Cancer medicine · 2020
Novel risk group stratification for metastatic urothelial cancer patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors.
СтатьяПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Shabto Julie M, Martini Dylan J, Liu Yuan, Ravindranathan Deepak, Brown Jacqueline, Hitron Emilie E, Russler Greta A, Caulfield Sarah, Kissick Haydn, Alemozaffar Mehrdad, Ogan Kenneth, Harris Wayne B, Master Viraj A, Kucuk Omer, Carthon Bradley C, Bilen Mehmet A
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: We developed a novel risk scoring system for urothelial cancer (UC) patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI).
METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of 67 UC patients treated with ICI at Winship Cancer Institute of Emory University from 2015 to 2018. Using stepwise variable selection in Cox proportional hazard model and Sullivan's weighting schema, baseline platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), presence of liver metastasis, baseline albumin, and baseline Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) were used for risk scoring. Patients were categorized into good risk (risk score 0-1), intermediate risk (risk score 2-3), and poor risk (risk score 4-6). Univariable (UVA) and multivariable analysis (MVA) and Kaplan-Meier method were used to assess overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS).
RESULTS: The Emory Risk Scoring System had C-statistics of 0.74 (Standard Error = 0.047) in predicting OS and 0.70 (Standard Error = 0.043) in predicting PFS. Compared to good risk patients, poor risk patients had significantly shorter OS and PFS in both UVA and MVA (all P < .001), and intermediate risk patients had significantly shorter OS and PFS in both UVA and MVA (all P < .03).
CONCLUSIONS: Risk scoring using baseline PLR, presence of liver metastasis, baseline albumin, and baseline ECOG PS may effectively predict OS and PFS in UC patients receiving ICI.
METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of 67 UC patients treated with ICI at Winship Cancer Institute of Emory University from 2015 to 2018. Using stepwise variable selection in Cox proportional hazard model and Sullivan's weighting schema, baseline platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), presence of liver metastasis, baseline albumin, and baseline Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) were used for risk scoring. Patients were categorized into good risk (risk score 0-1), intermediate risk (risk score 2-3), and poor risk (risk score 4-6). Univariable (UVA) and multivariable analysis (MVA) and Kaplan-Meier method were used to assess overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS).
RESULTS: The Emory Risk Scoring System had C-statistics of 0.74 (Standard Error = 0.047) in predicting OS and 0.70 (Standard Error = 0.043) in predicting PFS. Compared to good risk patients, poor risk patients had significantly shorter OS and PFS in both UVA and MVA (all P < .001), and intermediate risk patients had significantly shorter OS and PFS in both UVA and MVA (all P < .03).
CONCLUSIONS: Risk scoring using baseline PLR, presence of liver metastasis, baseline albumin, and baseline ECOG PS may effectively predict OS and PFS in UC patients receiving ICI.