File Download
  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)

Conference Paper: Validation of the CALGB and EORTC Prognostic Models for Mesothelioma based on multiple CALGB Trials (Alliance)

TitleValidation of the CALGB and EORTC Prognostic Models for Mesothelioma based on multiple CALGB Trials (Alliance)
Authors
KeywordsEORTC
CALGB
Prognostic models
Mesothelioma
Issue Date2013
PublisherLippincott Williams & Wilkins [for] International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer.
Citation
The 15th World Conference on Lung Cancer (WCLC 2013), Sydney, Australia, 26-29 October 2013. In Journal of Thoracic Oncology, 2013, v. 8 n.11 suppl. 2, p. S934-S935, abstract P2.14-002 How to Cite?
AbstractBACKGROUND: Prognostic models play an important role in the design and analysis of mesothelioma treatment trials. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) and the Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB) prognostic models are two well-known tools to predict survival in patients with malignant mesothelioma. In this retrospective validation study, we aim to assess the performance of these two mesothelioma prognostic models for overall survival (OS) with multiple clinical trials data from CALGB. METHODS: Using 204 patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma, the EORTC model (Curran et al 1998) was developed using a Cox regression with white blood cell (WBC) count, ECOG performance status (PS), diagnosis, histological type, and gender as prognostic variables. Using 337 patients with malignant mesothelioma, the CALGB model (Herndon et al 1998) was developed using a crossvalidated exponential regression tree with PS, age, haemoglobin (Hgb) level, WBC count, chest pain indicator, and weight loss indicator as prognostic variables. In this validation study, 602 mesothelioma patients from fifteen completed CALGB treatment trials accrued between June 1984 and August 2009 were included. As the CALGB model was developed using the seven earlier studies, 266 patients from eight recent studies were included in the validation. For the EORTC model, we analysed all studies as well as just those eight recent studies. The concordance of predicted survival times and risk scores was estimated by c-index (Harrell et al 1996). Secondary endpoint of interest includes progression-free survival (PFS). Sensitivity analysis and multiple imputations were used to handle missing data. We also compared our results with PS alone. RESULTS: (1) For OS, the EORTC model produced c-indices equal to 0.592 and 0.610 for the fifteen and eight studies respectively. For the eight recent studies, the CALGB model produced c-indices equal to 0.618 and 0.593 without and with imputation respectively. PS alone produced c-indices equal to 0.591 and 0.564 for the fifteen and eight studies respectively. (2) For PFS, the EORTC model produced c-indices equal to 0.569 and 0.598 for the fifteen and eight studies respectively. For the eight recent studies, the CALGB model produced c-indices equal to 0.585 and 0.560 without and with imputation respectively. PS alone produced c-indices equal to 0.568 and 0.553 for the fifteen and eight studies respectively. See Table 1. CONCLUSION: The EORTC and CALGB models perform similarly, with little improvement in prognostic ability from either compared to using PS alone. Further improvement on these existing prognostic models is warranted.
DescriptionInvited Abstracts: Poster Session 2 - Mesothelioma: no. P2.14-002:
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/195787
ISBN

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorPang, HMHen_US
dc.contributor.authorHodgson, Lydiaen_US
dc.contributor.authorKratzke, RobertAen_US
dc.contributor.authorCrawford, Jeffreyen_US
dc.contributor.authorKindler, Hedyen_US
dc.contributor.authorVokes, EverettEen_US
dc.contributor.authorWang, Xiaofeien_US
dc.date.accessioned2014-03-10T04:53:29Z-
dc.date.available2014-03-10T04:53:29Z-
dc.date.issued2013en_US
dc.identifier.citationThe 15th World Conference on Lung Cancer (WCLC 2013), Sydney, Australia, 26-29 October 2013. In Journal of Thoracic Oncology, 2013, v. 8 n.11 suppl. 2, p. S934-S935, abstract P2.14-002en_US
dc.identifier.isbn1556-0864en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/195787-
dc.descriptionInvited Abstracts: Poster Session 2 - Mesothelioma: no. P2.14-002:en_US
dc.description.abstractBACKGROUND: Prognostic models play an important role in the design and analysis of mesothelioma treatment trials. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) and the Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB) prognostic models are two well-known tools to predict survival in patients with malignant mesothelioma. In this retrospective validation study, we aim to assess the performance of these two mesothelioma prognostic models for overall survival (OS) with multiple clinical trials data from CALGB. METHODS: Using 204 patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma, the EORTC model (Curran et al 1998) was developed using a Cox regression with white blood cell (WBC) count, ECOG performance status (PS), diagnosis, histological type, and gender as prognostic variables. Using 337 patients with malignant mesothelioma, the CALGB model (Herndon et al 1998) was developed using a crossvalidated exponential regression tree with PS, age, haemoglobin (Hgb) level, WBC count, chest pain indicator, and weight loss indicator as prognostic variables. In this validation study, 602 mesothelioma patients from fifteen completed CALGB treatment trials accrued between June 1984 and August 2009 were included. As the CALGB model was developed using the seven earlier studies, 266 patients from eight recent studies were included in the validation. For the EORTC model, we analysed all studies as well as just those eight recent studies. The concordance of predicted survival times and risk scores was estimated by c-index (Harrell et al 1996). Secondary endpoint of interest includes progression-free survival (PFS). Sensitivity analysis and multiple imputations were used to handle missing data. We also compared our results with PS alone. RESULTS: (1) For OS, the EORTC model produced c-indices equal to 0.592 and 0.610 for the fifteen and eight studies respectively. For the eight recent studies, the CALGB model produced c-indices equal to 0.618 and 0.593 without and with imputation respectively. PS alone produced c-indices equal to 0.591 and 0.564 for the fifteen and eight studies respectively. (2) For PFS, the EORTC model produced c-indices equal to 0.569 and 0.598 for the fifteen and eight studies respectively. For the eight recent studies, the CALGB model produced c-indices equal to 0.585 and 0.560 without and with imputation respectively. PS alone produced c-indices equal to 0.568 and 0.553 for the fifteen and eight studies respectively. See Table 1. CONCLUSION: The EORTC and CALGB models perform similarly, with little improvement in prognostic ability from either compared to using PS alone. Further improvement on these existing prognostic models is warranted.-
dc.languageengen_US
dc.publisherLippincott Williams & Wilkins [for] International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer.-
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of Thoracic Oncologyen_US
dc.subjectEORTC-
dc.subjectCALGB-
dc.subjectPrognostic models-
dc.subjectMesothelioma-
dc.titleValidation of the CALGB and EORTC Prognostic Models for Mesothelioma based on multiple CALGB Trials (Alliance)en_US
dc.typeConference_Paperen_US
dc.identifier.emailPang, HMH: herbpang@hku.hken_US
dc.identifier.authorityPang, HMH=rp01857en_US
dc.description.naturelink_to_OA_fulltexten_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1097/01.JTO.0000438438.14562.c8en_US
dc.identifier.volume8en_US
dc.identifier.issue11 suppl. 2-
dc.identifier.spageS934, abstract P2.14-002en_US
dc.identifier.epageS935en_US
dc.publisher.placeUnited States-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats