Nomogram to predict cycle-one serious drug-related toxicity in phase I oncology trials
- PMID: 24419130
- PMCID: PMC3918535
- DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2013.49.8808
Nomogram to predict cycle-one serious drug-related toxicity in phase I oncology trials
Abstract
Purpose: All patients in phase I trials do not have equivalent susceptibility to serious drug-related toxicity (SDRT). Our goal was to develop a nomogram to predict the risk of cycle-one SDRT to better select appropriate patients for phase I trials.
Patients and methods: The prospectively maintained database of patients with solid tumor enrolled onto Cancer Therapeutics Evaluation Program-sponsored phase I trials activated between 2000 and 2010 was used. SDRT was defined as a grade ≥ 4 hematologic or grade ≥ 3 nonhematologic toxicity attributed, at least possibly, to study drug(s). Logistic regression was used to test the association of candidate factors to cycle-one SDRT. A final model, or nomogram, was chosen based on both clinical and statistical significance and validated internally using a bootstrapping technique and externally in an independent data set.
Results: Data from 3,104 patients enrolled onto 127 trials were analyzed to build the nomogram. In a model with multiple covariates, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, WBC count, creatinine clearance, albumin, AST, number of study drugs, biologic study drug (yes v no), and dose (relative to maximum administered) were significant predictors of cycle-one SDRT. All significant factors except dose were included in the final nomogram. The model was validated both internally (bootstrap-adjusted concordance index, 0.60) and externally (concordance index, 0.64).
Conclusion: This nomogram can be used to accurately predict a patient's risk for SDRT at the time of enrollment. Excluding patients at high risk for SDRT should improve the safety and efficiency of phase I trials.
Conflict of interest statement
Authors' disclosures of potential conflicts of interest and author contributions are found at the end of this article.
Figures



Comment in
-
Phase I trial improvement: a question of patient selection, trial design, or both?J Clin Oncol. 2014 Feb 20;32(6):489-90. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2013.53.6896. Epub 2014 Jan 13. J Clin Oncol. 2014. PMID: 24419111 No abstract available.
-
Reply to D.M. Hyman et al and M. Voskoboynik et al.J Clin Oncol. 2014 Oct 1;32(28):3200. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2014.56.5770. Epub 2014 Jul 28. J Clin Oncol. 2014. PMID: 25071106 No abstract available.
-
Reply to M. Voskoboynik et al.J Clin Oncol. 2014 Oct 1;32(28):3199-200. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2014.56.5762. Epub 2014 Jul 28. J Clin Oncol. 2014. PMID: 25071117 No abstract available.
-
Improving patient selection for phase I oncology trials.J Clin Oncol. 2014 Oct 1;32(28):3198-9. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2014.55.8031. Epub 2014 Jul 28. J Clin Oncol. 2014. PMID: 25071142 No abstract available.
References
-
- Karavasilis V, Digue L, Arkenau T, et al. Identification of factors limiting patient recruitment into phase I trials: A study from the Royal Marsden Hospital. Eur J Cancer. 2008;44:978–982. - PubMed
-
- Olmos D, A'Hern RP, Marsoni S, et al. Patient selection for oncology phase I trials: A multi-institutional study of prognostic factors. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30:996–1004. - PubMed
-
- Arkenau HT, Olmos D, Ang JE, et al. 90-days mortality rate in patients treated within the context of a phase-I trial: How should we identify patients who should not go on trial? Eur J Cancer. 2008;44:1536–1540. - PubMed
-
- Arkenau HT, Barriuso J, Olmos D, et al. Prospective validation of a prognostic score to improve patient selection for oncology phase I trials. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:2692–2696. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources