Oops, you're using an old version of your browser so some of the features on this page may not be displaying properly.

MINIMAL Requirements: Google Chrome 24+Mozilla Firefox 20+Internet Explorer 11Opera 15–18Apple Safari 7SeaMonkey 2.15-2.23

Poster display session

1309 - Comparison of Progression-free Survival (PFS) on Comprehensive Multiplatform Profiling-guided Therapy to PFS on Prior Therapy: a Pooled Analysis from 4 Contemporary Prospective Studies

Date

11 Sep 2017

Session

Poster display session

Presenters

Andreas Seeber

Citation

Annals of Oncology (2017) 28 (suppl_5): v573-v594. 10.1093/annonc/mdx390

Authors

A. Seeber1, G. Chahine2, F. Nasr2, A. Dean3, M. Miranova3, G. Jameson4, N. Robert5, G. Gastl1, H. Zwierzina1

Author affiliations

  • 1 Haematology And Oncology, Innsbruck Medical University, 6020 - Innsbruck/AT
  • 2 Centre Hospitalier De L’universite Saint Joseph De Beyrouth, Hotel-Dieu de France, Beirut/LB
  • 3 Oncology, St John of God Hospital, Subiaco/AU
  • 4 Clinical Trials Program At Scottsdale Healthcare, Virginia G. Piper Cancer Center, Scottsdale/US
  • 5 Oncology, Virginia Cancer Specialists, Fairfax/US
More

Resources

Abstract 1309

Background

It is expected that the progression-free survival (PFS) for patients with refractory cancers will decline over subsequent lines of therapy. Patients with refractory metastatic cancer have previously been shown to derive some clinical benefit from comprehensive multiplatform profiling (CMP) of tumor tissue. Data from four independent physician-led prospective and prospective/retrospective studies was pooled in an exploratory manner to determine if PFS was improved when patients were treated with molecular profiling-guided therapies compared to PFS on the prior therapies.

Methods

Tumor tissue specimens from 202 patients were submitted for CMP to a certified referral laboratory (Caris Life Sciences, USA) between March 2010 and December 2016. Treatment selections were based on predictive biomarker status associated with agents with potential clinical benefit. Clinical benefit was defined as a PFS ratio (= PFS upon treatment according to CMP/PFS on the prior therapy) ≥ 1.3.

Results

As of December 2016, 157 of 202 (77.8%) profiled patients were treated according to the predictive results, of whom 140 were evaluable. Patients had received a median of three prior therapies (range 1-12). The most common tumor types were breast (n = 35), colorectal (n = 14), non-small cell lung (n = 11) and gastric cancer (n = 9). A median PFS of 120.0 days was observed with CMP-directed therapies compared to 89.5 days for prior therapies (HR = 0.70, p = 0.012). Seventy-three of 140 patients (52%) had a PFS ratio ≥ 1.3. Over 70% of treated patients received chemotherapy alone, while 21% of patients received targeted therapies, either alone or in combination with chemotherapy or hormone therapy.

Conclusions

Contrary to the expected decline in PFS, patients had a better outcome when treated with CMP-guided treatments. This was interestingly driven by the precision use of available chemotherapeutic resources rather than sometimes inaccessible targeted therapies. Further prospective trials in specific tumor types may help to highlight particular patient populations who might benefit most from CMP guidance.

Clinical trial identification

Legal entity responsible for the study

Günther Gastl

Funding

None

Disclosure

A. Seeber: Consultant for Caris Life Sciences All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

This site uses cookies. Some of these cookies are essential, while others help us improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used.

For more detailed information on the cookies we use, please check our Privacy Policy.

Customise settings
  • Necessary cookies enable core functionality. The website cannot function properly without these cookies, and you can only disable them by changing your browser preferences.