Abstract 127P
Background
We propose the immunotherapy progression decision (iPD) score, a practical tool based on easily available patient features measured at the first evaluation after immunotherapy. Its purpose is to help oncologists decide whether to continue the current treatment or to change rapidly to another therapeutic line.
Methods
In this retrospective study, 107 patients with progressive disease at first evaluation according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors 1.1 (RECIST 1.1) were included. Clinical, radiological, and biological data at baseline and 1st evaluation were analyzed.
Results
Independent variables identified through Spearman correlation test were analyzed in a univariate study. The iPD score was constructed using only the independent variables, each variable was considered as a factor deteriorating the survival of the patients. They were stratified into three groups: Good Prognosis (GP), Poor Prognosis (PP) and Critical Prognosis (CP). Each group showed significantly different survivals (GP: 11.4, PP: 4.4, CP: 2.3 months median OS, p<0.001 log-rank-test). The iPD score was the only significant variable (HR=1.95, p<0.005) in the multivariate Cox analysis fitted to different prognostic scores such as the Gustave Roussy Immunotherapy score and the Royal Marsden Hospital scores.
Conclusions
The iPD score is more significant compared to the other scores that exist currently. In addition to identifying patients with poor survival, it also identifies the pseudo progressors at the first evaluation after immunotherapy. The iPD score provides oncologists with a new evaluation, computable at first progression, to decide if treatment should be continued (for the GP group), or immediately change the therapy for the PP and CP groups. A larger cohort is still needed for the validation of this prognostic score.
Clinical trial identification
Editorial acknowledgement
Legal entity responsible for the study
The authors.
Funding
Has not received any funding.
Disclosure
All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.