Nomogram Predicting Clinical Outcomes in Non-small Cell Lung Cancer Patients Treated with Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors

Bhumsuk Keam; Dong-Wan Kim; Jin Hyun Park; Jeong-Ok Lee; Tae Min Kim; Se-Hoon Lee; Doo Hyun Chung; Dae Seog Heo

doi:10.4143/crt.2013.120

Articles

Page Path: HOME > Cancer Res Treat > Volume 46(4); 2014 > Article

Original Article Nomogram Predicting Clinical Outcomes in Non-small Cell Lung Cancer Patients Treated with Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors: Bhumsuk Keam, MD, PhD^1,2, Dong-Wan Kim, MD, PhD^1,2,, Jin Hyun Park, MD¹, Jeong-Ok Lee, MD¹, Tae Min Kim, MD, PhD^1,2, Se-Hoon Lee, MD, PhD^1,2, Doo Hyun Chung, MD, PhD³, Dae Seog Heo, MD, PhD^1,2; Cancer Research and Treatment : Official Journal of Korean Cancer Association 2014;46(4):323-330.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.4143/crt.2013.120
Published online: July 14, 2014

¹Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Korea

²Cancer Research Institute, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea

³Department of Pathology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Korea

Correspondence: Dong-Wan Kim, MD, PhD Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital, 101 Daehak-ro, Jongno-gu, Seoul 110-744, Korea
Tel: 82-2-2072-2995 Fax: 82-2-764-2199 E-mail: kimdw@snu.ac.kr

• Received: July 23, 2013 • Accepted: October 1, 2013

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

21,327 Views
129 Download
24 Web of Science
20 Crossref
24 Scopus

Full Article

Download PDF

Abstract

Purpose
The aim of this study was to develop a pragmatic nomogram for prediction of progressionfree survival (PFS) for the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) in EGFR mutant non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).
Materials and Methods
A total of 306 recurred or metastatic NSCLC patients with EGFR mutation, who received EGFR TKIs, were enrolled in this study. We developed the nomogram, using a Cox proportional hazard regression model for PFS.
Results
The median PFS was 11.2 months. Response rate to EGFR TKI was 71.9%. Multivariate Cox model identified disease status, performance status, chemotherapy line, response to EGFR TKI, and bone metastasis as independent prognostic factors, and the nomogram for PFS was developed, based on these covariates. The concordance index for a nomogram was 0.708, and the calibration was also good.
Conclusion
We developed a nomogram, based on clinical characteristics, for prediction of the PFS to EGFR TKI in NSCLC patients with EGFR mutation.
Key words: Nomograms, Lung neoplasms, Epidermal growth factor receptor, Tyrosine kinase inhibitor, Prognosis

Introduction

Somatic mutations in the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) gene are present in a subset of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). EGFR mutations occur in the tyrosine kinase domain, mostly involving in-frame deletions in exon 19 and a point mutation (L858R) in exon 21, leading to constitutive activation of EGFR [1,2]. EGFR mutations are associated with increased sensitivity to specific EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), and repeatedly confirmed as a predictive and prognostic factor for EGFR TKIs [3-5].

Mutation analysis for EGFR is essential for the guidance of treatment decisions, regarding the use of EGFR TKIs, and is becoming a standard recommendation in the pretreatment work-up of patients with lung adenocarcinoma [6,7]. Although EGFR mutation status is associated with a high response rate, all patients eventually develop acquired resistance, and progression-free survival (PFS), reaching approximately 10 months [8,9].

However, predictive or prognostic factors for EGFR TKI, other than EGFR mutation, have not been well elucidated. A pragmatic prognostic model, which integrates potential relevant factors, has not been developed in EGFR mutant NSCLC. Based on these findings, there is an urgent need for a robust prognostic model for prediction of PFS for EGFR TKI in patients with NSCLC. The aim of this study was to develop a pragmatic nomogram for prediction of PFS for EGFR TKI in EGFR mutant NSCLC.

Materials and Methods

1. Study population

We retrospectively analyzed a consecutive database of NSCLC patients treated with either gefitinib or erlotinib at Seoul National University Hospital, between January 2002 and December 2011. Inclusion criteria were as follows: 1) pathology-confirmed, 2) recurred or metastatic NSCLC, 3) underwent EGFR mutation test, and 4) receiving gefitinib or erlotinib as a palliative chemotherapy. Gefitinib was administered orally, at a dose of 250 mg daily, and erlotinib was administered at a dose of 150 mg daily, until tumor progression, death, significant uncontrolled toxicity, or patient refusal. Mutational analysis of EGFR exons 18, 19, 20, and 21 was performed, as previously described [10,11]. In brief, coding sequences from exon 18 to 21 were amplified by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) with both forward and reverse sequence-specific primers [10,11]. PCR fragments were sequenced and analyzed in both sense and antisense directions. All sequence variants were confirmed by sequencing the products of independent PCR amplifications in both directions. Chest computed tomography scans were performed every 8 to 12 weeks as a routine clinical procedure, and additionally as needed to confirm patient response and for assessment of disease progression. The treatment response was evaluated using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors criteria [12]. PFS was measured from the first day of TKI treatment until the first objective sign of disease progression or death. This study was reviewed and approved by the Institutional Review Board of Seoul National University Hospital.

2. Constructing a model

Details of model construction are described in our previous report [13]. We constructed the nomogram, using the Cox proportional hazard regression (PHR) model for the survival data [14]. Beta-coefficients from the model were used for allocation of points. Univariate Cox PHR analyses were performed to evaluate the prognostic values of each variable, followed by multivariate Cox PHR analysis. Multicollinearity between variables was also tested, and one of the variables, which showed multicollinearity, was removed in the model. The final multivariate model was chosen on the basis of the stepwise procedure, as well as consideration of the clinical or biologic importance of the variables in the model. Based on the prediction model with identified predictive and prognostic factors, a nomogram was built for prediction of PFS.

3. Evaluating model performance

The model performance was evaluated, in terms of the discrimination and calibration performance. Discrimination is the ability of the predictor to separate patients with different responses or events. Discrimination for survival data was evaluated, using the C statistic with concordance index (C-index) [15], which is similar in concept to the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve in the logistic model [16], but appropriate for the censored data [17,18]. The concordance index provides the probability that given two randomly selected patients, the patient with the worse outcome will in fact have a worse outcome prediction. The C-index ranges from 0 to 1, with 1 indicating perfect concordance, 0.5 indicating no better concordance than chance, and 0 indicating perfect discordance. In general, the model is considered relatively good for discrimination with values above 0.70. ROC curve for the survival data was drawn, using the methods proposed by Heagerty et al. [19].

Calibration is the agreement between the observed probability and predicted probability produced by the model [15]. The nomogram was calibrated by plotting the nomogram’s predicted 12-month PFS rate against the actually observed PFS rate, as calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Patients were divided into eight groups, using the quartiles of the predicted risk as the cutoff points. We used the bootstrapping re-sampling method (400 repetitions) in order to obtain relatively unbiased estimates and to check the interval validation.

Statistical analyses were performed, using STATA statistical software ver. 11.0 (STATA, College Station, TX) and R software ver. 2.13.2 (http://www.r-project.org). R package with the Design, and survcomp libraries (available at URL: http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/) were used.

Results

Clinical characteristics of the 306 patients are shown in Table 1. The median PFS was 11.2 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 9.9 to 12.5 months), and 181 progression events had occurred. The 6-, 12-, and 18-month PFS rates, for the entire patient cohort, were 73.5%, 46.0%, and 25.1%, respectively. Response rate to EGFR TKI was 71.9% (95% CI, 66.9% to 76.9%).

1. Nomogram predicting PFS

We performed a univariate and multivariate Cox PHR analysis; Table 2 shows the results. In the univariate Cox PHR model, disease status, performance status, chemotherapy line, EGFR mutation status, response to TKI, liver metastasis, and bone metastasis showed association with PFS. Before constructing a multivariate Cox PHR model, colinearity was assessed, and the association between the variables was calculated, using the chi-square test for categorical variables. Significant association was observed between EGFR mutation status and response to TKI (chi-square p < 0.001). Liver metastasis and bone metastasis showed significant multicollinearity (chi-square p < 0.031). Therefore, liver metastasis and EGFR mutation status were not included in the multivariate Cox PHR model. Based on the results of multivariate analysis, the final nomogram model demonstrated the best fit and included all 5 variables (Fig. 1). The nomogram was developed for prediction of PFS, and can assign numeric predictions points for the risk of progression at 6, 12, and 18 months. Its C-index was 0.708 (95% CI, 0.659 to 0.758), and it appeared to be accurate. Fig. 2 shows the ROC curve and Fig. 3 shows the calibration plot.

Discussion

In the current study, we developed the nomogram for prediction of PFS for EGFR TKI in NSCLC patients with EGFR mutation, based on the clinical and molecular characteristics. These practical models were internally validated and showed a good model performance in terms of calibration and discrimination. This nomogram may be useful in predicting when primary or acquired resistance to EGFR TKI will develop.

To date, several prognostic models [20,21] have been reported in NSCLC patients receiving EGFR TKI. Florescu et al. [20], who analyzed patients treated with erlotinib in the National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trial Group Study BR21, identified the ten following clinical factors associated with overall survival: Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, smoking, weight loss, anemia, lactate dehydrogenase, time from diagnosis, response to prior treatment, ethnicity, and number of prior regimens. Florescu et al. [20] developed a clinical prognostic index, which allocates the scores to ten clinical factors, and categorized patients according to four subgroups. Among these 10 factors, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status and smoking were also valid in our model.

In addition to the clinical factors, several molecular markers are also known to be associated with PFS or resistance for EGFR TKI. Expression of thyroid transcription factor-1 [22] and estrogen receptor beta [23] showed an association with longer PFS for EGFR TKI, while K-ras mutation [24,25] and phosphoinositide-3-kinase catalytic alpha mutation [24] were associated with shorter PFS. Incorporation of these molecular markers into the nomogram can result in construction of a better prediction model.

The current study has some limitations. First, our nomogram was not externally validated using an independent data set. We performed only the internal validation, using the bootstrap method. It will be necessary to validate our nomogram by application in independent patients in other patient populations particularly Western patients. Second, response evaluation was repeatedly performed every 8-12 weeks, based on routine practice pattern. PFS might not be accurate due to inconsistent evaluation interval. Despite these limitations, the current study first developed the practical nomogram, regarding EGFR TKIs efficacy.

Conclusion

We developed a simple and precise nomogram that can be used for prediction of the PFS to EGFR TKIs in NSCLC patients with EGFR mutant. This prognostic nomogram can enable physicians to provide patients with an approximation of their prognosis before the initiation of EGFR TKIs treatment. In the clinic, this nomogram may be useful in prediction of when resistance to EGFR TKIs will occur, and provide guidance for identification of patients who will have long or short duration benefit from EGFR TKIs.

NOTES

Conflict of interest relevant to this article was not reported.

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by grants from the Innovative Research Institute for Cell Therapy, Republic of Korea (A062260), and this work was also supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) Grant funded by the Korean Government (2010-0009563).

Fig. 1.

Nomogram for prediction of progression-free survival (PFS) to epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) in non-small cell lung cancer. The nomogram is used by totaling the points identified on the top scale for each independent covariate. The total points projected to the bottom scale indicate the % probability of 6-, 12-, and 18-month PFS. ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status.

Fig. 2.

Receiver operating characteristic curve of the Cox proportional hazard regression model. Harrell’s C-index was 0.708 (95% confidence interval, 0.659 to 0.758).

Fig. 3.

Calibration plot for 12-month progression-free survival (PFS) from the nomogram. On the calibration plot, the x-axis is nomogram predicted probability of PFS. The y-axis is observed PFS. Vertical bars indicate 95% confidence interval calculated using Kaplan-Meier analysis.

Table 1.

Characteristics of the 306 patients who received gefitinib or erlotinib

	No. (%) (n=306)
Age (yr)
Median (range)	61 (31-85)
Gender
Male	108 (35.3)
Female	198 (64.7)
Disease status
Recurred	67 (21.9)
Initial stage wet IIIB, IV	239 (78.1)
Smoking
Never-smoker	222 (72.5)
Current or ex-smoker	76 (24.8)
Unknown	8 (2.6)
Pathology
Adenocarcinoma	275 (89.9)
Non-small cell carcinoma NOS	23 (7.5)
Squamous cell carcinoma	4 (1.3)
Others	4 (1.3)
ECOG PS
0	16 (5.2)
1	209 (68.3)
2	27 (8.8)
3	10 (3.3)
4	2 (0.7)
Unknown	42 (13.7)
Liver metastasis
No	260 (85.0)
Yes	46 (15.0)
Bone metastasis
No	177 (57.8)
Yes	129 (42.2)
Brain metastasis
No	196 (64.1)
Yes	110 (35.9)
EGFR TKI
Gefitinib	274 (89.5)
Erlotinib	32 (10.5)
Line
1st	108 (35.3)
2nd	178 (58.2)
3rd or more	20 (6.5)
EGFR mutation
Del-19 or L858R	290 (67.6)
Rare mutation^a)	16 (3.7)
Treatment response
Complete response	12 (3.9)
Partial response	208 (68.0)
Stable disease	46 (15.0)
Progressive disease	24 (7.8)
Not evaluable	16 (5.2)

NOS, not otherwise specified; ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status; EGFR, epidermal growth factor receptor; TKI, tyrosine kinase inhibitor.

^a) Rare mutations were defined as any mutation other than del-19 or L858R in exon 21 of the EGFR gene.

Table 2.

Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression analysis between clinicopathologic variables and progression-free survival

Variable	Univariate			Multivariate
Variable	HR	95% CI	p-value	HR	95% CI	p-value
Disease status
Recurred	1			1
Initial metastatic	1.906	1.325-2.742	0.001	2.126	1.434-3.152	< 0.001
Pathology
ADC	1			-
Non-ADC	0.886	0.548-1.434	0.623	-	-	-
Smoking
Never	1			-
Current or ex-smoking	1.237	0.880-1.739	0.220	-	-	-
ECOG PS
0-1	1			1
2-4	1.740	1.088-2.783	0.021	1.978	1.210-3.235	0.007
EGFR TKI
Gefitinib	1			-
Erlotinib	0.910	0.590-1.402	0.668	-	-	-
Line
1st	1			1
2nd	1.270	0.908-1.777	0.163	1.233	0.860-1.767	0.254
3rd or more	1.925	1.116-3.321	0.019	2.198	1.228-3.936	0.008
EGFR mutation
Del-19 or L858R	1			-
Rare	4.158	2.358-7.331	< 0.001	-	-	-
Response to TKI
Responding	1			1
Non-responding	3.056	2.223-4.200	< 0.001	3.141	2.228-4.426	< 0.001
Liver metastasis
No	1			-
Yes	1.546	1.067-2.240	0.021	-	-	-
Bone metastasis
No	1			1
Yes	1.730	1.286-2.327	< 0.001	1.384	1.001-1.913	0.049
Brain metastasis
No	1			-
Yes	1.241	0.919-1.677	0.160	-	-	-

HR, hazard ratio; CI, confidence interval; ADC, adenocarcinoma; ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status; EGFR, epidermal growth factor receptor; TKI, tyrosine kinase inhibitor.

REFERENCES

1. Lynch TJ, Bell DW, Sordella R, Gurubhagavatula S, Okimoto RA, Brannigan BW, et al. Activating mutations in the epidermal growth factor receptor underlying responsiveness of non-small-cell lung cancer to gefitinib. N Engl J Med. 2004;350:2129–39. Article PubMed
2. Paez JG, Janne PA, Lee JC, Tracy S, Greulich H, Gabriel S, et al. EGFR mutations in lung cancer: correlation with clinical response to gefitinib therapy. Science. 2004;304:1497–500. Article PubMed
3. Han SW, Kim TY, Hwang PG, Jeong S, Kim J, Choi IS, et al. Predictive and prognostic impact of epidermal growth factor receptor mutation in non-small-cell lung cancer patients treated with gefitinib. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:2493–501. Article PubMed
4. Takano T, Ohe Y, Sakamoto H, Tsuta K, Matsuno Y, Tateishi U, et al. Epidermal growth factor receptor gene mutations and increased copy numbers predict gefitinib sensitivity in patients with recurrent non-small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:6829–37. Article PubMed
5. Mitsudomi T, Kosaka T, Endoh H, Horio Y, Hida T, Mori S, et al. Mutations of the epidermal growth factor receptor gene predict prolonged survival after gefitinib treatment in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer with postoperative recurrence. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:2513–20. Article PubMed
6. Keedy VL, Temin S, Somerfield MR, Beasley MB, Johnson DH, McShane LM, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology provisional clinical opinion: epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) Mutation testing for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer considering first-line EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29:2121–7. Article PubMed
7. Azzoli CG, Baker S Jr, Temin S, Pao W, Aliff T, Brahmer J, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline update on chemotherapy for stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:6251–66. Article PubMed PMC
8. Mok TS, Wu YL, Thongprasert S, Yang CH, Chu DT, Saijo N, et al. Gefitinib or carboplatin-paclitaxel in pulmonary adenocarcinoma. N Engl J Med. 2009;361:947–57. Article PubMed
9. Maemondo M, Inoue A, Kobayashi K, Sugawara S, Oizumi S, Isobe H, et al. Gefitinib or chemotherapy for non-small-cell lung cancer with mutated EGFR. N Engl J Med. 2010;362:2380–8. Article PubMed
10. Keam B, Kim DW, Park JH, Lee JO, Kim TM, Lee SH, et al. Rare and complex mutations of epidermal growth factor receptor, and efficacy of tyrosine kinase inhibitor in patients with non-small cell lung cancer. Int J Clin Oncol. 2013 Aug 6 [Epub]. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10147-013-0602-1Article
11. Kim YT, Kim TY, Lee DS, Park SJ, Park JY, Seo SJ, et al. Molecular changes of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and KRAS and their impact on the clinical outcomes in surgically resected adenocarcinoma of the lung. Lung Cancer. 2008;59:111–8. Article PubMed
12. 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;92:205–16. Article PubMed
13. Keam B, Im SA, Park S, Nam BH, Han SW, Oh DY, et al. Nomogram predicting clinical outcomes in breast cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2011;137:1301–8. Article PubMed
14. Iasonos A, Schrag D, Raj GV, Panageas KS. How to build and interpret a nomogram for cancer prognosis. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:1364–70. Article PubMed
15. Harrell FE Jr, Lee KL, Mark DB. Multivariable prognostic models: issues in developing models, evaluating assumptions and adequacy, and measuring and reducing errors. Stat Med. 1996;15:361–87. Article PubMed
16. Hanley JA, McNeil BJ. The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Radiology. 1982;143:29–36. Article PubMed
17. Nam BH. Discrimination and calibration in survival analysis [Dissertation]. Boston: Boston University; 2000
18. Pencina MJ, D'Agostino RB. Overall C as a measure of discrimination in survival analysis: model specific population value and confidence interval estimation. Stat Med. 2004;23:2109–23. Article PubMed
19. Heagerty PJ, Lumley T, Pepe MS. Time-dependent ROC curves for censored survival data and a diagnostic marker. Biometrics. 2000;56:337–44. Article PubMed
20. Florescu M, Hasan B, Seymour L, Ding K, Shepherd FA; National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group. A clinical prognostic index for patients treated with erlotinib in National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group study BR.21. J Thorac Oncol. 2008;3:590–8. Article PubMed
21. Kim ST, Lee J, Sun JM, Park YH, Ahn JS, Park K, et al. Prognostic model to predict outcomes in non-small cell lung cancer patients with erlotinib as salvage treatment. Oncology. 2010;79:78–84. Article PubMed
22. Chung KP, Huang YT, Chang YL, Yu CJ, Yang CH, Chang YC, et al. Clinical significance of thyroid transcription factor-1 in advanced lung adenocarcinoma under epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor treatment. Chest. 2012;141:420–8. Article PubMed
23. Nose N, Uramoto H, Iwata T, Hanagiri T, Yasumoto K. Expression of estrogen receptor beta predicts a clinical response and longer progression-free survival after treatment with EGFR-TKI for adenocarcinoma of the lung. Lung Cancer. 2011;71:350–5. Article PubMed
24. Ludovini V, Bianconi F, Pistola L, Chiari R, Minotti V, Colella R, et al. Phosphoinositide-3-kinase catalytic alpha and KRAS mutations are important predictors of resistance to therapy with epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer. J Thorac Oncol. 2011;6:707–15. Article PubMed
25. Han SW, Kim TY, Jeon YK, Hwang PG, Im SA, Lee KH, et al. Optimization of patient selection for gefitinib in non-small cell lung cancer by combined analysis of epidermal growth factor receptor mutation, K-ras mutation, and Akt phosphorylation. Clin Cancer Res. 2006;12:2538–44. Article PubMed

Figure & Data

REFERENCES

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

To establish a prognostic model of epidermal growth factor receptor mutated non-small cell lung cancer patients based on Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator regression
Bowen Li, Xiaopeng Zhang
European Journal of Cancer Prevention.2024; 33(4): 368. CrossRef
A predictive model of computed tomography and clinical features of EGFR gene mutation in lung adenocarcinoma
Youjian Yao, Nengde Zhang, Caiwei Lu, Lianhua Liu, Yu Fu, Mei Gui
Science Progress.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Hallmark guided identification and characterization of a novel immune-relevant signature for prognostication of recurrence in stage I–III lung adenocarcinoma
Yongqiang Zhang, Zhao Yang, Yuqin Tang, Chengbin Guo, Danni Lin, Linling Cheng, Xun Hu, Kang Zhang, Gen Li
Genes & Diseases.2023; 10(4): 1657. CrossRef
Risk Stratification Using a Novel Nomogram for 2190 EGFR-Mutant NSCLC Patients Receiving the First or Second Generation EGFR-TKI
John Wen-Cheng Chang, Chen-Yang Huang, Yueh-Fu Fang, Ching-Fu Chang, Cheng-Ta Yang, Chih-Hsi Scott Kuo, Ping-Chih Hsu, Chiao-En Wu
Cancers.2022; 14(4): 977. CrossRef
Establishment of prognostic nomograms for predicting the progression free survival of EGFR‐sensitizing mutation, advanced lung cancer patients treated with EGFR‐TKIs
Xinyang Du, Hua Bai, Zhijie Wang, Jianchun Daun, Zheng Liu, Jiachen Xu, Geyun Chang, Yixiang Zhu, Jie Wang
Thoracic Cancer.2022; 13(9): 1289. CrossRef
Prognostic model of long-term advanced stage (IIIB-IV) EGFR mutated non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) survivors using real-life data
Lourdes Gutiérrez, Ana Royuela, Enric Carcereny, Rafael López-Castro, Delvys Rodríguez-Abreu, Bartomeu Massuti, José Luis González-Larriba, Rosario García-Campelo, Joaquim Bosch-Barrera, María Guirado, Carlos Camps, Manuel Dómine, Reyes Bernabé, Joaquín C
BMC Cancer.2021;[Epub] CrossRef
The Ki-67 Proliferation Index-Related Nomogram to Predict the Response of First-Line Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors or Chemotherapy in Non-small Cell Lung Cancer Patients With Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor-Mutant Status
Weiguo Gu, Mingbin Hu, Linlin Xu, Yuanhui Ren, Jinhong Mei, Weijia Wang, Chunliang Wang
Frontiers in Medicine.2021;[Epub] CrossRef
A nomogram to predict outcomes of lung cancer patients after pneumonectomy based on 47 indicators
Bo Cheng, Cong Wang, Bing Zou, Di Huang, Jinming Yu, Yufeng Cheng, Xue Meng
Cancer Medicine.2020; 9(4): 1430. CrossRef
Clinical factors affecting progression-free survival with crizotinib in ALK-positive non-small cell lung cancer
Chan-Young Ock, Shin-Hye Yoo, Bhumsuk Keam, Miso Kim, Tae Min Kim, Yoon Kyung Jeon, Dong-Wan Kim, Doo Hyun Chung, Dae Seog Heo
The Korean Journal of Internal Medicine.2019; 34(5): 1116. CrossRef
The Risk of Herpes Zoster in Patients with Non-small Cell Lung Cancer according to Chemotherapy Regimens: Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors versus Cytotoxic Chemotherapy
Ji Young Choi, Miso Kim, Bhumsuk Keam, Tae Min Kim, Dong-Wan Kim, Dae Seog Heo, Seong Jin Jo
Cancer Research and Treatment.2019; 51(1): 169. CrossRef
Development and validation of nomograms for predicting survival probability of patients with advanced adenocarcinoma in different EGFR mutation status
Hsi-Chieh Chen, Elise Chia-Hui Tan, Chih-Hsien Liao, Zhong-Zhe Lin, Ming-Chin Yang, Wan-Teck Lim
PLOS ONE.2019; 14(8): e0220730. CrossRef
An inflammation-related nomogram for predicting the survival of patients with non-small cell lung cancer after pulmonary lobectomy
Ying Wang, Xiao Qu, Ngar-Woon Kam, Kai Wang, Hongchang Shen, Qi Liu, Jiajun Du
BMC Cancer.2018;[Epub] CrossRef
Clinical nomograms: Is a picture worth a thousand words?
Kaitlin C. McLoughlin, R. Taylor Ripley
The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery.2017; 153(2): 470. CrossRef
Prognostic Factors and Scoring Model for Survival in Metastatic Biliary Tract Cancer
Hyung Soon Park, Ji Soo Park, You Jin Chun, Yun Ho Roh, Jieun Moon, Hong Jae Chon, Hye Jin Choi, Joon Seong Park, Dong Ki Lee, Se-Joon Lee, Dong Sup Yoon, Hei-Cheul Jeung
Cancer Research and Treatment.2017; 49(4): 1127. CrossRef
An international epidemiological analysis of young patients with non-small cell lung cancer (AduJov-CLICaP)
Luis Corrales-Rodríguez, Oscar Arrieta, Luis Mas, Renata Báez-Saldaña, Omar Castillo-Fernández, Normand Blais, Claudio Martín, Melissa Juárez, Priyanka Khanna, Allan Ramos-Esquivel, Ludwing Bacon, Leonardo Rojas, Beatriz Wills, George Oblitas, María Angel
Lung Cancer.2017; 113: 30. CrossRef
The prognostic value of CT radiomic features for patients with pulmonary adenocarcinoma treated with EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors
Hyungjin Kim, Chang Min Park, Bhumsuk Keam, Sang Joon Park, Miso Kim, Tae Min Kim, Dong-Wan Kim, Dae Seog Heo, Jin Mo Goo, Fan Yang
PLOS ONE.2017; 12(11): e0187500. CrossRef
Nomograms for predicting progression and efficacy of post-operation radiotherapy in IIIA-pN2 non-small cell lung cancer patients
Baozhong Zhang, Zhiyong Yuan, Lujun Zhao, Qingsong Pang, Ping Wang
Oncotarget.2017; 8(23): 37208. CrossRef
A Nomogram to Predict Recurrence and Survival of High-Risk Patients Undergoing Sublobar Resection for Lung Cancer: An Analysis of a Multicenter Prospective Study (ACOSOG Z4032)
Michael S. Kent, Sumithra J. Mandrekar, Rodney Landreneau, Francis Nichols, Nathan R. Foster, Thomas A. DiPetrillo, Bryan Meyers, Dwight E. Heron, David R. Jones, Angelina D. Tan, Sandra Starnes, Joe B. Putnam, Hiran C. Fernando
The Annals of Thoracic Surgery.2016; 102(1): 239. CrossRef
Advanced non-Small cell lung cancer patients at the extremes of age in the era of epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors
Yu-Mu Chen, Chien-Hao Lai, Kun-Ming Rau, Cheng-Hua Huang, Huang-Chih Chang, Tung-Ying Chao, Chia-Cheng Tseng, Wen-Feng Fang, Yung-Che Chen, Yu-Hsiu Chung, Yi-Hsi Wang, Mao-Chang Su, Kuo-Tung Huang, Shih-Feng Liu, Hung-Chen Chen, Ya-Chun Chang, Yu-Ping Cha
Lung Cancer.2016; 98: 99. CrossRef
Prognostic Scoring Index for Patients with Metastatic Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma
Hyung Soon Park, Hye Sun Lee, Ji Soo Park, Joon Seong Park, Dong Ki Lee, Se-Joon Lee, Dong Sup Yoon, Min Goo Lee, Hei-Cheul Jeung
Cancer Research and Treatment.2016; 48(4): 1253. CrossRef

PubReader
ePub Link

Cite

CITE: export Copy Download Format; Close

Download Citation

Download a citation file in RIS format that can be imported by all major citation management software, including EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and Reference Manager.

Format:

RIS — For EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and most other reference management software
BibTeX — For JabRef, BibDesk, and other BibTeX-specific software

Include:

Citation for the content below
Citation and abstract for the content below

Nomogram Predicting Clinical Outcomes in Non-small Cell Lung Cancer Patients Treated with Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors

Cancer Res Treat. 2014;46(4):323-330. Published online July 14, 2014

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4143/crt.2013.120

XML Download

Abstract
Introduction
Materials and Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
NOTES
REFERENCES

Nomogram Predicting Clinical Outcomes in Non-small Cell Lung Cancer Patients Treated with Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors

Fig. 1. Nomogram for prediction of progression-free survival (PFS) to epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) in non-small cell lung cancer. The nomogram is used by totaling the points identified on the top scale for each independent covariate. The total points projected to the bottom scale indicate the % probability of 6-, 12-, and 18-month PFS. ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status.

Fig. 2. Receiver operating characteristic curve of the Cox proportional hazard regression model. Harrell’s C-index was 0.708 (95% confidence interval, 0.659 to 0.758).

Fig. 3. Calibration plot for 12-month progression-free survival (PFS) from the nomogram. On the calibration plot, the x-axis is nomogram predicted probability of PFS. The y-axis is observed PFS. Vertical bars indicate 95% confidence interval calculated using Kaplan-Meier analysis.

Fig. 1.

Fig. 2.

Fig. 3.

Nomogram Predicting Clinical Outcomes in Non-small Cell Lung Cancer Patients Treated with Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors

	No. (%) (n=306)
Age (yr)
Median (range)	61 (31-85)
Gender
Male	108 (35.3)
Female	198 (64.7)
Disease status
Recurred	67 (21.9)
Initial stage wet IIIB, IV	239 (78.1)
Smoking
Never-smoker	222 (72.5)
Current or ex-smoker	76 (24.8)
Unknown	8 (2.6)
Pathology
Adenocarcinoma	275 (89.9)
Non-small cell carcinoma NOS	23 (7.5)
Squamous cell carcinoma	4 (1.3)
Others	4 (1.3)
ECOG PS
0	16 (5.2)
1	209 (68.3)
2	27 (8.8)
3	10 (3.3)
4	2 (0.7)
Unknown	42 (13.7)
Liver metastasis
No	260 (85.0)
Yes	46 (15.0)
Bone metastasis
No	177 (57.8)
Yes	129 (42.2)
Brain metastasis
No	196 (64.1)
Yes	110 (35.9)
EGFR TKI
Gefitinib	274 (89.5)
Erlotinib	32 (10.5)
Line
1st	108 (35.3)
2nd	178 (58.2)
3rd or more	20 (6.5)
EGFR mutation
Del-19 or L858R	290 (67.6)
Rare mutation^a)	16 (3.7)
Treatment response
Complete response	12 (3.9)
Partial response	208 (68.0)
Stable disease	46 (15.0)
Progressive disease	24 (7.8)
Not evaluable	16 (5.2)

Variable	Univariate			Multivariate
Variable	HR	95% CI	p-value	HR	95% CI	p-value
Disease status
Recurred	1			1
Initial metastatic	1.906	1.325-2.742	0.001	2.126	1.434-3.152	< 0.001
Pathology
ADC	1			-
Non-ADC	0.886	0.548-1.434	0.623	-	-	-
Smoking
Never	1			-
Current or ex-smoking	1.237	0.880-1.739	0.220	-	-	-
ECOG PS
0-1	1			1
2-4	1.740	1.088-2.783	0.021	1.978	1.210-3.235	0.007
EGFR TKI
Gefitinib	1			-
Erlotinib	0.910	0.590-1.402	0.668	-	-	-
Line
1st	1			1
2nd	1.270	0.908-1.777	0.163	1.233	0.860-1.767	0.254
3rd or more	1.925	1.116-3.321	0.019	2.198	1.228-3.936	0.008
EGFR mutation
Del-19 or L858R	1			-
Rare	4.158	2.358-7.331	< 0.001	-	-	-
Response to TKI
Responding	1			1
Non-responding	3.056	2.223-4.200	< 0.001	3.141	2.228-4.426	< 0.001
Liver metastasis
No	1			-
Yes	1.546	1.067-2.240	0.021	-	-	-
Bone metastasis
No	1			1
Yes	1.730	1.286-2.327	< 0.001	1.384	1.001-1.913	0.049
Brain metastasis
No	1			-
Yes	1.241	0.919-1.677	0.160	-	-	-

Table 1. Characteristics of the 306 patients who received gefitinib or erlotinib

NOS, not otherwise specified; ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status; EGFR, epidermal growth factor receptor; TKI, tyrosine kinase inhibitor.

Rare mutations were defined as any mutation other than del-19 or L858R in exon 21 of the EGFR gene.

Table 2. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression analysis between clinicopathologic variables and progression-free survival

HR, hazard ratio; CI, confidence interval; ADC, adenocarcinoma; ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status; EGFR, epidermal growth factor receptor; TKI, tyrosine kinase inhibitor.