Rationale and delineation of a composite index of relative antitumoural efficacy (In-RATE).
ABSTRACT Over the last decades, the development of new drugs has allowed cancer patients to experience several lines of chemotherapy, the objective of which is a long term stabilization of the tumour. The objectives of this work was to delineate a composite index of relative antitumoural efficacy (In-RATE) of a regimen over another, including response rate (RR), median time to progression (TTP) and progression rate (PR). When considering two treatments a and b, the In-RATE was defined as RRa/RRb x TTPa/TTPb x PRb/PRa. Values significantly superior or inferior to 1 reveal an advantage for treatment a or b, respectively. The applicability of the In-RATE to published randomized trials in four frequent tumour types (colorectal, non-small cell lung, advanced ovarian and metastatic breast cancers) was suggested to more precisely distinguish the effects of different drugs, and sometimes to detect a significant difference when the published data did not conclude to statistical difference.
- SourceAvailable from: umontreal.ca[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Provide long-term follow-up data for women treated in a randomized multicenter study of pegylated liposomal doxorubicin compared with topotecan. Patients with epithelial ovarian cancer that recurred after or failed to respond to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy were randomized to receive pegylated liposomal doxorubicin 50 mg/m(2) every 28 days (n = 239) or topotecan 1.5 mg/m(2) per day for 5 days every 21 days (n = 235). Patients were stratified prospectively based on response to initial platinum-based chemotherapy as well as the presence or absence of bulky disease. Most patients had been previously treated with platinum and taxanes (74% in the pegylated liposomal doxorubicin group and 72% in the topotecan group). Survival data are mature: 87% of patients have died (n = 413). There was an 18% reduction in the risk of death for patients treated with pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (median survival 62.7 weeks for pegylated liposomal doxorubicin and 59.7 weeks for topotecan-treated patients; HR = 1.216; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.000-1.478; P = 0.050). The hazard ratio for all randomized subjects (includes those randomized, but never treated; n = 481) was 1.23 (median survival 63.6 weeks for pegylated liposomal doxorubicin and 57.0 weeks for topotecan-treated patients; 95% CI 1.01-1.50; P = 0.038). For patients with platinum-sensitive disease, there was a 30% reduction in the risk of death for the pegylated liposomal doxorubicin-treated group (median survival 107.9 weeks for pegylated liposomal doxorubicin and 70.1 weeks for topotecan-treated patients; HR = 1.432; 95% CI 1.066-1.923; P = 0.017). In patients with platinum-refractory disease, survival was similar between treatment groups. Long-term follow-up demonstrates that treatment with pegylated liposomal doxorubicin significantly prolongs survival compared with topotecan in patients with recurrent and refractory epithelial ovarian cancer. The survival benefit is pronounced in patients with platinum-sensitive disease.Gynecologic Oncology 11/2004; 95(1):1-8. · 3.93 Impact Factor
- [show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Anticancer cytotoxic agents go through a process by which their antitumor activity-on the basis of the amount of tumor shrinkage they could generate-has been investigated. In the late 1970s, the International Union Against Cancer and the World Health Organization introduced specific criteria for the codification of tumor response evaluation. In 1994, several organizations involved in clinical research combined forces to tackle the review of these criteria on the basis of the experience and knowledge acquired since then. After several years of intensive discussions, a new set of guidelines is ready that will supersede the former criteria. In parallel to this initiative, one of the participating groups developed a model by which response rates could be derived from unidimensional measurement of tumor lesions instead of the usual bidimensional approach. This new concept has been largely validated by the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors Group and integrated into the present guidelines. This special article also provides some philosophic background to clarify the various purposes of response evaluation. It proposes a model by which a combined assessment of all existing lesions, characterized by target lesions (to be measured) and nontarget lesions, is used to extrapolate an overall response to treatment. Methods of assessing tumor lesions are better codified, briefly within the guidelines and in more detail in Appendix I. All other aspects of response evaluation have been discussed, reviewed, and amended whenever appropriate.JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute 03/2000; 92(3):205-16. · 14.34 Impact Factor
- [show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: A large, randomized study comparing the efficacy and safety of topotecan versus paclitaxel in patients with relapsed epithelial ovarian cancer showed that these two compounds have similar activity. In this study, a number of patients crossed over to the alternative drug as third-line therapy, ie, from paclitaxel to topotecan and vice versa. We therefore were able to assess the degree of non-cross-resistance between these two compounds. Patients who had progressed after one platinum-based regimen were randomized to either topotecan (1.5 mg/m(2)/d) x 5 every 21 days (n = 112) or paclitaxel (175 mg/m(2) over 3 hours) every 21 days (n = 114). A total of 110 patients received cross-over therapy with the alternative drug (61 topotecan, 49 paclitaxel) as third-line therapy. Response rates to third-line cross-over therapy were 13.1% (8 of 61 topotecan) and 10.2% (5 of 49 paclitaxel; P =.638). Seven patients who responded to third-line topotecan and four patients who responded to paclitaxel had failed to respond to their second-line treatment. Median time to progression (from the start of third-line therapy) was 9 weeks in both groups, and median survival was 40 and 48 weeks for patients who were receiving topotecan or paclitaxel, respectively. The principal toxicity was myelosuppression; grade 4 neutropenia was more frequent with topotecan (81.4% of patients) than with paclitaxel (22.9% of patients). Topotecan and paclitaxel have similar activity as second-line therapies with regard to response rates and progression-free and overall survival. We demonstrated that the two drugs have a degree of non-cross-resistance. Thus, there is a good rationale for incorporating these drugs into future first-line regimens.Journal of Clinical Oncology 05/2001; 19(7):1893-900. · 18.04 Impact Factor