (−0.97, 1.17) | (−5.05, − 2.59) | (−2.23, 0.50) | (35.0, 104.6) | |
| P9754 | n = 73 | n = 73 | n = 65 | ||||
| GM = 43.9 | |||||||
| (−0.52, 0.22) | (−0.76, − 0.20) | (−0.59, 0.04) | (− 0.57, 0.05) | (− 0.96, − 0.31) | (− 1.07, − 0.40) | (32.4, 59.3) | |
| Assessment Pointd | |||||||
| 0 to 37 days | n = 48 | n = 48 | n = 45 | ||||
| GM = 32.6 | |||||||
| (−0.72, 0.35) | (−0.75, − 0.01) | (−0.85, 0.05) | (− 0.90, 0.03) | (− 0.80, 0.03) | (− 1.13, − 0.20) | (18.4, 57.7) | |
| 38 to 81 days | n = 40 | n = 38 | n = 32 | ||||
| GM = 45.2 | |||||||
| (−0.70, 0.43) | (−1.00, − 0.21) | (−0.33, 0.64) | (− 0.33, 0.63) | (− 1.24, − 0.40) | (−0.93, 0.07) | (26.4, 77.3) | |
| > 81 days | n = 37 | n = 40 | n = 29 | n = 36 | |||
| GM = 67.6 | |||||||
| (−0.82, 0.34) | (−0.91, − 0.10) | (− 1.05, − 0.09) | (−0.83, 0.12) | (− 1.91, − 1.02) | (−1.53, − 0.60) | (39.9, 114.5) | |
aMETT minimal expected treatment time
bIn the Z-score columns, a Z-score of 0 represents the average value for a healthy child of the same age
NT-proBNP is a raw score. Analysis for the NT-proBNP was done using a natural log transformation to better adhere to the normality assumption for regression. The back-transformed NT-proBNP numbers are presented here for ease of interpretability. Due to the back transformations, these represent geometric means (GM). The P-value is from the two-sided hypothesis test with null hypothesis H0: the population GM is 100
dAssessment Point is the measure in days after the minimum expected treatment (28 weeks/196 days) and broken up into tertiles based on the 33.3rd and 66.7th percentiles of the assessment points of all measurements. Due to multiple measurements per patient, it is possible for patients to be in multiple tertiles
Fig. 45-year Cumulative Incidence of Second Malignant Neoplasms in The Clinical Trial INT-0133 versus COG P9754 and COG AOST0121