Cargando…

QoL analyses from INFORM study, a phase III study of gefitinib versus placebo as maintenance therapy in advanced NSCLC

This report aimed to provide the full results of QoL assessment in INFORM study. QoL was assessed by FACT-L questionnaire. QoL improvement ratio in gefitinib arm was higher than placebo arm (FACT-L: 46% vs. 22%, p < 0.001; TOI: 41% vs. 18%, p < 0.001; LCS: 46% vs. 22%, p < 0.001). Gefitinib...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Yang, Yun-Peng, Ma, Yu-Xiang, Huang, Yan, Zhao, Yuan-Yuan, Fang, Wen-Feng, Hong, Shao-Dong, Tian, Ying, Xue, Cong, Sheng, Jin, Zhang, Li
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Nature Publishing Group 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4490396/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26137916
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/srep11934
_version_ 1782379494371229696
author Yang, Yun-Peng
Ma, Yu-Xiang
Huang, Yan
Zhao, Yuan-Yuan
Fang, Wen-Feng
Hong, Shao-Dong
Tian, Ying
Xue, Cong
Sheng, Jin
Zhang, Li
author_facet Yang, Yun-Peng
Ma, Yu-Xiang
Huang, Yan
Zhao, Yuan-Yuan
Fang, Wen-Feng
Hong, Shao-Dong
Tian, Ying
Xue, Cong
Sheng, Jin
Zhang, Li
author_sort Yang, Yun-Peng
collection PubMed
description This report aimed to provide the full results of QoL assessment in INFORM study. QoL was assessed by FACT-L questionnaire. QoL improvement ratio in gefitinib arm was higher than placebo arm (FACT-L: 46% vs. 22%, p < 0.001; TOI: 41% vs. 18%, p < 0.001; LCS: 46% vs. 22%, p < 0.001). Gefitinib prolonged time-to-worsening of QoL (FACT-L: 2.8 m vs 1.4 m, p = 0.019; TOI: 3.5 m vs 1.4 m, p = 0.006; LCS: 2.8 vs 1.4 m, p = 0.028). Patients with an improvement in QoL had longer PFS (FACT-L: 9.4 m vs. 2.8 m vs. 2.7 m, P < 0.001; TOI: 9.9 m vs. 2.8 m vs. 2.1 m, P < 0.001; LCS: 9.4 m vs. 2.9 m vs. 2.1 m, P < 0.001) and OS (FACT-L: 25.4 m vs. 19.9 m vs. 14.4 m, P = 0.003; TOI: 25.7 m vs. 19.0 m vs. 12.7 m, P = 0.002; LCS: 25.4 m vs. 19.3 m vs. 14.7 m, P = 0.004) compared with patients with stable or worsened QoL. Furthermore, in patients with good QoL at baseline, the treatment of gefitinib couldn’t improve OS compared to placebo, whereas patients with low QoL experienced marginal significant improvement in OS (20.6 m vs 14.4, p = 0.051). Our study indicated that gefitinib could improve patients’ QoL, confirmed the prognostic value of QoL changes during treatment, and implied patients with low QoL at baseline may be the potential population which will gain OS benefit from maintenance EGFR-TKI therapy.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4490396
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Nature Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-44903962015-07-07 QoL analyses from INFORM study, a phase III study of gefitinib versus placebo as maintenance therapy in advanced NSCLC Yang, Yun-Peng Ma, Yu-Xiang Huang, Yan Zhao, Yuan-Yuan Fang, Wen-Feng Hong, Shao-Dong Tian, Ying Xue, Cong Sheng, Jin Zhang, Li Sci Rep Article This report aimed to provide the full results of QoL assessment in INFORM study. QoL was assessed by FACT-L questionnaire. QoL improvement ratio in gefitinib arm was higher than placebo arm (FACT-L: 46% vs. 22%, p < 0.001; TOI: 41% vs. 18%, p < 0.001; LCS: 46% vs. 22%, p < 0.001). Gefitinib prolonged time-to-worsening of QoL (FACT-L: 2.8 m vs 1.4 m, p = 0.019; TOI: 3.5 m vs 1.4 m, p = 0.006; LCS: 2.8 vs 1.4 m, p = 0.028). Patients with an improvement in QoL had longer PFS (FACT-L: 9.4 m vs. 2.8 m vs. 2.7 m, P < 0.001; TOI: 9.9 m vs. 2.8 m vs. 2.1 m, P < 0.001; LCS: 9.4 m vs. 2.9 m vs. 2.1 m, P < 0.001) and OS (FACT-L: 25.4 m vs. 19.9 m vs. 14.4 m, P = 0.003; TOI: 25.7 m vs. 19.0 m vs. 12.7 m, P = 0.002; LCS: 25.4 m vs. 19.3 m vs. 14.7 m, P = 0.004) compared with patients with stable or worsened QoL. Furthermore, in patients with good QoL at baseline, the treatment of gefitinib couldn’t improve OS compared to placebo, whereas patients with low QoL experienced marginal significant improvement in OS (20.6 m vs 14.4, p = 0.051). Our study indicated that gefitinib could improve patients’ QoL, confirmed the prognostic value of QoL changes during treatment, and implied patients with low QoL at baseline may be the potential population which will gain OS benefit from maintenance EGFR-TKI therapy. Nature Publishing Group 2015-07-03 /pmc/articles/PMC4490396/ /pubmed/26137916 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/srep11934 Text en Copyright © 2015, Macmillan Publishers Limited http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in the credit line; if the material is not included under the Creative Commons license, users will need to obtain permission from the license holder to reproduce the material. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
spellingShingle Article
Yang, Yun-Peng
Ma, Yu-Xiang
Huang, Yan
Zhao, Yuan-Yuan
Fang, Wen-Feng
Hong, Shao-Dong
Tian, Ying
Xue, Cong
Sheng, Jin
Zhang, Li
QoL analyses from INFORM study, a phase III study of gefitinib versus placebo as maintenance therapy in advanced NSCLC
title QoL analyses from INFORM study, a phase III study of gefitinib versus placebo as maintenance therapy in advanced NSCLC
title_full QoL analyses from INFORM study, a phase III study of gefitinib versus placebo as maintenance therapy in advanced NSCLC
title_fullStr QoL analyses from INFORM study, a phase III study of gefitinib versus placebo as maintenance therapy in advanced NSCLC
title_full_unstemmed QoL analyses from INFORM study, a phase III study of gefitinib versus placebo as maintenance therapy in advanced NSCLC
title_short QoL analyses from INFORM study, a phase III study of gefitinib versus placebo as maintenance therapy in advanced NSCLC
title_sort qol analyses from inform study, a phase iii study of gefitinib versus placebo as maintenance therapy in advanced nsclc
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4490396/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26137916
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/srep11934
work_keys_str_mv AT yangyunpeng qolanalysesfrominformstudyaphaseiiistudyofgefitinibversusplaceboasmaintenancetherapyinadvancednsclc
AT mayuxiang qolanalysesfrominformstudyaphaseiiistudyofgefitinibversusplaceboasmaintenancetherapyinadvancednsclc
AT huangyan qolanalysesfrominformstudyaphaseiiistudyofgefitinibversusplaceboasmaintenancetherapyinadvancednsclc
AT zhaoyuanyuan qolanalysesfrominformstudyaphaseiiistudyofgefitinibversusplaceboasmaintenancetherapyinadvancednsclc
AT fangwenfeng qolanalysesfrominformstudyaphaseiiistudyofgefitinibversusplaceboasmaintenancetherapyinadvancednsclc
AT hongshaodong qolanalysesfrominformstudyaphaseiiistudyofgefitinibversusplaceboasmaintenancetherapyinadvancednsclc
AT tianying qolanalysesfrominformstudyaphaseiiistudyofgefitinibversusplaceboasmaintenancetherapyinadvancednsclc
AT xuecong qolanalysesfrominformstudyaphaseiiistudyofgefitinibversusplaceboasmaintenancetherapyinadvancednsclc
AT shengjin qolanalysesfrominformstudyaphaseiiistudyofgefitinibversusplaceboasmaintenancetherapyinadvancednsclc
AT zhangli qolanalysesfrominformstudyaphaseiiistudyofgefitinibversusplaceboasmaintenancetherapyinadvancednsclc