ASO Visual Abstract: External Validation of a Dutch Predictive Nomogram for Complete Response to T-VEC in an Independent American Patient Cohort

Author(s):  
Emma H. A. Stahlie ◽  
Michael J. Carr ◽  
Jonathan S. Zager ◽  
Alexander C. J. van Akkooi
2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 9563-9563
Author(s):  
Emma H.A. Stahlie ◽  
Michael Carr ◽  
Jonathan S. Zager ◽  
Alexander Christopher Jonathan Van Akkooi

9563 Background: Talimogene Laherparepvec (T-VEC) is a genetically modified herpes simplex type 1 virus and known as an effective oncolytic immunotherapy for injectable cutaneous, subcutaneous, and nodal melanoma lesions in stage IIIB-IVM1a patients. Recently, Stahlie et al. published (Cancer Immunol Immunother '21) a model for predicting a complete response (CR) to T-VEC based on 3 easily accessible tumor characteristics identified using univariable and multivariable logistic regression analysis. The aim of this study was to externally validate this model in an independent, American patient cohort. Methods: A total of 76 patients with stage IIIB-IVM1a melanoma treated with T-VEC at Moffitt Cancer Center were included. A second nomogram was built incorporating the same predictive factors: tumor size (diameter of largest metastasis in mm), type of metastases (cutaneous, subcutaneous and nodal) and number of metastases (cut-off: <20 and >20). Predictive accuracy was assessed through calculation of overall performance, discriminative ability, and calibration. Outcomes and previously published outcomes were compared. Statistical analyses were done using R software. Results: Overall performance of the validation dataset nomogram was calculated with the Brier score and found to be 0.195, demonstrating good overall performance and similar to the original model Brier score of 0.182. Discriminative power, assessed by calculating the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was similar for both models, 0.767 and 0.755 for the NKI and Moffitt, respectively, resulting in a fair discriminative ability. The calibration curve showed mostly slight underestimation for predicated probabilities >0.37 and slight overestimation <0.37. Conclusions: An independent dataset externally validated a recently published predictive nomogram for CR to T-VEC in stage IIIB-IVM1a melanoma, with both models resulting in overall performances that were comparable and good. The second model reinforces the conclusion that for the best response to T-VEC, it should be used early on in the course of the disease, when the patient’s tumor burden is cutaneous with smaller diameter and fewer of metastases.[Table: see text]


2018 ◽  
Vol 31 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 187-187
Author(s):  
Lauren O Connell ◽  
Mary Coleman ◽  
Natalia Kharyntiuk ◽  
Thomas Walsh

Abstract Background: Background Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (naCRT) for upper gastrointestinal malignancies induces a pathological complete response (pCR) in 25–85% of patients, depending on disease stage and regimen chosen. All patients with a pCR will have a clinical complete response (cCR). Avoidance of surgery is desirable where feasible, as operative intervention entails morbidity and mortality risks and a reduction in lifelong health related quality of life (HRQoL). Pursuant on a policy of permitting selected patients with a cCR to opt for surveillance, this study aims to compare the QoL of patients who chose surveillance over adjuvant surgery following a cCR to naCRT. Methods: Methods One hundred and fourteen patients participated in the study. These comprised 4 groups; Group 1 (n = 31) were healthy controls; Group 2 (n = 26) had chemoradiotherapy only; Group 3 (n = 31) had oesophagectomy post naCRT and Group 4(n = 26) had gastrectomy alone. A novel 33 point questionnaire assessing 5 functional domains was completed focusing on symptoms of antro-pyloric function, respiratory reflux and post-vagotomy symptoms, as well as a previously validated questionnaire instrument for purposes of comparison and external validation. The data was aggregated to produce a total score ranging from 20–93 with 20 representing the least symptomatic. Results: Results Mean(± sd) overall QoL scores were significantly better in patients avoiding resection (28.9 ± 4.5) vs oesophagectomy (32.3 ± 58. P = 0.042) and vs gastrectomy(33.19 ± 5.9, P = 0.004. Scores did not differ between patients undergoing oesophagectomy or gastrectomy (P = 0.889). Oesophagectomy was associated with a trend towards increased reflux-related respiratory symptoms (7.3 ± 2.2 vs 6.5 ± 1.9; P = 0.396) while gastrectomy patients reported more symptoms related to vagotomy (1.82 ± 0.9 vs 1.4 ± 0.6; P = 0.438) and early dumping (8.2 ± 1.4 vs 7.1 ± 1.7; P = 0.239). The mean score for the control group administered the novel questionnaire was 20.74, approaching the lowest possible score of 20. This was significantly lower than any of the scores recorded for the treatment groups (P = < 0.001). Conclusion: Discussion A strategy of active surveillance in complete responders to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy is rewarded with a superior quality of life than in those undergoing surgery. Disclosure All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.


2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 716-716
Author(s):  
Jianwei Zhang ◽  
Yue Cai ◽  
Huabin Hu ◽  
Ping Lan ◽  
Lei Wang ◽  
...  

716 Background: To establish a clinical nomogram with pretherapeutic parameters for predicting pathologic complete response (pCR) and tumor downstaging after neoadjuvant treatment in patients with rectal cancer. Methods: From Jan 2011 to Feb 2015, complete data was available for 309 patients with rectal cancer who received concurrent chemoradiotherapy or chemotherapy alone enrolled in FOWARC study. All pre-treatment clinical parameters were collected to build a nomogram for pCR and tumor down-staging. The model was subjected to bootstrap internal validation. The predictive performance of the model was assessed with concordance index (c-index) and calibration. Results: Of the 309 patients, 55 (17.8%) had achieved pCR, 138 (44.7%) patients were classified as good down-staging with ypTNM stage 0-I. Basing on the multivariate logistic regression and clinical consideration, 5 factors were identified to be the independent predictors for pCR and good downstaging, respectively (Table 1). The predictive nomograms were developed (fig 1 and 2) to predict the probability of pCR and good down-staging with a C-index of 0.802 (95% CI: 0.736-0.867) and 0.73 (95% CI: 0.672-0.784). Calibration plots showed good performance on internal validation. Conclusions: The nomograms provide individual prediction of response to different preoperative treatment for patients with rectal cancer. This model may help physician in patient selection for optimized treatment. Further external validation is warranted. [Table: see text]


Medicine ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 94 (52) ◽  
pp. e2406 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Reim ◽  
Alexander Novotny ◽  
Bang Wool Eom ◽  
Yunjin Park ◽  
Hong Man Yoon ◽  
...  

2011 ◽  
Vol 98 (1) ◽  
pp. 126-133 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruud G.P.M. van Stiphout ◽  
Guido Lammering ◽  
Jeroen Buijsen ◽  
Marco H.M. Janssen ◽  
Maria Antonietta Gambacorta ◽  
...  

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (11) ◽  
pp. e0259864
Author(s):  
Lukas Higi ◽  
Angela Lisibach ◽  
Patrick E. Beeler ◽  
Monika Lutters ◽  
Anne-Laure Blanc ◽  
...  

Background Readmission prediction models have been developed and validated for targeted in-hospital preventive interventions. We aimed to externally validate the Potentially Avoidable Readmission-Risk Score (PAR-Risk Score), a 12-items prediction model for internal medicine patients with a convenient scoring system, for our local patient cohort. Methods A cohort study using electronic health record data from the internal medicine ward of a Swiss tertiary teaching hospital was conducted. The individual PAR-Risk Score values were calculated for each patient. Univariable logistic regression was used to predict potentially avoidable readmissions (PARs), as identified by the SQLape algorithm. For additional analyses, patients were stratified into low, medium, and high risk according to tertiles based on the PAR-Risk Score. Statistical associations between predictor variables and PAR as outcome were assessed using both univariable and multivariable logistic regression. Results The final dataset consisted of 5,985 patients. Of these, 340 patients (5.7%) experienced a PAR. The overall PAR-Risk Score showed rather poor discriminatory power (C statistic 0.605, 95%-CI 0.575–0.635). When using stratified groups (low, medium, high), patients in the high-risk group were at statistically significant higher odds (OR 2.63, 95%-CI 1.33–5.18) of being readmitted within 30 days compared to low risk patients. Multivariable logistic regression identified previous admission within six months, anaemia, heart failure, and opioids to be significantly associated with PAR in this patient cohort. Conclusion This external validation showed a limited overall performance of the PAR-Risk Score, although higher scores were associated with an increased risk for PAR and patients in the high-risk group were at significantly higher odds of being readmitted within 30 days. This study highlights the importance of externally validating prediction models.


Blood ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 116 (21) ◽  
pp. 3046-3046 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bart Heeg ◽  
Michel van Agthoven ◽  
Johan Liwing ◽  
Ulf-Henrik Mellqvist ◽  
Torben Plesner ◽  
...  

Abstract Abstract 3046 Background: The introduction of the novel agents thalidomide, lenalidomide and bortezomib has created a perspective of chronic, intermittent treatment of patients with multiple myeloma (MM). The important question today is how and in which sequence these treatments should be administered in order to achieve the best outcome. This question cannot be addressed by means of a randomized clinical trial (RCT), due to the number of trial arms, patients and years needed. There is therefore a need for an evidence-based methodology to address this question. Finding a robust conclusion is also relevant to balance costs and efficacy of treatments by taking a longer perspective. Objective: The goal of this study was to establish an analytic framework aimed at comparing the outcomes of treatment sequences for MM by incorporating the results of published studies into a single coherent unifying Markov model. We focused on treatment strategies for patients not eligible for transplantation. The ultimate aim was to predict the overall survival (OS) of each treatment sequence, by expressing the additive effect on OS from single treatments at presentation or at relapse. Methods: The basic structure of the model contains three lines of treatment and one phase for “later lines of treatment”. Within each of the three treatment lines, patients could either enter, stay in or move to complete response, partial response or no response states. In order to populate the model, this meta-modeling study consisted of the following steps. Firstly, we performed a systematic literature review (SLR), extracting outcome measures that could serve as inputs for the model (cut-off date November 2009) and analyzing them by traditional meta-analysis (fixed effect modeling (FEM)). We then performed a first meta-regression identifying the response for each treatment in each treatment line. The next meta-regression established a model framework based on the following mechanism: response to treatment from meta-regression 1 is predictive for time to progression (TTP). TTP in its turn could be translated into time to next treatment (TTNT). A relationship was established between complete response (CR), partial response (PR) and no response (NR) and OS. Finally, the synthesized data were incorporated in the Markov sequencing model that estimates overall survival for the considered treatment sequences. In total the model can predict results for 245 different treatment sequences. Outcomes are expressed as mean OS, the mean response rates of the individual treatment combinations per line of treatment and corresponding TTNT estimates. Uncertainty in outcomes was addressed in sensitivity analyses. Results: The SLR provided 57 relevant clinical studies with 84 treatment arms. The meta-analysis on response showed that in first line MPV (melphalan/prednisone + bortezomib) showed the highest CR (33%), followed by MP + lenalidomide (17%), MP + thalidomide (10%) and MP (3%). Internal validation showed consistency with the results from the meta-analysis. External validation showed consistency with results presented after the SLR cut-off date, like the MM-015 trial, e.g. 16% complete response (CR) predicted compared to 18% observed CR for MP/lenalidomide and 3% CR predicted vs. 5% CR observed for the MP arm. In the second meta-analysis, a linear pattern established for the relationship between overall response and TTP. Following extrapolation from TTP to TTNT, external validation versus data from the VISTA trial showed predicted TTNT for MPV to 29.29 month compared to the observed 28.1 month and predicted 19.14 month for MP compared to the observed 19.2. Finally, the exploratory model showed that mean survival results for the sequences starting with MP, MPT, MPR and MPV ranged from 3.86–4.50, 4.72–5.09, 5.07 to 5.05–5.65 years respectively. The survival of sequences starting with one of the novel agents in combination with MP was consistently and significant better than sequences starting with MP alone as the confidence intervals did not overlap. Discussion: The numerical result of this exploratory analysis indicates that starting with one of the novel agents in combination with MP increases survival compared to starting with MP alone. We were able to develop a methodological framework in which we can evaluate the additive effect of single treatments on the overall OS as a result of the treatment sequence as well as the TTNT per treatment line. Disclosures: Heeg: Pharmerit: Consultancy. van Agthoven:Janssen-Cilag BV: Employment, Equity Ownership. Liwing:Janssen-Cilag AB: Employment, Equity Ownership. Off Label Use: All drugs are approved for the treatment of multiple myeloma. However, non-approved combinations of drugs or use of drugs in non-approved lines of therapy are included in the sequencing model. The data used for the model regarding such combinations and lines of therapy have been taken from published clinical trials. Mellqvist:Jansen-Cilag: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Logman:Pharmerit: Employment. Donatz:Janssen-Cilag GmbH: Employment. Aschan:Janssen-Cilag AB: Employment. Kropff:ORTHO BIOTECH: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Treur:Pharmerit: Consultancy. Barendse:Janssen-Cilag AB: Employment. Harousseau:Janssen-Cilag: Advisory Board, Honoraria; Cellgene: Advisory Board, Honoraria. Palumbo:CELGENE: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; JANSSEN-CILAG: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Sonneveld:Ortho-Biotech: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millennium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document