Clinical report 1215
The predictive and prognostic value of the Glasgow Prognostic Score in metastatic colorectal carcinoma patients receiving bevacizumab Marianne Mailleta, Johann Dréanica, Marion Dhoogea, Olivier Mirc, Catherine Brezaulta, François Goldwasserb, Stanislas Chaussadea and Romain Coriata The Glasgow Prognostic Score (GPS), based on C-reactive protein and albumin levels, has shown its prognostic value in metastatic colorectal carcinoma (mCRC) patients receiving conventional cytotoxic therapy. Bevacizumab, a monoclonal antibody to vascular epidermal growth factor, improves the overall survival in mCRC. The aim of the present study was to assess the prognostic value of GPS in mCRC patients receiving antivascular epidermal growth factor therapy. From August 2005 to August 2012, consecutive patients with mCRC who received chemotherapy plus bevacizumab were eligible for the present analysis. The clinical stage, C-reactive protein, albumin and the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status were recorded at the time of initiation of bevacizumab. Patients received 5-fluorouracil-based chemotherapy plus bevacizumab in accordance with the digestive oncology multidisciplinary staff proposal and in line with the French recommendations for the treatment of mCRC. Eighty patients were eligible (colon n = 59, rectum n = 21), with a median follow-up of 14 months (range 1–58 months). Chemotherapy given with bevacizumab and 5-fluorouracil was oxaliplatin (n = 41, 51%) or irinotecan (n = 27, 34%). At baseline, 56, 31 and 13% of patients had a GPS of 0 (n = 45), 1 (n = 25) and 2 (n = 10), respectively. The
median progression-free survival in these groups was 10.1, 6.5 and 5.6 months (P = 0.16), respectively. The median overall survival was 20.1, 11.4 and 6.5 months, respectively (P = 0.004). Our study confirmed the prognostic value of GPS in mCRC patients receiving chemotherapy plus bevacizumab. Given the poor survival observed in patients with an GPS of 2, studies dedicated to these patients could identify optimal treatment modalities. Anti-Cancer Drugs 25:1215–1219 © 2014 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
Introduction
beyond progression, with an acceptable increase in toxicity [4].
Colorectal carcinoma is the third most commonly diagnosed cancer in men and second in women, with over 96 000 new cases and 50 300 deaths each year in the USA [1]. Approximately 14.5% of patients have liver metastases at the time of diagnosis. In addition, more than 20% of the patients will experience metastatic disease [2]. The prognosis of metastatic colorectal carcinoma (mCRC) is generally poor, with a 5-year overall survival (OS) inferior to 5%. The OS in patients with mCRC increased from 6 to 16 months with the addition of oxaliplatin and irinotecan to 5-fluorouracil. From 2003, the addition of bevacizumab to this backbone of conventional chemotherapy has allowed reaching a median OS of 22 months [3]. Besides, bevacizumab, a monoclonal antibody to the vascular epidermal growth factor (VEGF), improves progressionfree survival (PFS) in the first or the second lines, and 0959-4973 © 2014 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
Anti-Cancer Drugs 2014, 25:1215–1219 Keywords: bevacizumab, chemotherapy, Glasgow Prognostic Score, metastatic colorectal carcinoma, performance status a
Gastroenterology and Digestive Oncology Unit, Department of Gastroenterology, Department of Medical Oncology, Cochin Teaching Hospital, AP-HP, Université Paris Descartes, Sorbonne Paris Cité, Paris and cDepartment of Cancer Medicine, Gustave Roussy Cancer Institute, University of Paris-Sud, Villejuif, France b
Correspondence to Romain Coriat, MD, PhD, Gastroenterology and Digestive Oncology Unit, Department of Gastroenterology, Cochin Teaching Hospital, AP-HP, Université Paris Descartes, 27, Rue du Faubourg Saint Jacques, F75014 Paris, France Tel: + 33 158 411 952; fax: + 33 179 734 881; e-mail: [email protected] Received 16 January 2014 Revised form accepted 19 April 2014
Various clinical and biological factors, such as weight loss, the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) and lymphopenia can be used to estimate the survival, aiming not to initiate aggressive treatment in patients with a poor prognosis [5]. Previous studies have established the prognostic importance of the systemic inflammatory response as evidence by an elevated circulated C-reactive protein (CRP) [6]. The Glasgow Prognostic Score (GPS), based on albumin and CRP levels, has shown its prognostic value in mCRC patients receiving conventional cytotoxic chemotherapy [7,8]. McMillan et al. [9] highlighted that the systemic inflammation-based prognostic score, the GPS, identified patients at risk and also provided well-defined targets for future treatments. DOI: 10.1097/CAD.0000000000000129
Copyright © Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
1216 Anti-Cancer Drugs 2014, Vol 25 No 10
Patients with a GPS of 2 had a median survival of 2 months, which suggests that these patients do not benefit from chemotherapy [10]. We have previously shown that GPS is still effective, and more accurate than ECOG PS, to evaluate the survival in CRC patients receiving anti-EGFR monoclonal antibody cetuximab [11]. The aim of the present analysis was to assess the prognostic value of GPS in mCRC patients receiving bevacizumab in addition to chemotherapy.
Patients and methods We performed a retrospective medical record review of consecutive patients with mCRC who initiated first-line or second-line treatment with 5-fluorouracil-based chemotherapy and bevacizumab (Avastin; Genetech, South San Francisco, California, USA) in our institution from August 2005 to August 2012. Eligibility criteria were advanced pathologically proven mCRC, age 18 years or more and ECOG PS, CRP and albumin evaluation before treatment initiation. Cancer staging was performed on the basis of clinical findings and thoracic and abdominopelvic computed tomography scans, according to the American Society TNM classification. The tumour response was assessed after every six cycles with repeat computed tomography according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors [12]. PFS and OS were measured from the date of first administration of bevacizumab to the date of disease progression or death. This retrospective study was conducted in agreement with good clinical practice and applicable laws and the Declaration of Helsinki, and was approved by the local ethics boards. Routine laboratory measurement of CRP and albumin concentrations was carried out. The coefficient of variation was less than 5%, as established by the routine quality control procedure. GPS was constructed as described previously: patients with both elevated CRP (>10 mg/l) and hypoalbuminemia (< 35 g/l) were allocated a score of 2 [13]. Patients in whom the CRP level was elevated (>10 mg/l) or patients who had hypoalbuminemia less than 35 g/l were allocated a score of 1 [14]. Patients in whom the CRP level was not elevated (< 10 mg/l) and who had a normal albumin level were allocated a score of 0. Statistical analysis
Descriptive statistics were used to report patients and disease characteristics. Qualitative data were expressed as number and percentage. The quantitative descriptive analysis was presented as median (interquartile range). Survival analyses were performed using the Kaplan– Meier method with the log-rank test. Multivariate analysis was performed using the Cox regression analysis. A P value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Statistical analysis was performed using
GraphPad 6.0 (GraphPad Software Inc., San Diego, California, USA) software. Deaths up to 1 June 2013 were included in the analysis.
Results A total of 80 patients were included in the present analysis. Patients and disease baseline characteristics are summarized in Table 1. Most patients (median age 65 years, range, 36–83 years) had normal albumin levels (n = 62, 78%) and normal CRP levels (n = 51, 64%). The chemotherapy regimen used in addition to bevacizumab was mainly FOLFOX (n = 41, 51%) and FOLFIRI (n = 24, 30%). At the time of diagnosis, 56, 31 and 13% of patients had a GPS of 0 (n = 45), 1 (n = 25) and 2 (n = 10), respectively. The median follow-up duration was 14 months (range 1–58 months). At the time of analysis (1 June 2013), eight patients remained under treatment with bevacizumab. By univariate survival analysis, CRP, haemoglobin, GPS and ECOG PS were significant predictors of OS, but not PFS (Table 1). The median PFS was 10.1, 6.5 and 5.6 months in the GPS 0, 1 and 2 groups, respectively Table 1 Clinical characteristics and univariate overall survival analysis in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer receiving 5-fluorouracil and antivascular epidermal growth factor-based chemotherapy (n = 80) Patients (N = 80) [n (%)] Age (years) < 65 38 (48) ≥ 65 42 (52) Sex Male 45 (56) Female 35 (44) ECOG performance statusa 0 13 (16) 1 51 (64) ≥2 16 (20) a GPS 0 45 (56) 1 25 (31) 2 10 (13) C-reactive protein (mg/l)a < 10 51 (64) ≥ 10 29 (36) Albumin (g/l) < 35 18 (22) ≥ 35 62 (78) Type Colon 59 (74) Rectum 21 (26) Number of metastatic sites 1 42 (52) 2 26 (33) ≥3 12 (15) Lymphocytes 13 (16) < 1000/mm3 > 1000/mm3 67 (84) Haemoglobina < 10 × 103/l 3 (4) ≥ 10 × 103/l 77 (96)
Overall survival (months) [median (IQR)]
P value
16.3 (10.4–29.2) 14.9 (6.32–23.1)
0.16
16.7 (6.6–24.5) 14.8 (8.2–23.6)
0.8
17.1 (13.5–35.4) 17.8 (7.7–25.2) 9.4 (3.6–12.6)
0.003
20.1 (11.4–29.3) 11.4 (6.03–19.4) 6.5 (3.33–16.2)
0.03
18 (11.4–29) 7 (4.5–17.3)
0.01
11.5 (4.6–24.2) 16.5 (8.2–24.4)
0.64
14.8 (6.5–24.4) 17.1 (10.8–24.3)
0.54
13.9 (6.8–23.6) 18.9 (6.8–31.3) 15.3 (10.7–21.4)
0.36
14.8 (8.4–30) 18.8 (6.9–24.6)
0.6
7 (3.37–10.9) 15.9 (7.4–24.6)
0.01
ECOG, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group; GPS, Glasgow Prognostic Score; IQR, interquartile range. Statistical difference.
a
Copyright © Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
GPS and bevacizumab in colorectal cancer Maillet et al. 1217
Clinical characteristics and univariate overall and progression-free survival analysis in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer receiving 5-fluorouracil and antivascular epidermal growth factor-based chemotherapy (n = 80)
Table 2
GPS 0
GPS 1
n (%) 45 (56) 25 Age (years) < 65 22 (48) 11 ≥ 65 23 (52) 14 Sex Male 23 (52) 15 Female 22 (48) 10 Number of metastatic sites 1 24 (53) 11 2 13 (29) 10 ≥3 8 (18) 4 a C-reactive protein (mg/l) < 10 39 (87) 6 ≥ 10 6 (13) 19 Albumin (g/l) < 35 0 8 ≥ 35 45 17 ECOG performance status 0 8 (18) 5 1 30 (67) 12 ≥2 7 (15) 8 Overall survival (months)a Median 20.1 (11.4–29.3) 11.4 Progression-free disease (months) Median 10 (5.8–14.9) 6.5
GPS 2
P value
(31)
10 (13)
(44) (56)
5 (50) 5 (50)
0.94
(60) (40)
8 (80) 2 (20)
0.28
(44) (40) (16)
7 (70) 3 (30) 0
0.5
(24) (76)
1 (10) 9 (90)
0.03
(32) (68)
10 (100) 0
–
(20) (48) (32)
0 9 (90) 1 (10)
0.16
Considering two groups (PS = 0 vs. ≥ 1), the median OS were significantly different (P = 0.003; Table 1). By multivariate analysis with ECOG PS (0 vs. ≥ 1), haemoglobin and the GPS (0–1 vs. 2) entered as covariates, only the GPS (P = 0.03) remained a significant predictor of OS.
Discussion In routine practice, the decision to initiate chemotherapy in mCRC patients is primarily based on ECOG PS, which is assessed subjectively, and related to anxiousness and depressiveness. Indeed, significant differences in the assessment of ECOG PS have been reported between oncologists, nurses and patients, oncologist being the most optimistic in their assessment and patients the least [15].
(6–19.4)
6.5 (3.3–16.2)
0.03
(3.5–10.8)
5.6 (3.3–10.9)
0.09
ECOG, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group; GPS, Glasgow Prognostic Score. Statistical difference.
a
GPS has been shown to be a useful predictor of OS in patients with mCRC before the era of anti-VEGF treatments [16]. GPS avoids any subjective assessment, being simply based on albumin and CRP levels. Here, we found that GPS maintains its prognostic value in the era of anti-VEGF therapy, and might even be superior to ECOG PS to predict OS in mCRC patients. Our results are consistent with the relationship between GPS and OS
Fig. 1
(a)
(b) 100
100
80
Percent survival
80
60
60
40
40
PS = 0 PS = 1 PS > 2
20
GPS = 0 GPS = 1 GPS = 2
20
0
0 0
100
200 Days
300
400
0
100
200 Days
300
400
Progression-free survival in Glasgow Prognostic Score (GPS) groups 0, 1 and 2 (a) and in ECOG PS groups 0, 1 and > 2 (b) in patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma.
(P = 0.16) (Table 2 and Fig. 1a). Otherwise, PFS did not differ according to ECOG PS (Fig. 1b). The median OS were 20.1, 11.4 and 6.5 months in the GPS 0, 1 and 2 groups, respectively (P = 0.03; Table 1 and Fig. 2a). The median OS in patients with an ECOG PS of 0, 1 and ≥ 2 were 17.1, 17.8 and 9.4 months, respectively (Fig. 2b).
observed in mCRC patients receiving capecitabine [17] and, more generally, conventional chemotherapy without targeted agents [18–20]. This may be in part because ECOG PS mostly reflects the functional status at a specific point in time, whereas the GPS predicts the progressive nutritional decline [21] that is associated with
Copyright © Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
1218 Anti-Cancer Drugs 2014, Vol 25 No 10
Fig. 2
(a)
(b)
100
100
Percent survival
80
80
60
60
40
40 GPS = 0 GPS = 1 GPS = 2
20
PS = 0 PS = 1 PS > 2
20
0
0 0
200
400 Days
600
800
0
200
400 Days
600
800
Overall survival in Glasgow Prognostic Score (GPS) groups 0, 1 and 2 (a) and in ECOG PS groups 0, 1 and > 2 (b) in patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma.
poor tolerance to chemotherapy [22]. Meanwhile, the presence of inflammation and malnutrition are considered as prognostic factors, with decreased survival in patients with cancer [23]. Mauricio et al. [24] identified that nutritional and inflammatory states are two prognostic factors that deserve more attention in future studies and in clinical practice. It is important to note that the present analysis showed a significant difference in OS according to the GPS but no difference in terms of PFS in patients receiving bevacizumab in addition to chemotherapy. This may be due to the fact that the benefit induced by the addition of bevacizumab to chemotherapy could overcome the impact of an altered nutritional and inflammatory status in patients with a GPS of 2. However, this difference in OS according to the GPS could also be related to a better tolerability and dose intensity of cytotoxic drugs in patients with a favourable nutritional and inflammatory status. Indeed, the tolerability of bevacizumab itself is not expected to be altered in mCRC patients with a GPS of 2, as it has shown a low rate of toxicity with hypertension being the sole bevacizumab-related toxicity that increased in this setting [3,4,25]. Moreover, hypertension is usually easily manageable with early and adequate treatment [3,4,26]. Finally, we observed a particularly small number of patients with all grade anaemia (4%). These could be explained by the widespread use of erythropoietin or transfusion before chemotherapy. Overall, our data suggest that bevacizumab improves PFS in mCRC patients regardless of the nutritional and inflammatory status, similar to what is seen with imatinib
in gastrointestinal stromal tumour patients with a poor general status [27]. Conclusion
In the present study, a simple inflammation-based prognostic score, the GPS, based on routinely available well-standardized laboratory measurements, was an independent predictor of OS among patients with mCRC receiving 5-fluorouracil-based chemotherapy plus bevacizumab. Given the poor OS seen in patients with a GPS of 2, we postulate that the use of the GPS could help in better identifying mCRC patients who could derive benefit from intensive treatments.
Acknowledgements Conflicts of interest
Prof. Goldwasser has acted as a paid consultant for Roche, Amgen, Bayer Healthcare and Pfizer. Dr Mir has acted as an advisory board member for Roche, and a paid consultant for Roche, Servier and Pfizer. Dr Coriat has acted as an advisory board member for Roche, Sanofi and Merck. For the remaining authors, there are no conflicts of interest.
References 1 2
3
4
Siegel R, Ma J, Zou Z, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2014. CA Cancer J Clin 2014; 64:9–29. Manfredi S, Bouvier AM, Lepage C, Hatem C, Dancourt V, Faivre J. Incidence and patterns of recurrence after resection for cure of colonic cancer in a well defined population. Br J Surg 2006; 93:1115–1122. Hurwitz H, Fehrenbacher L, Novotny W, Cartwright T, Hainsworth J, Heim W, et al. Bevacizumab plus irinotecan, fluorouracil, and leucovorin for metastatic colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med 2004; 350:2335–2342. Grothey A, Sugrue MM, Purdie DM, Dong W, Sargent D, Hedrick E, Kozloff M. Bevacizumab beyond first progression is associated with prolonged overall survival in metastatic colorectal cancer: results from a
Copyright © Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
GPS and bevacizumab in colorectal cancer Maillet et al. 1219
5
6
7
8
9 10
11
12
13
14
15
large observational cohort study (BRiTE). J Clin Oncol 2008; 26:5326–5334. Ray-Coquard I, Borg C, Bachelot T, Sebban C, Philip I, Clapisson G, et al. ELYPSE study group. Baseline and early lymphopenia predict for the risk of febrile neutropenia after chemotherapy. Br J Cancer 2003; 88:181–186. O’Gorman P, McMillan DC, McArdle CS. Prognostic factors in advanced gastrointestinal cancer patients with weight loss. Nutr Cancer 2000; 37:36–40. Proctor MJ, Talwar D, Balmar SM, O’Reilly DS, Foulis AK, Horgan PG, et al. The relationship between the presence and site of cancer, an inflammation-based prognostic score and biochemical parameters. Initial results of the Glasgow Inflammation Outcome Study. Br J Cancer 2010; 103:870–876. Brown DJ, Milroy R, Preston T, McMillan DC. The relationship between an inflammation-based prognostic score (Glasgow Prognostic Score) and changes in serum biochemical variables in patients with advanced lung and gastrointestinal cancer. J Clin Pathol 2007; 60:705–708. McMillan DC. Systemic inflammation, nutritional status and survival in patients with cancer. Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care 2009; 12:223–226. Elahi MM, McMillan DC, McArdle CS, Angerson WJ, Sattar N. Score based on hypoalbuminemia and elevated C-reactive protein predicts survival in patients with advanced gastrointestinal cancer. Nutr Cancer 2004; 48:171–173. Dréanic J, Maillet M, Dhooge M, Mir O, Brezault C, Goldwasser F, et al. Prognostic value of the Glasgow Prognostic Score in metastatic colorectal cancer in the era of anti-EGFR therapies. Med Oncol 2013; 30:656. Therasse P, Arbuck SG, Eisenhauer EA, Wanders J, Kaplan RS, Rubinstein L, et al. New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, National Cancer Institute of the United States, National Cancer Institute of Canada. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000; 92:205–216. Forrest LM, McMillan DC, McArdle CS, Angerson WJ, Dunlop DJ. Evaluation of cumulative prognostic scores based on the systemic inflammatory response in patients with inoperable non-small-cell lung cancer. Br J Cancer 2003; 89:1028–1030. Proctor MJ, Morrison DS, Talwar D, Balmer SM, O’Reilly DS, Foulis AK, et al. An inflammation-based prognostic score (mGPS) predicts cancer survival independent of tumour site: a Glasgow Inflammation Outcome Study. Br J Cancer 2011; 104:726–734. Ando M, Ando Y, Hasegawa Y, Shimokata K, Minami H, Wakai K, et al. Prognostic value of performance status assessed by patients themselves, nurses, and oncologists in advanced non-small cell lung cancer. Br J Cancer 2001; 85:1634–1639.
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
Inoue Y, Iwata T, Okugawa Y, Kawamoto A, Hiro J, Toiyama Y, et al. Prognostic significance of a systemic inflammatory response in patients undergoing multimodality therapy for advanced colorectal cancer. Oncology 2013; 84:100–107. Sharma R, Zucknick M, London R, Kacevska M, Liddle C, Clarke SJ. Systemic inflammatory response predicts prognosis in patients with advanced-stage colorectal cancer. Clin Colorectal Cancer 2008; 7:331–337. Travis WD, Costabel U, Hansell DM, King TE Jr, Lynch DA, Nicholson AG, et al. An official American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society statement: update of the international multidisciplinary classification of the idiopathic interstitial pneumonias. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2013; 188:733–748. Leitch EF, Chakrabarti M, Crozier JE, McKee RF, Anderson JH, Horgan PG, McMillan DC. Comparison of the prognostic value of selected markers of the systemic inflammatory response in patients with colorectal cancer. Br J Cancer 2007; 97:1266–1270. Maeda K, Shibutani M, Otani H, Nagahara H, Sugano K, Ikeya T, et al. Prognostic value of preoperative inflammation-based prognostic scores in patients with stage IV colorectal cancer who undergo palliative resection of asymptomatic primary tumors. Anticancer Res 2013; 33:5567–5573. McMillan DC, Elahi MM, Sattar N, Angerson WJ, Johnstone J, McArdle CS. Measurement of the systemic inflammatory response predicts cancerspecific and non-cancer survival in patients with cancer. Nutr Cancer 2001; 41:64–69. Chlebowski RT, Palomares MR, Lillington L, Grosvenor M. Recent implications of weight loss in lung cancer management. Nutrition 1996; 12 (Suppl):S43–S47. Alexandre J, Gross-Goupil M, Falissard B, Nguyen ML, Gornet JM, Misset JL, Goldwasser F. Evaluation of the nutritional and inflammatory status in cancer patients for the risk assessment of severe haematological toxicity following chemotherapy. Ann Oncol 2003; 14:36–41. Maurício SF, da Silva JB, Bering T, Correia MI. Relationship between nutritional status and the Glasgow Prognostic Score in patients with colorectal cancer. Nutrition 2013; 29:625–629. Mir O, Coriat R, Cabanes L, Ropert S, Billemont B, Alexandre J, et al. An observational study of bevacizumab-induced hypertension as a clinical biomarker of antitumor activity. Oncologist 2011; 16:1325–1332. Mir O, Ropert S, Alexandre J, Goldwasser F. Hypertension as a surrogate marker for the activity of anti-VEGF agents. Ann Oncol 2009; 20:967–970. Croom KF, Perry CM. Imatinib mesylate: in the treatment of gastrointestinal stromal tumours. Drugs 2003; 63:513–522, discussion 523–514.
Copyright © Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
The predictive and prognostic value of the Glasgow Prognostic Score in metastatic colorectal carcinoma patients receiving bevacizumab Marianne Mailleta, Johann Dréanica, Marion Dhoogea, Olivier Mirc, Catherine Brezaulta, François Goldwasserb, Stanislas Chaussadea and Romain Coriata The Glasgow Prognostic Score (GPS), based on C-reactive protein and albumin levels, has shown its prognostic value in metastatic colorectal carcinoma (mCRC) patients receiving conventional cytotoxic therapy. Bevacizumab, a monoclonal antibody to vascular epidermal growth factor, improves the overall survival in mCRC. The aim of the present study was to assess the prognostic value of GPS in mCRC patients receiving antivascular epidermal growth factor therapy. From August 2005 to August 2012, consecutive patients with mCRC who received chemotherapy plus bevacizumab were eligible for the present analysis. The clinical stage, C-reactive protein, albumin and the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status were recorded at the time of initiation of bevacizumab. Patients received 5-fluorouracil-based chemotherapy plus bevacizumab in accordance with the digestive oncology multidisciplinary staff proposal and in line with the French recommendations for the treatment of mCRC. Eighty patients were eligible (colon n = 59, rectum n = 21), with a median follow-up of 14 months (range 1–58 months). Chemotherapy given with bevacizumab and 5-fluorouracil was oxaliplatin (n = 41, 51%) or irinotecan (n = 27, 34%). At baseline, 56, 31 and 13% of patients had a GPS of 0 (n = 45), 1 (n = 25) and 2 (n = 10), respectively. The
median progression-free survival in these groups was 10.1, 6.5 and 5.6 months (P = 0.16), respectively. The median overall survival was 20.1, 11.4 and 6.5 months, respectively (P = 0.004). Our study confirmed the prognostic value of GPS in mCRC patients receiving chemotherapy plus bevacizumab. Given the poor survival observed in patients with an GPS of 2, studies dedicated to these patients could identify optimal treatment modalities. Anti-Cancer Drugs 25:1215–1219 © 2014 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
Introduction
beyond progression, with an acceptable increase in toxicity [4].
Colorectal carcinoma is the third most commonly diagnosed cancer in men and second in women, with over 96 000 new cases and 50 300 deaths each year in the USA [1]. Approximately 14.5% of patients have liver metastases at the time of diagnosis. In addition, more than 20% of the patients will experience metastatic disease [2]. The prognosis of metastatic colorectal carcinoma (mCRC) is generally poor, with a 5-year overall survival (OS) inferior to 5%. The OS in patients with mCRC increased from 6 to 16 months with the addition of oxaliplatin and irinotecan to 5-fluorouracil. From 2003, the addition of bevacizumab to this backbone of conventional chemotherapy has allowed reaching a median OS of 22 months [3]. Besides, bevacizumab, a monoclonal antibody to the vascular epidermal growth factor (VEGF), improves progressionfree survival (PFS) in the first or the second lines, and 0959-4973 © 2014 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
Anti-Cancer Drugs 2014, 25:1215–1219 Keywords: bevacizumab, chemotherapy, Glasgow Prognostic Score, metastatic colorectal carcinoma, performance status a
Gastroenterology and Digestive Oncology Unit, Department of Gastroenterology, Department of Medical Oncology, Cochin Teaching Hospital, AP-HP, Université Paris Descartes, Sorbonne Paris Cité, Paris and cDepartment of Cancer Medicine, Gustave Roussy Cancer Institute, University of Paris-Sud, Villejuif, France b
Correspondence to Romain Coriat, MD, PhD, Gastroenterology and Digestive Oncology Unit, Department of Gastroenterology, Cochin Teaching Hospital, AP-HP, Université Paris Descartes, 27, Rue du Faubourg Saint Jacques, F75014 Paris, France Tel: + 33 158 411 952; fax: + 33 179 734 881; e-mail: [email protected] Received 16 January 2014 Revised form accepted 19 April 2014
Various clinical and biological factors, such as weight loss, the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) and lymphopenia can be used to estimate the survival, aiming not to initiate aggressive treatment in patients with a poor prognosis [5]. Previous studies have established the prognostic importance of the systemic inflammatory response as evidence by an elevated circulated C-reactive protein (CRP) [6]. The Glasgow Prognostic Score (GPS), based on albumin and CRP levels, has shown its prognostic value in mCRC patients receiving conventional cytotoxic chemotherapy [7,8]. McMillan et al. [9] highlighted that the systemic inflammation-based prognostic score, the GPS, identified patients at risk and also provided well-defined targets for future treatments. DOI: 10.1097/CAD.0000000000000129
Copyright © Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
1216 Anti-Cancer Drugs 2014, Vol 25 No 10
Patients with a GPS of 2 had a median survival of 2 months, which suggests that these patients do not benefit from chemotherapy [10]. We have previously shown that GPS is still effective, and more accurate than ECOG PS, to evaluate the survival in CRC patients receiving anti-EGFR monoclonal antibody cetuximab [11]. The aim of the present analysis was to assess the prognostic value of GPS in mCRC patients receiving bevacizumab in addition to chemotherapy.
Patients and methods We performed a retrospective medical record review of consecutive patients with mCRC who initiated first-line or second-line treatment with 5-fluorouracil-based chemotherapy and bevacizumab (Avastin; Genetech, South San Francisco, California, USA) in our institution from August 2005 to August 2012. Eligibility criteria were advanced pathologically proven mCRC, age 18 years or more and ECOG PS, CRP and albumin evaluation before treatment initiation. Cancer staging was performed on the basis of clinical findings and thoracic and abdominopelvic computed tomography scans, according to the American Society TNM classification. The tumour response was assessed after every six cycles with repeat computed tomography according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors [12]. PFS and OS were measured from the date of first administration of bevacizumab to the date of disease progression or death. This retrospective study was conducted in agreement with good clinical practice and applicable laws and the Declaration of Helsinki, and was approved by the local ethics boards. Routine laboratory measurement of CRP and albumin concentrations was carried out. The coefficient of variation was less than 5%, as established by the routine quality control procedure. GPS was constructed as described previously: patients with both elevated CRP (>10 mg/l) and hypoalbuminemia (< 35 g/l) were allocated a score of 2 [13]. Patients in whom the CRP level was elevated (>10 mg/l) or patients who had hypoalbuminemia less than 35 g/l were allocated a score of 1 [14]. Patients in whom the CRP level was not elevated (< 10 mg/l) and who had a normal albumin level were allocated a score of 0. Statistical analysis
Descriptive statistics were used to report patients and disease characteristics. Qualitative data were expressed as number and percentage. The quantitative descriptive analysis was presented as median (interquartile range). Survival analyses were performed using the Kaplan– Meier method with the log-rank test. Multivariate analysis was performed using the Cox regression analysis. A P value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Statistical analysis was performed using
GraphPad 6.0 (GraphPad Software Inc., San Diego, California, USA) software. Deaths up to 1 June 2013 were included in the analysis.
Results A total of 80 patients were included in the present analysis. Patients and disease baseline characteristics are summarized in Table 1. Most patients (median age 65 years, range, 36–83 years) had normal albumin levels (n = 62, 78%) and normal CRP levels (n = 51, 64%). The chemotherapy regimen used in addition to bevacizumab was mainly FOLFOX (n = 41, 51%) and FOLFIRI (n = 24, 30%). At the time of diagnosis, 56, 31 and 13% of patients had a GPS of 0 (n = 45), 1 (n = 25) and 2 (n = 10), respectively. The median follow-up duration was 14 months (range 1–58 months). At the time of analysis (1 June 2013), eight patients remained under treatment with bevacizumab. By univariate survival analysis, CRP, haemoglobin, GPS and ECOG PS were significant predictors of OS, but not PFS (Table 1). The median PFS was 10.1, 6.5 and 5.6 months in the GPS 0, 1 and 2 groups, respectively Table 1 Clinical characteristics and univariate overall survival analysis in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer receiving 5-fluorouracil and antivascular epidermal growth factor-based chemotherapy (n = 80) Patients (N = 80) [n (%)] Age (years) < 65 38 (48) ≥ 65 42 (52) Sex Male 45 (56) Female 35 (44) ECOG performance statusa 0 13 (16) 1 51 (64) ≥2 16 (20) a GPS 0 45 (56) 1 25 (31) 2 10 (13) C-reactive protein (mg/l)a < 10 51 (64) ≥ 10 29 (36) Albumin (g/l) < 35 18 (22) ≥ 35 62 (78) Type Colon 59 (74) Rectum 21 (26) Number of metastatic sites 1 42 (52) 2 26 (33) ≥3 12 (15) Lymphocytes 13 (16) < 1000/mm3 > 1000/mm3 67 (84) Haemoglobina < 10 × 103/l 3 (4) ≥ 10 × 103/l 77 (96)
Overall survival (months) [median (IQR)]
P value
16.3 (10.4–29.2) 14.9 (6.32–23.1)
0.16
16.7 (6.6–24.5) 14.8 (8.2–23.6)
0.8
17.1 (13.5–35.4) 17.8 (7.7–25.2) 9.4 (3.6–12.6)
0.003
20.1 (11.4–29.3) 11.4 (6.03–19.4) 6.5 (3.33–16.2)
0.03
18 (11.4–29) 7 (4.5–17.3)
0.01
11.5 (4.6–24.2) 16.5 (8.2–24.4)
0.64
14.8 (6.5–24.4) 17.1 (10.8–24.3)
0.54
13.9 (6.8–23.6) 18.9 (6.8–31.3) 15.3 (10.7–21.4)
0.36
14.8 (8.4–30) 18.8 (6.9–24.6)
0.6
7 (3.37–10.9) 15.9 (7.4–24.6)
0.01
ECOG, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group; GPS, Glasgow Prognostic Score; IQR, interquartile range. Statistical difference.
a
Copyright © Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
GPS and bevacizumab in colorectal cancer Maillet et al. 1217
Clinical characteristics and univariate overall and progression-free survival analysis in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer receiving 5-fluorouracil and antivascular epidermal growth factor-based chemotherapy (n = 80)
Table 2
GPS 0
GPS 1
n (%) 45 (56) 25 Age (years) < 65 22 (48) 11 ≥ 65 23 (52) 14 Sex Male 23 (52) 15 Female 22 (48) 10 Number of metastatic sites 1 24 (53) 11 2 13 (29) 10 ≥3 8 (18) 4 a C-reactive protein (mg/l) < 10 39 (87) 6 ≥ 10 6 (13) 19 Albumin (g/l) < 35 0 8 ≥ 35 45 17 ECOG performance status 0 8 (18) 5 1 30 (67) 12 ≥2 7 (15) 8 Overall survival (months)a Median 20.1 (11.4–29.3) 11.4 Progression-free disease (months) Median 10 (5.8–14.9) 6.5
GPS 2
P value
(31)
10 (13)
(44) (56)
5 (50) 5 (50)
0.94
(60) (40)
8 (80) 2 (20)
0.28
(44) (40) (16)
7 (70) 3 (30) 0
0.5
(24) (76)
1 (10) 9 (90)
0.03
(32) (68)
10 (100) 0
–
(20) (48) (32)
0 9 (90) 1 (10)
0.16
Considering two groups (PS = 0 vs. ≥ 1), the median OS were significantly different (P = 0.003; Table 1). By multivariate analysis with ECOG PS (0 vs. ≥ 1), haemoglobin and the GPS (0–1 vs. 2) entered as covariates, only the GPS (P = 0.03) remained a significant predictor of OS.
Discussion In routine practice, the decision to initiate chemotherapy in mCRC patients is primarily based on ECOG PS, which is assessed subjectively, and related to anxiousness and depressiveness. Indeed, significant differences in the assessment of ECOG PS have been reported between oncologists, nurses and patients, oncologist being the most optimistic in their assessment and patients the least [15].
(6–19.4)
6.5 (3.3–16.2)
0.03
(3.5–10.8)
5.6 (3.3–10.9)
0.09
ECOG, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group; GPS, Glasgow Prognostic Score. Statistical difference.
a
GPS has been shown to be a useful predictor of OS in patients with mCRC before the era of anti-VEGF treatments [16]. GPS avoids any subjective assessment, being simply based on albumin and CRP levels. Here, we found that GPS maintains its prognostic value in the era of anti-VEGF therapy, and might even be superior to ECOG PS to predict OS in mCRC patients. Our results are consistent with the relationship between GPS and OS
Fig. 1
(a)
(b) 100
100
80
Percent survival
80
60
60
40
40
PS = 0 PS = 1 PS > 2
20
GPS = 0 GPS = 1 GPS = 2
20
0
0 0
100
200 Days
300
400
0
100
200 Days
300
400
Progression-free survival in Glasgow Prognostic Score (GPS) groups 0, 1 and 2 (a) and in ECOG PS groups 0, 1 and > 2 (b) in patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma.
(P = 0.16) (Table 2 and Fig. 1a). Otherwise, PFS did not differ according to ECOG PS (Fig. 1b). The median OS were 20.1, 11.4 and 6.5 months in the GPS 0, 1 and 2 groups, respectively (P = 0.03; Table 1 and Fig. 2a). The median OS in patients with an ECOG PS of 0, 1 and ≥ 2 were 17.1, 17.8 and 9.4 months, respectively (Fig. 2b).
observed in mCRC patients receiving capecitabine [17] and, more generally, conventional chemotherapy without targeted agents [18–20]. This may be in part because ECOG PS mostly reflects the functional status at a specific point in time, whereas the GPS predicts the progressive nutritional decline [21] that is associated with
Copyright © Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
1218 Anti-Cancer Drugs 2014, Vol 25 No 10
Fig. 2
(a)
(b)
100
100
Percent survival
80
80
60
60
40
40 GPS = 0 GPS = 1 GPS = 2
20
PS = 0 PS = 1 PS > 2
20
0
0 0
200
400 Days
600
800
0
200
400 Days
600
800
Overall survival in Glasgow Prognostic Score (GPS) groups 0, 1 and 2 (a) and in ECOG PS groups 0, 1 and > 2 (b) in patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma.
poor tolerance to chemotherapy [22]. Meanwhile, the presence of inflammation and malnutrition are considered as prognostic factors, with decreased survival in patients with cancer [23]. Mauricio et al. [24] identified that nutritional and inflammatory states are two prognostic factors that deserve more attention in future studies and in clinical practice. It is important to note that the present analysis showed a significant difference in OS according to the GPS but no difference in terms of PFS in patients receiving bevacizumab in addition to chemotherapy. This may be due to the fact that the benefit induced by the addition of bevacizumab to chemotherapy could overcome the impact of an altered nutritional and inflammatory status in patients with a GPS of 2. However, this difference in OS according to the GPS could also be related to a better tolerability and dose intensity of cytotoxic drugs in patients with a favourable nutritional and inflammatory status. Indeed, the tolerability of bevacizumab itself is not expected to be altered in mCRC patients with a GPS of 2, as it has shown a low rate of toxicity with hypertension being the sole bevacizumab-related toxicity that increased in this setting [3,4,25]. Moreover, hypertension is usually easily manageable with early and adequate treatment [3,4,26]. Finally, we observed a particularly small number of patients with all grade anaemia (4%). These could be explained by the widespread use of erythropoietin or transfusion before chemotherapy. Overall, our data suggest that bevacizumab improves PFS in mCRC patients regardless of the nutritional and inflammatory status, similar to what is seen with imatinib
in gastrointestinal stromal tumour patients with a poor general status [27]. Conclusion
In the present study, a simple inflammation-based prognostic score, the GPS, based on routinely available well-standardized laboratory measurements, was an independent predictor of OS among patients with mCRC receiving 5-fluorouracil-based chemotherapy plus bevacizumab. Given the poor OS seen in patients with a GPS of 2, we postulate that the use of the GPS could help in better identifying mCRC patients who could derive benefit from intensive treatments.
Acknowledgements Conflicts of interest
Prof. Goldwasser has acted as a paid consultant for Roche, Amgen, Bayer Healthcare and Pfizer. Dr Mir has acted as an advisory board member for Roche, and a paid consultant for Roche, Servier and Pfizer. Dr Coriat has acted as an advisory board member for Roche, Sanofi and Merck. For the remaining authors, there are no conflicts of interest.
References 1 2
3
4
Siegel R, Ma J, Zou Z, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2014. CA Cancer J Clin 2014; 64:9–29. Manfredi S, Bouvier AM, Lepage C, Hatem C, Dancourt V, Faivre J. Incidence and patterns of recurrence after resection for cure of colonic cancer in a well defined population. Br J Surg 2006; 93:1115–1122. Hurwitz H, Fehrenbacher L, Novotny W, Cartwright T, Hainsworth J, Heim W, et al. Bevacizumab plus irinotecan, fluorouracil, and leucovorin for metastatic colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med 2004; 350:2335–2342. Grothey A, Sugrue MM, Purdie DM, Dong W, Sargent D, Hedrick E, Kozloff M. Bevacizumab beyond first progression is associated with prolonged overall survival in metastatic colorectal cancer: results from a
Copyright © Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
GPS and bevacizumab in colorectal cancer Maillet et al. 1219
5
6
7
8
9 10
11
12
13
14
15
large observational cohort study (BRiTE). J Clin Oncol 2008; 26:5326–5334. Ray-Coquard I, Borg C, Bachelot T, Sebban C, Philip I, Clapisson G, et al. ELYPSE study group. Baseline and early lymphopenia predict for the risk of febrile neutropenia after chemotherapy. Br J Cancer 2003; 88:181–186. O’Gorman P, McMillan DC, McArdle CS. Prognostic factors in advanced gastrointestinal cancer patients with weight loss. Nutr Cancer 2000; 37:36–40. Proctor MJ, Talwar D, Balmar SM, O’Reilly DS, Foulis AK, Horgan PG, et al. The relationship between the presence and site of cancer, an inflammation-based prognostic score and biochemical parameters. Initial results of the Glasgow Inflammation Outcome Study. Br J Cancer 2010; 103:870–876. Brown DJ, Milroy R, Preston T, McMillan DC. The relationship between an inflammation-based prognostic score (Glasgow Prognostic Score) and changes in serum biochemical variables in patients with advanced lung and gastrointestinal cancer. J Clin Pathol 2007; 60:705–708. McMillan DC. Systemic inflammation, nutritional status and survival in patients with cancer. Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care 2009; 12:223–226. Elahi MM, McMillan DC, McArdle CS, Angerson WJ, Sattar N. Score based on hypoalbuminemia and elevated C-reactive protein predicts survival in patients with advanced gastrointestinal cancer. Nutr Cancer 2004; 48:171–173. Dréanic J, Maillet M, Dhooge M, Mir O, Brezault C, Goldwasser F, et al. Prognostic value of the Glasgow Prognostic Score in metastatic colorectal cancer in the era of anti-EGFR therapies. Med Oncol 2013; 30:656. Therasse P, Arbuck SG, Eisenhauer EA, Wanders J, Kaplan RS, Rubinstein L, et al. New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, National Cancer Institute of the United States, National Cancer Institute of Canada. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000; 92:205–216. Forrest LM, McMillan DC, McArdle CS, Angerson WJ, Dunlop DJ. Evaluation of cumulative prognostic scores based on the systemic inflammatory response in patients with inoperable non-small-cell lung cancer. Br J Cancer 2003; 89:1028–1030. Proctor MJ, Morrison DS, Talwar D, Balmer SM, O’Reilly DS, Foulis AK, et al. An inflammation-based prognostic score (mGPS) predicts cancer survival independent of tumour site: a Glasgow Inflammation Outcome Study. Br J Cancer 2011; 104:726–734. Ando M, Ando Y, Hasegawa Y, Shimokata K, Minami H, Wakai K, et al. Prognostic value of performance status assessed by patients themselves, nurses, and oncologists in advanced non-small cell lung cancer. Br J Cancer 2001; 85:1634–1639.
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
Inoue Y, Iwata T, Okugawa Y, Kawamoto A, Hiro J, Toiyama Y, et al. Prognostic significance of a systemic inflammatory response in patients undergoing multimodality therapy for advanced colorectal cancer. Oncology 2013; 84:100–107. Sharma R, Zucknick M, London R, Kacevska M, Liddle C, Clarke SJ. Systemic inflammatory response predicts prognosis in patients with advanced-stage colorectal cancer. Clin Colorectal Cancer 2008; 7:331–337. Travis WD, Costabel U, Hansell DM, King TE Jr, Lynch DA, Nicholson AG, et al. An official American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society statement: update of the international multidisciplinary classification of the idiopathic interstitial pneumonias. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2013; 188:733–748. Leitch EF, Chakrabarti M, Crozier JE, McKee RF, Anderson JH, Horgan PG, McMillan DC. Comparison of the prognostic value of selected markers of the systemic inflammatory response in patients with colorectal cancer. Br J Cancer 2007; 97:1266–1270. Maeda K, Shibutani M, Otani H, Nagahara H, Sugano K, Ikeya T, et al. Prognostic value of preoperative inflammation-based prognostic scores in patients with stage IV colorectal cancer who undergo palliative resection of asymptomatic primary tumors. Anticancer Res 2013; 33:5567–5573. McMillan DC, Elahi MM, Sattar N, Angerson WJ, Johnstone J, McArdle CS. Measurement of the systemic inflammatory response predicts cancerspecific and non-cancer survival in patients with cancer. Nutr Cancer 2001; 41:64–69. Chlebowski RT, Palomares MR, Lillington L, Grosvenor M. Recent implications of weight loss in lung cancer management. Nutrition 1996; 12 (Suppl):S43–S47. Alexandre J, Gross-Goupil M, Falissard B, Nguyen ML, Gornet JM, Misset JL, Goldwasser F. Evaluation of the nutritional and inflammatory status in cancer patients for the risk assessment of severe haematological toxicity following chemotherapy. Ann Oncol 2003; 14:36–41. Maurício SF, da Silva JB, Bering T, Correia MI. Relationship between nutritional status and the Glasgow Prognostic Score in patients with colorectal cancer. Nutrition 2013; 29:625–629. Mir O, Coriat R, Cabanes L, Ropert S, Billemont B, Alexandre J, et al. An observational study of bevacizumab-induced hypertension as a clinical biomarker of antitumor activity. Oncologist 2011; 16:1325–1332. Mir O, Ropert S, Alexandre J, Goldwasser F. Hypertension as a surrogate marker for the activity of anti-VEGF agents. Ann Oncol 2009; 20:967–970. Croom KF, Perry CM. Imatinib mesylate: in the treatment of gastrointestinal stromal tumours. Drugs 2003; 63:513–522, discussion 523–514.
Copyright © Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
