Prognostic and predictive factors for overall survival (OS) in metastatic esophagogastric cancer (EGC): A meta-analysis.

Authors

null

Emil ter Veer

Department of Medical Oncology, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands

Emil ter Veer , Jessy Joy van Kleef , Sandor Schokker , Stephanie Van Der Woude , Marety Laarman , Nadia Haj Mohammad , Martijn G.H. van Oijen , Hanneke W.M. Van Laarhoven

Organizations

Department of Medical Oncology, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands

Research Funding

Other

Background: Prognostic and predictive factors for metastatic EGC are important to estimate prognosis, inform clinical decision-making and design future trials. We performed a systematic review with meta-analysis to identify these factors. Methods: We searched Medline, EMBASE and CENTRAL for phase 2/3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) until January 2016 on palliative chemotherapy and targeted therapy for metastatic EGC. Prognostic and predictive factors were identified from respectively multivariate cox regressions and stratified treatment comparisons. Hazard Ratio’s (HR) for OS were extracted and pooled with meta-analysis if possible. Prognostic factors were considered independent if the multivariate HR was significant (P≤0.05). Predictive factors were clinically relevant if P for subgroup interaction was ≤0.20 and the HR in one of the subgroups was significant (P≤0.05). Results: We identified 47 RCTs (14,853 patients), wherein 54 potential prognostic and 40 predictive factors were reported. Eight independent prognostic factors for poor OS reported in ≥2 RCTs based on ≥300 patients were: performance status of ≥1 vs 0 (pooled HR, 95% confidence interval: 1.47, 1.25-1.73) or 2 vs 0-1 (1.52, 1.32-1.76); metastatic vs locally advanced disease (1.55, 1.39-1.72); diffuse vs intestinal/other histology (1.38, 1.12-1.71); ≥3 vs < 2 metastatic sites (1.35, 1.07-1.70); presence of metastases in peritoneum (1.24, 1.01-1.51) or liver (1.45 (1.28-1.64); measurable vs non-measurable disease (1.31, 1.04-1.66); and no prior vs prior surgery (1.33, 1.16-1.53). Predictive factors for specific treatment comparisons based on ≥300 patients were: age (≥65 vs < 65); performance status; tumor location (GEJ vs stomach); disease stage; number of metastatic sites; peritoneal metastasis; measurable disease; histology; HER2; KRAS; VEGF A; and Neuropilin-1 for first line treatments; and time to progression on first line therapy ( < 3, 3-6 or ≥6 months) for second-line treatments. Conclusions: Eight independent prognostic factors for OS and thirteen clinically relevant predictive factors for treatment efficacy of EGC were found.

Disclaimer

This material on this page is ©2024 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org

Abstract Details

Meeting

2017 ASCO Annual Meeting

Session Type

Poster Session

Session Title

Gastrointestinal (Noncolorectal) Cancer

Track

Gastrointestinal Cancer—Gastroesophageal, Pancreatic, and Hepatobiliary

Sub Track

Esophageal or Gastric Cancer

Citation

J Clin Oncol 35, 2017 (suppl; abstr 4048)

DOI

10.1200/JCO.2017.35.15_suppl.4048

Abstract #

4048

Poster Bd #

40

Abstract Disclosures