Beaumont Jennifer L, Salsman John M, Diaz Jose, Deen Keith C, McCann Lauren, Powles Thomas, Hackshaw Michelle D, Motzer Robert J, Cella David
Department of Medical Social Sciences, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois.
Department of Social Sciences and Health Policy, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina.
Cancer. 2016 Apr 1;122(7):1108-15. doi: 10.1002/cncr.29888. Epub 2016 Jan 27.
In a phase 3, randomized, open-label trial (Pazopanib versus Sunitinib in the Treatment of Locally Advanced and/or Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma, COMPARZ; NCT00720941), pazopanib was found to be noninferior to sunitinib in terms of progression-free survival in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma with no prior therapy. Overall treatment differences were evaluated in a post hoc analysis with a quality-adjusted time without symptoms or toxicity (Q-TWiST) methodology.
Each patient's overall survival was partitioned into 3 mutually exclusive health states: time with grade 3 or 4 toxicity (TOX), time without symptoms of disease or grade 3/4 toxicity of treatment, and time after tumor progression or relapse (REL). The time spent in each state was weighted by a health-state utility associated with that state and summed to calculate the Q-TWiST. A threshold utility analysis was used, and utilities were applied across the range of 0 (similar to death) to 1 (perfect health).
A total of 1110 patients were enrolled (557 on pazopanib and 553 on sunitinib). The mean TOX was 31 days (95% confidence interval, 13-48 days) longer for sunitinib versus pazopanib. In the threshold utility analysis, the difference in the Q-TWiST ranged from -11 days (utility for TOX, 1; utility for REL, 0) to 43 days (utility for TOX, 0; utility for REL, 1) in favor of pazopanib across most utility combinations. Differences were significant in less than half of the utility combinations examined, and this typically occurred when the utility for TOX was lower than the utility for REL.
Patients randomized to pazopanib had a slightly longer Q-TWiST in comparison with sunitinib patients, and this was primarily due to the reduced length of TOX.
在一项3期随机开放标签试验(帕唑帕尼与舒尼替尼治疗局部晚期和/或转移性肾细胞癌的比较研究,COMPARZ;NCT00720941)中,发现在既往未接受过治疗的转移性肾细胞癌患者中,帕唑帕尼在无进展生存期方面不劣于舒尼替尼。采用质量调整无症状或毒性时间(Q-TWiST)方法在事后分析中评估总体治疗差异。
将每位患者的总生存期分为3个相互排斥的健康状态:3/4级毒性时间(TOX)、无疾病症状或治疗3/4级毒性时间以及肿瘤进展或复发后时间(REL)。每个状态所花费的时间通过与该状态相关的健康状态效用值进行加权,并求和以计算Q-TWiST。使用阈值效用分析,效用值范围为0(类似于死亡)至1(完美健康)。
共纳入1110例患者(557例接受帕唑帕尼治疗,553例接受舒尼替尼治疗)。舒尼替尼的平均TOX比帕唑帕尼长31天(95%置信区间,13 - 48天)。在阈值效用分析中,在大多数效用组合中,Q-TWiST的差异为-11天(TOX效用值为1;REL效用值为0)至43天(TOX效用值为0;REL效用值为1),帕唑帕尼占优。在所检查的效用组合中,不到一半差异具有统计学意义,且这通常发生在TOX效用值低于REL效用值时。
与舒尼替尼组患者相比,随机接受帕唑帕尼治疗的患者Q-TWiST略长,这主要是由于TOX时长缩短。