Bruzzi Paolo, Del Mastro Lucia, Sormani Maria P, Bastholt Lars, Danova Marco, Focan Christian, Fountzilas George, Paul James, Rosso Riccardo, Venturini Marco
Unit of Clinical Epidemiology, National Institute for Cancer Research, Largo Rosanna Benzi 10, 16132 Genoa, Italy.
J Clin Oncol. 2005 Aug 1;23(22):5117-25. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2005.02.106. Epub 2005 Jun 13.
To assess the validity of objective response to chemotherapy as a surrogate end point for survival in metastatic breast cancer.
We carried out a meta-analysis on individual data from 2,126 metastatic breast cancer patients who were enrolled onto 10 randomized trials comparing standard versus intensified epirubicin-containing chemotherapy.
The intensified chemotherapy was associated with a significantly higher tumor response rate compared with standard chemotherapy (pooled odds ratio for nonresponse, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.72). The intensified regimens also led to better (although not significant) survival (pooled odds ratio, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.86 to 1.04; P = .22). Tumor response was a highly significant predictor of survival (P < .0001). When tumor response was introduced in the Cox model, the hazard ratio in favor of experimental treatment changed from 0.94 to 1.005 (95% CI, 0.91 to 1.11; P = .92), indicating that no residual effect of the experimental treatment on survival was present once tumor response was adjusted for. This suggests that the overall survival benefit of intensified epirubicin was a result of the increase in response rate. The median survival time of patients with complete response and partial response was 28.8 months (95% CI, 25.4 to 45.3 months) and 21.3 months (95% CI, 19.2 to 22.4 months), respectively; whereas, the median survival time of patients with no response was 14.6 months (95% CI, 13.9 to 15.4 months).
These results support the hypothesis that the achievement of an objective response to chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer is associated with a true survival benefit. The potential role of objective response as a surrogate end point for survival in chemotherapy trials of metastatic breast cancer warrants further investigation.
评估转移性乳腺癌化疗客观缓解作为生存替代终点的有效性。
我们对2126例转移性乳腺癌患者的个体数据进行了荟萃分析,这些患者参与了10项比较含表柔比星标准化疗与强化化疗的随机试验。
与标准化疗相比,强化化疗的肿瘤缓解率显著更高(无缓解的合并比值比为0.60;95%可信区间为0.51至0.72)。强化方案也带来了更好(尽管不显著)的生存(合并比值比为0.94;95%可信区间为0.86至1.04;P = 0.22)。肿瘤缓解是生存的高度显著预测因素(P < 0.0001)。当将肿瘤缓解引入Cox模型时,支持试验性治疗的风险比从0.94变为1.005(95%可信区间为0.91至1.11;P = 0.92),这表明一旦对肿瘤缓解进行调整,试验性治疗对生存就不存在残留效应。这表明表柔比星强化治疗的总生存获益是缓解率增加的结果。完全缓解和部分缓解患者的中位生存时间分别为28.8个月(95%可信区间为25.4至45.3个月)和21.3个月(95%可信区间为19.2至22.4个月);而无缓解患者的中位生存时间为14.6个月(95%可信区间为13.9至15.4个月)。
这些结果支持这样的假设,即转移性乳腺癌化疗达到客观缓解与真正的生存获益相关。客观缓解作为转移性乳腺癌化疗试验生存替代终点的潜在作用值得进一步研究。