http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
Al-Batran, S.-E.,Van Cutsem, E.,Oh, S. C.,Bodoky, G.,Shimada, Y.,Hironaka, S.,Sugimoto, N.,Lipatov, O. N.,Kim, T.-Y.,Cunningham, D.,Rougier, P.,Muro, K.,Liepa, A. M.,Chandrawansa, K.,Emig, M.,Ohtsu, A Oxford University Press 2016 Annals of Oncology Vol.27 No.4
<P><B>Background</B></P><P>The phase III RAINBOW trial demonstrated that the addition of ramucirumab to paclitaxel improved overall survival, progression-free survival, and tumor response rate in fluoropyrimidine–platinum previously treated patients with advanced gastric/gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma. Here, we present results from quality-of-life (QoL) and performance status (PS) analyses.</P><P><B>Patients and methods</B></P><P>Patients with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group PS of 0/1 were randomized to receive ramucirumab (8 mg/kg i.v.) or placebo on days 1 and 15 of a 4-week cycle, with both arms receiving paclitaxel (80 mg/m<SUP>2</SUP>) on days 1, 8, and 15. Patient-reported outcomes were assessed with the QoL/health status questionnaires EORTC QLQ-C30 and EQ-5D at baseline and 6-week intervals. PS was assessed at baseline and day 1 of every cycle. Time to deterioration (TtD) in each QLQ-C30 scale was defined as randomization to first worsening of ≥10 points (on 100-point scale) and TtD in PS was defined as first worsening to ≥2. Hazard ratios (HRs) for treatment effect were estimated using stratified Cox proportional hazards models.</P><P><B>Results</B></P><P>Of the 665 patients randomized, 650 (98%) provided baseline QLQ-C30 and EQ-5D data, and 560 (84%) also provided data from ≥1 postbaseline time point. Baseline scores for both instruments were similar between arms. Of the 15 QLQ-C30 scales, 14 had HR < 1, indicating similar or longer TtD in QoL for ramucirumab + paclitaxel. Treatment with ramucirumab + paclitaxel was also associated with a delay in TtD in PS to ≥2 (HR = 0.798, <I>P</I> = 0.0941). Alternate definitions of PS deterioration yielded similar results: PS ≥ 3 (HR = 0.656, <I>P</I> = 0.0508), deterioration by ≥1 PS level (HR = 0.802, <I>P</I> = 0.0444), and deterioration by ≥2 PS levels (HR = 0.608, <I>P</I> = 0.0063). EQ-5D scores were comparable between treatment arms, stable during treatment, and worsened at discontinuation.</P><P><B>Conclusion</B></P><P>In patients with previously treated advanced gastric/GEJ adenocarcinoma, addition of ramucirumab to paclitaxel prolonged overall survival while maintaining patient QoL with delayed symptom worsening and functional status deterioration.</P><P><B>ClinicalTrials.gov</B></P><P>NCT01170663.</P>
Tabernero, Josep,Ohtsu, Atsushi,Muro, Kei,Van Cutsem, Eric,Oh, Sang Cheul,Bodoky, Gyorgy,Shimada, Yasuhiro,Hironaka, Shuichi,Ajani, Jaffer A.,Tomasek, Jiri,Safran, Howard,Chandrawansa, Kumari,Hsu, Yan American Association for Cancer Research 2017 Molecular cancer therapeutics Vol.16 No.10
<P>Ramucirumab is an IgG1 monoclonal antibody specific for the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-2. Ramucirumab, 8 mg/kg every 2 weeks, administered as monotherapy (REGARD) or in combination with paclitaxel (RAINBOW), was safe and effective in patients with previously treated advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancer. We evaluated exposure-efficacy and exposure-safety relationships of ramucirumab from two randomized, placebo-controlled phase III trials. Sparse pharmacokinetic samples were collected, and a population pharmacokinetic analysis was conducted to predict ramucirumab minimumtrough concentration at steady state (C-min,C-ss). Kaplan-Meier methods and Cox proportional hazards models were used to evaluate the ramucirumab exposure (C-min,C-ss)-efficacy relationship to overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Logistic regression analyses were used to evaluate exposure-safety relationships. Analyses included 321 ramucirumab + paclitaxel and 335 placebo + paclitaxel patients from RAINBOW and 72 ramucirumab and 35 placebo patients from REGARD. Exposure-efficacy analysis showed ramucirumab C-min,C-ss was a significant predictor of OS and PFS in both trials. Higher ramucirumab exposure was associated with longer OS and PFS. In RAINBOW, grade >= 3 hypertension, leukopenia, and neutropenia, but not febrile neutropenia, significantly correlated with Cmin, ss, with increased exposure leading to increased incidence. Exploratory exposure-response analyses suggest a positive relationship between efficacy and ramucirumab exposure with manageable toxicities at exposures generated from a dose of 8 mg/kg ramucirumab given every 2 weeks for patients with advanced gastric/GEJ cancer. These findings suggest an opportunity to further optimize benefit versus risk profiles of ramucirumab treatment in patients with gastric/GEJ cancer. (C) 2017 AACR.</P>
Charles S. Fuchs,Kei Muro,Jiri Tomasek,Eric Van Cutsem,조재용,오상철,Howard Safran,György Bodoky,Ian Chau,Yasuhiro Shimada,Salah-Eddin Al-Batran,Rodolfo Passalacqua,Atsushi Ohtsu,Michael Emig,David Ferry,Ku 대한위암학회 2017 Journal of gastric cancer Vol.17 No.2
The identified prognostic factors and the reported prognostic index may help clinical decision-making, patient stratification, and planning of future clinical studies.
Fuchs, Charles S.,Muro, Kei,Tomasek, Jiri,Van Cutsem, Eric,Cho, Jae Yong,Oh, Sang-Cheul,Safran, Howard,Bodoky, Gyorgy,Chau, Ian,Shimada, Yasuhiro,Al-Batran, Salah-Eddin,Passalacqua, Rodolfo,Ohtsu, Ats The Korean Gastric Cancer Association 2017 Journal of gastric cancer Vol.17 No.2
Purpose: To identify baseline prognostic factors for survival in patients with disease progression, during or after chemotherapy for the treatment of advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancer. Materials and Methods: We pooled data from patients randomized between 2009 and 2012 in 2 phase III, global double-blind studies of ramucirumab for the treatment of advanced gastric or GEJ adenocarcinoma following disease progression on first-line platinum- and/or fluoropyrimidine-containing therapy (REGARD and RAINBOW). Forty-one key baseline clinical and laboratory factors common in both studies were examined. Model building started with covariate screening using univariate Cox models (significance level=0.05). A stepwise multivariable Cox model identified the final prognostic factors (entry+exit significance level=0.01). Cox models were stratified by treatment and geographic region. The process was repeated to identify baseline prognostic quality of life (QoL) parameters. Results: Of 1,020 randomized patients, 953 (93%) patients without any missing covariates were included in the analysis. We identified 12 independent prognostic factors of poor survival: 1) peritoneal metastases; 2) Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance score 1; 3) the presence of a primary tumor; 4) time to progression since prior therapy <6 months; 5) poor/unknown tumor differentiation; abnormally low blood levels of 6) albumin, 7) sodium, and/or 8) lymphocytes; and abnormally high blood levels of 9) neutrophils, 10) aspartate aminotransferase (AST), 11) alkaline phosphatase (ALP), and/or 12) lactate dehydrogenase (LDH). Factors were used to devise a 4-tier prognostic index (median overall survival [OS] by risk [months]: high=3.4, moderate=6.4, medium=9.9, and low=14.5; Harrell's C-index=0.66; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.64-0.68). Addition of QoL to the model identified patient-reported appetite loss as an independent prognostic factor. Conclusions: The identified prognostic factors and the reported prognostic index may help clinical decision-making, patient stratification, and planning of future clinical studies.