Tumor Response May Not Be Best Measure Of Efficacy In Non-small Cell Lung Cancer Treatment
Main Category: Lung CancerAlso Included In: Respiratory / Asthma; Cancer / Oncology; Clinical Trials / Drug Trials
Article Date: 06 Jun 2006 - 0:00 PDT
Researchers typically evaluate the effectiveness of a new cancer treatment by looking at how tumors respond to it. But in the case of advanced non-small cell lung cancer, there may be a better way to assess effectiveness.
A new Southwest Oncology Group study led by a team of UC Davis Cancer Center researchers suggests that an alternative measurement - "disease control rate" - may be a more powerful predictor of survival than tumor shrinkage. The research was presented today at the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology in Atlanta.
"If validated, this 'early look' statistical measure could enhance efficacy assessment, with broad implications for the design of future cancer clinical trials for advanced non-small cell lung cancer," said Primo N. Lara, Jr., associate professor of hematology and oncology at UC Davis Cancer Center and lead author of the new study.
Lara and his colleagues defined the disease control rate as the percentage of patients who have a partial or complete response to an investigational treatment plus those whose disease stabilizes.
"In the past, we have used the complete response rate plus the partial response rate, or CR + PR, as our sole efficacy measure," Lara said. "The disease control rate, DCR, is the complete response rate plus the partial response rate plus the rate of patients with stabilized disease, or DCR = CR + PR + SD. This measure may better predict how a new drug will affect survival."
In their study, the investigators pooled data from 984 patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer who participated in three randomized SWOG trials of platinum-based chemotherapy regimens.
Of the 886 patients who were alive two months after beginning treatment, 62 percent had stable disease, meaning their cancer had not progressed since entering the clinical trial. Another 19 percent had a complete or partial response, meaning their tumors had disappeared or reduced in size. Adding the two measures together yielded a disease control rate of 81 percent.
When Lara and his colleagues compared the disease control rate to the standard measure (CR+PR), they found that the disease control rate had a much stronger association with survival.
"The cancer community is actively looking for ways to improve clinical trials, so that we can get better answers more efficiently and bring advances to our patients more rapidly. Nowhere is this more important than in lung cancer," Lara said. "These findings will be prospectively tested in SWOG, but if they bear out, they may help us to design smarter clinical trials for lung and perhaps other cancers."
Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death among both men and women in the United States. According to the American Cancer Society, an estimated 174,470 people will get lung cancer this year, and 162,460 will die from it. Non-small cell lung cancer accounts for about 80 percent of lung cancer cases.
Claudia Morain
claudia.morain@ucdmc.ucdavis.edu
University of California, Davis - Health System
http://www.ucdmc.ucdavis.edu/
Visit our lung cancer section for the latest news on this subject.
MLA
16 Feb. 2012. <http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/44599.php>
APA
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/44599.php.
Please note: If no author information is provided, the source is cited instead.
|
Rate this article: (Hover over the stars then click to rate) |
Patient / Public: |
or |
Health Professional: |
Visitor Opinions In Chronological Order (1)
(CCDRT) predicts for patient survival
posted by Gregory D. Pawelski on 7 Jun 2006 at 12:36 pmSeveral new "targeted" drugs have been introduced during the last few years. Most of them have been developed for use in solid tumors but some have also emerged for hematological maligancies. These new "targeted" drugs mostly need to be combined with active chemotherapy to provide any benefit and the need for predictive tests for individualized therapy selection has increased.
Unfortunately, the introduction of these new drugs has not been accompanied by specific predictive tests allowing for a rational and economical use of the drugs. Given the technical and conceptual advantages of Cell Culture Drug Resistance Tests (CCDRTs) together with their performance and the modest efficacy of therapy prediction based on analysis of genome expression as published so far, there is reason for a renewal in the interest for CCDRTs for optimized use of medical treatment of malignant disease.
There was a recent study using an angiogenesis assay, describing correlations between cell culture assay results (cell death in response to Iressa exposure) and survival of 31 patients with non-small cell lung cancer who had received extensive prior chemotherapy. These correlations were based on the actual assay results which had been reported, in real time, prospectively to the doctors who had ordered the assay laboratory tests. There were striking correlations between test results and patient survival.
By inhibiting anti-apoptosis with Iressa (or even Tarceva), the cells undergo apoptosis and die. And it is detected at the whole cell level in the cell culture assays and reported out -- prospectively -- that this correlates strikingly with patient survival. Not only is it a very important predictive test, but it is a unique tool for identifying newer, better drugs, testing drug combinations, and serving as a "gold standard" to develop new DNA, RNA, and protein-based tests of drug activity.
Over the past few years, gene expression profiling has been suggested as the best or only way of determining ex vivo drug sensitivity. However, the cliinical application of these DNA content assays have been shown to correlate only with response and not survival. And due to almost all patients being treated with combination chemotherapy, this methodology cannot even be calibrated without the use of CCDRT. CCDRTs can actually integrate all the gene expression into one convenient test result.
In obtaining information from gene mutations (DNA content assays) and/or gene expression (RNA content) it must be realized that DNA structure is only important insofar as it predicts for RNA content, which is only important insofar as it predicts for protein content, which is only important insofar as it predicts for protein function, which is important only insofar as it predicts for cell response, which is only important insofar as it predicts for tumor response and function. In other words, it correlates only with response and not survival, in entirely retrospective (not prospective) studies.
What are the data supporting the use of testing DNA, RNA and Protein expression? Two retrospective studies from two Harvard-affiliated hospitals, showing response, but not survival advantages, with a grand total of twenty six correlations. And a subsequent study, presented in the July 14, 2005 issue of the New England Journal of Medicine from another laboratory that did not show correlations between gene mutations and patient survival (Volume 353:133-144 Number 2).
Journal of Clinical Oncology, 2006 ASCO Annual Meeting Proceedings Part I. Vol 24, No. 18S (June 20 Supplement), 2006: 17117
Add Your Opinion
Please note that we publish your name, but we do not publish your email address. It is only used to let you know when your message is published. We do not use it for any other purpose. Please see our privacy policy for more information.
If you write about specific medications or operations, please do not name health care professionals by name.
All opinions are moderated before being included (to stop spam)
Contact Our News Editors
For any corrections of factual information, or to contact the editors please use our feedback form.
![]()
Please send any medical news or health news press releases to:
Note: Any medical information published on this website is not intended as a substitute for informed medical advice and you should not take any action before consulting with a health care professional. For more information, please read our terms and conditions.




