The clinical role of VeriStrat testing in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer considered unfit for first-line platinum-based chemotherapy.
Adenocarcinoma of Lung
/ blood
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Biomarkers, Tumor
/ blood
Blood Proteins
/ analysis
Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung
/ blood
Carcinoma, Squamous Cell
/ blood
Double-Blind Method
Erlotinib Hydrochloride
/ therapeutic use
Female
Follow-Up Studies
Humans
Lung Neoplasms
/ blood
Male
Middle Aged
Platinum
/ therapeutic use
Predictive Value of Tests
Protein Kinase Inhibitors
/ therapeutic use
Proteomics
Survival Rate
Active supportive care
Biomarker
Non-small cell lung cancer
Poor performance ECOG 2&3
Predictive
Prognostic
Proteonomic
VeriStrat
Journal
European journal of cancer (Oxford, England : 1990)
ISSN: 1879-0852
Titre abrégé: Eur J Cancer
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9005373
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
10 2019
10 2019
Historique:
received:
02
05
2019
accepted:
29
07
2019
pubmed:
10
9
2019
medline:
10
6
2020
entrez:
10
9
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
We previously demonstrated that the median survival of patients with poor prognosis non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) considered unfit for first-line platinum chemotherapy was <4 months. We evaluated whether VeriStrat could be used as a prognostic or predictive biomarker in this population. We conducted a randomised double-blind trial among patients with untreated advanced NSCLC considered unfit for platinum chemotherapy because of poor performance status (PS) or multiple comorbidities. All patients received active supportive care (ASC) and were treated with either oral erlotinib or placebo daily. Five hundred twenty-seven patients had plasma samples for VeriStrat classification: good (VeriStrat Good [VSG]) or poor (VeriStrat Poor [VSP]). Main end-point was overall survival. Fifty-five percent patients had VSG, and 83% had Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) 2-3 at baseline. VeriStrat was strongly associated with survival. Among patients managed with ASC only, the adjusted hazard ratio (HR) was 0.54 (p < 0.001) for VSG versus VSP. The association was consistent across patient factors: HR = 0.25 (p = 0.004) and HR = 0.56 (p < 0.001) for ECOG 0-1 and 2-3, respectively, HR = 0.49 (0070 < 0.001) for age≥75 years and HR = 0.59 (p = 0.007) for stage IV. Several ECOG 2-3 patients had long survival: 2-year survival was 8% for VSG patients who had ASC, compared with 0% for VSP. VeriStrat status did not predict benefit from erlotinib treatment because the HRs for erlotinib versus placebo were similar between VSG and VSP patients. VeriStrat was not a predictive marker for survival when considering first-line erlotinib for patients with NSCLC who had poor PS and were not recommended for platinum doublet therapies. However, VeriStrat was an independent prognostic marker of survival. It represents an objective measurement that could be considered alongside other patient factors to provide a more refined assessment of prognosis for this particular patient group. VSG patients could be selected for treatment trials because of better survival, while VSP patients can continue to be treated conservatively or offered trials of less toxic agents. ISRCTN02370070.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31499384
pii: S0959-8049(19)30444-7
doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2019.07.025
pmc: PMC6859789
pii:
doi:
Substances chimiques
Biomarkers, Tumor
0
Blood Proteins
0
Protein Kinase Inhibitors
0
Platinum
49DFR088MY
Erlotinib Hydrochloride
DA87705X9K
Types de publication
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
86-96Informations de copyright
Crown Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Références
Oncologist. 2019 Jun;24(6):e251-e259
pubmed: 30139835
N Engl J Med. 2005 Jul 14;353(2):123-32
pubmed: 16014882
Lancet Oncol. 2013 Sep;14(10):981-8
pubmed: 23883922
J Thorac Oncol. 2010 Feb;5(2):169-78
pubmed: 20035238
Cancer. 2018 Jun 1;124(11):2355-2364
pubmed: 29645086
Br J Cancer. 2012 Nov 20;107(11):1820-5
pubmed: 23079575
J Thorac Oncol. 2012 Jan;7(1):40-8
pubmed: 21964534
J Thorac Oncol. 2017 Apr;12(4):752-762
pubmed: 28017787
J Clin Oncol. 2005 Sep 1;23(25):5892-9
pubmed: 16043829
Br J Cancer. 2017 Jan 3;116(1):36-43
pubmed: 27898657
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2007 Jun 6;99(11):838-46
pubmed: 17551144
BMC Cancer. 2018 Mar 20;18(1):310
pubmed: 29558888
J Thorac Oncol. 2013 Apr;8(4):443-51
pubmed: 23370367
J Thorac Oncol. 2012 Nov;7(11):1653-60
pubmed: 23059783
Lung Cancer. 2013 Jan;79(1):59-64
pubmed: 23122759
J Clin Oncol. 2014 Jun 20;32(18):1902-8
pubmed: 24841974
Lancet Oncol. 2015 Aug;16(8):897-907
pubmed: 26156651
Lung Cancer. 2017 Jul;109:101-108
pubmed: 28577938
J Clin Oncol. 2004 Mar 1;22(5):777-84
pubmed: 14990632
Clin Cancer Res. 2013 Feb 1;19(3):743-51
pubmed: 23224737
Lung Cancer. 2010 Sep;69(3):337-40
pubmed: 20036440
Transl Lung Cancer Res. 2015 Feb;4(1):36-54
pubmed: 25806345
Lung Cancer. 2013 Mar;79(3):307-11
pubmed: 23273522
Lancet Oncol. 2012 Nov;13(11):1161-70
pubmed: 23078958
Lancet Oncol. 2014 Jun;15(7):713-21
pubmed: 24831979