Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18349817›Full record

ArticleBritish journal of cancer2008

Clinical outcome and prognostic factors for patients treated within the context of a phase I study: the Royal Marsden Hospital experience.

H-T Arkenau, D Olmos, J E Ang, J de Bono, I Judson, S Kaye

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in British journal of cancer, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 97 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
97citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

97 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. The role of age on dose-limiting toxicities in phase I dose-escalation trials.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2014
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Treatment with methylnaltrexone is associated with increased survival in patients with advanced cancer.Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology · 2016
    Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

37 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

H-T ArkenauRoyal Marsden Hospital, Institute of Cancer Research, Downs Road, Sutton SM2 5PT, UK.
D Olmos
J E Ang
J de Bono
I Judson
S Kaye

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The main aim of phase I trials is to evaluate the tolerability and pharmacology of a new compound. However, investigating the potential for clinical benefit is also a key objective. Our phase I trial portfolio incorporates a range of new drugs, including molecular targeted agents, sometimes given together with cytotoxic agents. We performed this analysis of response rate, progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) to assess the extent of clinical benefit rate (CBR: partial response (PR)+stable disease (SD)) derived from current trials. We analysed 212 consecutive patients who were treated in 29 phase I studies, from January 2005 to June 2006. All patients had progression of disease prior to study entry. The median age was 58 years (range: 18-86) with a male/female ratio of 2 : 1. A total of 148 patients (70%) were treated in 'first in human trials' involving biological agents (132 patients) or new cytotoxic compounds (16 patients) alone, and 64 patients (30%) received chemotherapy-based regimens with or without biological agents. After a median follow-up time of 34 weeks, the median PFS and OS were 11 and 43 weeks, respectively. The CBR was 53% (9% PR and 44% SD) after the first tumour evaluation after two cycles (between weeks 6 and 8) and has been maintained at 36 and 26% at 3 and 6 months, respectively. Treatment related deaths occurred in 0.47% of our patients and treatment had to be withdrawn in 11.8% of patients due to toxicity. A multivariate analysis (MVA) of 13 factors indicated that low albumin (<35 g l(-1)), lactate dehydrogenase>upper normal limit and >2 sites of metastasis were independent negative prognostic factors for OS. A risk score based on the MVA revealed that patients with a score of 2-3 had a significantly shorter OS compared to patients with a score of 0-1 (24.9 weeks, 95% CI 19.5-30.2 vs 74.1 weeks, 95% CI 53.2-96.2). This analysis shows that a significant number of patients who develop disease progression while receiving standard therapy derived benefit from participation in phase I trials. Risk scoring based on objective clinical parameters indicated that patients with a high score had a significantly shorter OS, and this may help in the process of patient selection for phase I trial entry.

Indexed as

Clinical Trials, Phase I as TopicPatient SelectionTreatment OutcomeAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overDisease ProgressionFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPrognosisRetrospective StudiesSurvival Analysis

Identifiers

PMID18349817
PMCPMC2275488

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.