817PPROGNOSTIC IMPACT OF CHANGE IN NEUTROPHIL TO LYMPHOCYTE RATIO (NLR) IN RESPONSE TO TARGETED THERAPY FOR METASTATIC RENAL CELL CARCINOMA (MRCC)

Abstract Aim: NLR is a marker of host inflammation and adds independent prognostic information to the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) model (Templeton et al. ASCO GU 2014). Here we evaluate the impact of change in NLR after exposure to targeted therapy. Metho...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Annals of oncology 2014-09, Vol.25 (suppl_4), p.iv284-iv284
Hauptverfasser: Templeton, A., Knox, J., Mitchell, N., Broom, R., Choueiri, T.K., McDermott, D.F., Fay, A., Rini, B.I., Alvarez, A., Bjarnason, G.A., Smoragiewicz, M., Kollmannsberger, C.K., Kanesvaran, R., North, S., Alimohamed, N., Hermanns, T., Wells, C., Amir, E., Heng, D.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page iv284
container_issue suppl_4
container_start_page iv284
container_title Annals of oncology
container_volume 25
creator Templeton, A.
Knox, J.
Mitchell, N.
Broom, R.
Choueiri, T.K.
McDermott, D.F.
Fay, A.
Rini, B.I.
Alvarez, A.
Bjarnason, G.A.
Smoragiewicz, M.
Kollmannsberger, C.K.
Kanesvaran, R.
North, S.
Alimohamed, N.
Hermanns, T.
Wells, C.
Amir, E.
Heng, D.
description Abstract Aim: NLR is a marker of host inflammation and adds independent prognostic information to the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) model (Templeton et al. ASCO GU 2014). Here we evaluate the impact of change in NLR after exposure to targeted therapy. Methods: We included patients with mRCC treated with targeted therapy for which NLR data were available at start of first-line treatment, and 6 and 12 weeks thereafter (± 2 weeks). Change from below to above (or vice versa) NLR cut-offs between 2.5 and 5.0 by week 6 and 12 were studied. Median overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS) was estimated using the Kaplan Meier method, the impact of conversion on OS and PFS was evaluated by Cox regression analyses. The impact of NLR conversion on objective response rates (ORR) was evaluated by binary logistic regression. Results: Data comprising 1199 pts from 9 Consortium sites were evaluated. Median age was 62 years; 23%, 52%, 25% were in the favorable, intermediate and poor prognostic groups, respectively. Sunitinib was first line treatment in 74%. Median baseline NLR was 3.5. Compared with pts without change in NLR, a fall was associated with longer OS, PFS and higher ORR for all cut-offs tested. A rise in NLR showed opposite effects for the 3 endpoints. Data for change in NLR by week 6 using a cut-off of 3.0 are shown in the table. Similar results were observed for changes by week 12. NLR week 0 -> NLR week 6 (cut-off 3.5)H -> LH -> HL -> HL -> LN32027658545OSmedian (mo)19.48.114.328.9HR*; P0.54;
doi_str_mv 10.1093/annonc/mdu337.10
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>oup</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_oup_primary_10_1093_annonc_mdu337_10</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><oup_id>10.1093/annonc/mdu337.10</oup_id><sourcerecordid>10.1093/annonc/mdu337.10</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-oup_primary_10_1093_annonc_mdu337_103</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqVj8tqwzAUREVpoe5j3-VdJhQ3UpSXl0K9tgW2JOTbhVfG9AEtjRNisuhv5Itrk_5ANzMwHBgOYw-CPwmeyFnbdbvudbZ9O0q5HqYLFonlKok3fCEuWcSTuYzXS7m4Zjd9_8U5XyXzJGKnjVh7H1xmXUVGgym90gQuBZ0rmyEYCxZfKDifmwLIQVGXPne6JoSgyDiY2CJMRy5g5Z2tcKRIhQwJn4FyDMrXkLoAJZKqSI0_Aa0qQGMxhAraWFcqmJRB6-kdu_pov_v3-7--ZY8pks7j3XHf7A-f2_bw0wjejNrNWbs5aw-T_B_9CzqbVhk</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Publisher</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>817PPROGNOSTIC IMPACT OF CHANGE IN NEUTROPHIL TO LYMPHOCYTE RATIO (NLR) IN RESPONSE TO TARGETED THERAPY FOR METASTATIC RENAL CELL CARCINOMA (MRCC)</title><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Templeton, A. ; Knox, J. ; Mitchell, N. ; Broom, R. ; Choueiri, T.K. ; McDermott, D.F. ; Fay, A. ; Rini, B.I. ; Alvarez, A. ; Bjarnason, G.A. ; Smoragiewicz, M. ; Kollmannsberger, C.K. ; Kanesvaran, R. ; North, S. ; Alimohamed, N. ; Hermanns, T. ; Wells, C. ; Amir, E. ; Heng, D.</creator><creatorcontrib>Templeton, A. ; Knox, J. ; Mitchell, N. ; Broom, R. ; Choueiri, T.K. ; McDermott, D.F. ; Fay, A. ; Rini, B.I. ; Alvarez, A. ; Bjarnason, G.A. ; Smoragiewicz, M. ; Kollmannsberger, C.K. ; Kanesvaran, R. ; North, S. ; Alimohamed, N. ; Hermanns, T. ; Wells, C. ; Amir, E. ; Heng, D.</creatorcontrib><description>Abstract Aim: NLR is a marker of host inflammation and adds independent prognostic information to the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) model (Templeton et al. ASCO GU 2014). Here we evaluate the impact of change in NLR after exposure to targeted therapy. Methods: We included patients with mRCC treated with targeted therapy for which NLR data were available at start of first-line treatment, and 6 and 12 weeks thereafter (± 2 weeks). Change from below to above (or vice versa) NLR cut-offs between 2.5 and 5.0 by week 6 and 12 were studied. Median overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS) was estimated using the Kaplan Meier method, the impact of conversion on OS and PFS was evaluated by Cox regression analyses. The impact of NLR conversion on objective response rates (ORR) was evaluated by binary logistic regression. Results: Data comprising 1199 pts from 9 Consortium sites were evaluated. Median age was 62 years; 23%, 52%, 25% were in the favorable, intermediate and poor prognostic groups, respectively. Sunitinib was first line treatment in 74%. Median baseline NLR was 3.5. Compared with pts without change in NLR, a fall was associated with longer OS, PFS and higher ORR for all cut-offs tested. A rise in NLR showed opposite effects for the 3 endpoints. Data for change in NLR by week 6 using a cut-off of 3.0 are shown in the table. Similar results were observed for changes by week 12. NLR week 0 -&gt; NLR week 6 (cut-off 3.5)H -&gt; LH -&gt; HL -&gt; HL -&gt; LN32027658545OSmedian (mo)19.48.114.328.9HR*; P0.54; &lt;0.0012.20; &lt;0.001PFSmedian (mo)8.63.96.611.7HR*; P0.56; &lt;0.0012.20; &lt;0.001ORRN (%)91 (32)29 (12)6 (11)176 (35)OR*; P3.48; &lt;0.0010.16; 0.002* adjusted for IMDC score. H, high (i.e. NLR &gt; 3.5); L, low (i.e. NLR ≤ 3.5). HR, hazard ratio; mo, months; OR, odds ratio; ORR, objective response rate; OS, overall survival; PFS, progression free survival. Conclusions: NLR is a readily available and inexpensive biomarker. Changes in NLR as early as 6 weeks after exposure to targeted therapy appear to have both prognostic and predictive value. Prospective validation of change in NLR is warranted. Disclosure: All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0923-7534</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1569-8041</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdu337.10</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford University Press</publisher><ispartof>Annals of oncology, 2014-09, Vol.25 (suppl_4), p.iv284-iv284</ispartof><rights>European Society for Medical Oncology 2014. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society for Medical Oncology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com. 2014</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Templeton, A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Knox, J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mitchell, N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Broom, R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Choueiri, T.K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McDermott, D.F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fay, A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rini, B.I.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Alvarez, A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bjarnason, G.A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Smoragiewicz, M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kollmannsberger, C.K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kanesvaran, R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>North, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Alimohamed, N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hermanns, T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wells, C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Amir, E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Heng, D.</creatorcontrib><title>817PPROGNOSTIC IMPACT OF CHANGE IN NEUTROPHIL TO LYMPHOCYTE RATIO (NLR) IN RESPONSE TO TARGETED THERAPY FOR METASTATIC RENAL CELL CARCINOMA (MRCC)</title><title>Annals of oncology</title><description>Abstract Aim: NLR is a marker of host inflammation and adds independent prognostic information to the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) model (Templeton et al. ASCO GU 2014). Here we evaluate the impact of change in NLR after exposure to targeted therapy. Methods: We included patients with mRCC treated with targeted therapy for which NLR data were available at start of first-line treatment, and 6 and 12 weeks thereafter (± 2 weeks). Change from below to above (or vice versa) NLR cut-offs between 2.5 and 5.0 by week 6 and 12 were studied. Median overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS) was estimated using the Kaplan Meier method, the impact of conversion on OS and PFS was evaluated by Cox regression analyses. The impact of NLR conversion on objective response rates (ORR) was evaluated by binary logistic regression. Results: Data comprising 1199 pts from 9 Consortium sites were evaluated. Median age was 62 years; 23%, 52%, 25% were in the favorable, intermediate and poor prognostic groups, respectively. Sunitinib was first line treatment in 74%. Median baseline NLR was 3.5. Compared with pts without change in NLR, a fall was associated with longer OS, PFS and higher ORR for all cut-offs tested. A rise in NLR showed opposite effects for the 3 endpoints. Data for change in NLR by week 6 using a cut-off of 3.0 are shown in the table. Similar results were observed for changes by week 12. NLR week 0 -&gt; NLR week 6 (cut-off 3.5)H -&gt; LH -&gt; HL -&gt; HL -&gt; LN32027658545OSmedian (mo)19.48.114.328.9HR*; P0.54; &lt;0.0012.20; &lt;0.001PFSmedian (mo)8.63.96.611.7HR*; P0.56; &lt;0.0012.20; &lt;0.001ORRN (%)91 (32)29 (12)6 (11)176 (35)OR*; P3.48; &lt;0.0010.16; 0.002* adjusted for IMDC score. H, high (i.e. NLR &gt; 3.5); L, low (i.e. NLR ≤ 3.5). HR, hazard ratio; mo, months; OR, odds ratio; ORR, objective response rate; OS, overall survival; PFS, progression free survival. Conclusions: NLR is a readily available and inexpensive biomarker. Changes in NLR as early as 6 weeks after exposure to targeted therapy appear to have both prognostic and predictive value. Prospective validation of change in NLR is warranted. Disclosure: All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.</description><issn>0923-7534</issn><issn>1569-8041</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid/><recordid>eNqVj8tqwzAUREVpoe5j3-VdJhQ3UpSXl0K9tgW2JOTbhVfG9AEtjRNisuhv5Itrk_5ANzMwHBgOYw-CPwmeyFnbdbvudbZ9O0q5HqYLFonlKok3fCEuWcSTuYzXS7m4Zjd9_8U5XyXzJGKnjVh7H1xmXUVGgym90gQuBZ0rmyEYCxZfKDifmwLIQVGXPne6JoSgyDiY2CJMRy5g5Z2tcKRIhQwJn4FyDMrXkLoAJZKqSI0_Aa0qQGMxhAraWFcqmJRB6-kdu_pov_v3-7--ZY8pks7j3XHf7A-f2_bw0wjejNrNWbs5aw-T_B_9CzqbVhk</recordid><startdate>20140901</startdate><enddate>20140901</enddate><creator>Templeton, A.</creator><creator>Knox, J.</creator><creator>Mitchell, N.</creator><creator>Broom, R.</creator><creator>Choueiri, T.K.</creator><creator>McDermott, D.F.</creator><creator>Fay, A.</creator><creator>Rini, B.I.</creator><creator>Alvarez, A.</creator><creator>Bjarnason, G.A.</creator><creator>Smoragiewicz, M.</creator><creator>Kollmannsberger, C.K.</creator><creator>Kanesvaran, R.</creator><creator>North, S.</creator><creator>Alimohamed, N.</creator><creator>Hermanns, T.</creator><creator>Wells, C.</creator><creator>Amir, E.</creator><creator>Heng, D.</creator><general>Oxford University Press</general><scope/></search><sort><creationdate>20140901</creationdate><title>817PPROGNOSTIC IMPACT OF CHANGE IN NEUTROPHIL TO LYMPHOCYTE RATIO (NLR) IN RESPONSE TO TARGETED THERAPY FOR METASTATIC RENAL CELL CARCINOMA (MRCC)</title><author>Templeton, A. ; Knox, J. ; Mitchell, N. ; Broom, R. ; Choueiri, T.K. ; McDermott, D.F. ; Fay, A. ; Rini, B.I. ; Alvarez, A. ; Bjarnason, G.A. ; Smoragiewicz, M. ; Kollmannsberger, C.K. ; Kanesvaran, R. ; North, S. ; Alimohamed, N. ; Hermanns, T. ; Wells, C. ; Amir, E. ; Heng, D.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-oup_primary_10_1093_annonc_mdu337_103</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Templeton, A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Knox, J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mitchell, N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Broom, R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Choueiri, T.K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McDermott, D.F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fay, A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rini, B.I.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Alvarez, A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bjarnason, G.A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Smoragiewicz, M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kollmannsberger, C.K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kanesvaran, R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>North, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Alimohamed, N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hermanns, T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wells, C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Amir, E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Heng, D.</creatorcontrib><jtitle>Annals of oncology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Templeton, A.</au><au>Knox, J.</au><au>Mitchell, N.</au><au>Broom, R.</au><au>Choueiri, T.K.</au><au>McDermott, D.F.</au><au>Fay, A.</au><au>Rini, B.I.</au><au>Alvarez, A.</au><au>Bjarnason, G.A.</au><au>Smoragiewicz, M.</au><au>Kollmannsberger, C.K.</au><au>Kanesvaran, R.</au><au>North, S.</au><au>Alimohamed, N.</au><au>Hermanns, T.</au><au>Wells, C.</au><au>Amir, E.</au><au>Heng, D.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>817PPROGNOSTIC IMPACT OF CHANGE IN NEUTROPHIL TO LYMPHOCYTE RATIO (NLR) IN RESPONSE TO TARGETED THERAPY FOR METASTATIC RENAL CELL CARCINOMA (MRCC)</atitle><jtitle>Annals of oncology</jtitle><date>2014-09-01</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>25</volume><issue>suppl_4</issue><spage>iv284</spage><epage>iv284</epage><pages>iv284-iv284</pages><issn>0923-7534</issn><eissn>1569-8041</eissn><abstract>Abstract Aim: NLR is a marker of host inflammation and adds independent prognostic information to the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) model (Templeton et al. ASCO GU 2014). Here we evaluate the impact of change in NLR after exposure to targeted therapy. Methods: We included patients with mRCC treated with targeted therapy for which NLR data were available at start of first-line treatment, and 6 and 12 weeks thereafter (± 2 weeks). Change from below to above (or vice versa) NLR cut-offs between 2.5 and 5.0 by week 6 and 12 were studied. Median overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS) was estimated using the Kaplan Meier method, the impact of conversion on OS and PFS was evaluated by Cox regression analyses. The impact of NLR conversion on objective response rates (ORR) was evaluated by binary logistic regression. Results: Data comprising 1199 pts from 9 Consortium sites were evaluated. Median age was 62 years; 23%, 52%, 25% were in the favorable, intermediate and poor prognostic groups, respectively. Sunitinib was first line treatment in 74%. Median baseline NLR was 3.5. Compared with pts without change in NLR, a fall was associated with longer OS, PFS and higher ORR for all cut-offs tested. A rise in NLR showed opposite effects for the 3 endpoints. Data for change in NLR by week 6 using a cut-off of 3.0 are shown in the table. Similar results were observed for changes by week 12. NLR week 0 -&gt; NLR week 6 (cut-off 3.5)H -&gt; LH -&gt; HL -&gt; HL -&gt; LN32027658545OSmedian (mo)19.48.114.328.9HR*; P0.54; &lt;0.0012.20; &lt;0.001PFSmedian (mo)8.63.96.611.7HR*; P0.56; &lt;0.0012.20; &lt;0.001ORRN (%)91 (32)29 (12)6 (11)176 (35)OR*; P3.48; &lt;0.0010.16; 0.002* adjusted for IMDC score. H, high (i.e. NLR &gt; 3.5); L, low (i.e. NLR ≤ 3.5). HR, hazard ratio; mo, months; OR, odds ratio; ORR, objective response rate; OS, overall survival; PFS, progression free survival. Conclusions: NLR is a readily available and inexpensive biomarker. Changes in NLR as early as 6 weeks after exposure to targeted therapy appear to have both prognostic and predictive value. Prospective validation of change in NLR is warranted. Disclosure: All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.</abstract><pub>Oxford University Press</pub><doi>10.1093/annonc/mdu337.10</doi></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0923-7534
ispartof Annals of oncology, 2014-09, Vol.25 (suppl_4), p.iv284-iv284
issn 0923-7534
1569-8041
language eng
recordid cdi_oup_primary_10_1093_annonc_mdu337_10
source EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; Alma/SFX Local Collection
title 817PPROGNOSTIC IMPACT OF CHANGE IN NEUTROPHIL TO LYMPHOCYTE RATIO (NLR) IN RESPONSE TO TARGETED THERAPY FOR METASTATIC RENAL CELL CARCINOMA (MRCC)
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-21T12%3A17%3A27IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-oup&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=817PPROGNOSTIC%20IMPACT%20OF%20CHANGE%20IN%20NEUTROPHIL%20TO%20LYMPHOCYTE%20RATIO%20(NLR)%20IN%20RESPONSE%20TO%20TARGETED%20THERAPY%20FOR%20METASTATIC%20RENAL%20CELL%20CARCINOMA%20(MRCC)&rft.jtitle=Annals%20of%20oncology&rft.au=Templeton,%20A.&rft.date=2014-09-01&rft.volume=25&rft.issue=suppl_4&rft.spage=iv284&rft.epage=iv284&rft.pages=iv284-iv284&rft.issn=0923-7534&rft.eissn=1569-8041&rft_id=info:doi/10.1093/annonc/mdu337.10&rft_dat=%3Coup%3E10.1093/annonc/mdu337.10%3C/oup%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_oup_id=10.1093/annonc/mdu337.10&rfr_iscdi=true