Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2015 Nov;90(2):288-95.
doi: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2015.09.004. Epub 2015 Sep 16.

Analysis of serum protein levels of angiogenic factors and their soluble receptors as markers of response to cediranib in the NCIC CTG BR.24 clinical trial

Affiliations

Analysis of serum protein levels of angiogenic factors and their soluble receptors as markers of response to cediranib in the NCIC CTG BR.24 clinical trial

Christina L Addison et al. Lung Cancer. 2015 Nov.

Abstract

Objectives: Prognostic and predictive ability of circulating vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), stromal derived factor (SDF)-1α and soluble VEGF receptors (sVEGFR) 2 and 3, were evaluated in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients enrolled in NCIC Clinical Trials Group BR. 24 comparing chemotherapy with or without cediranib.

Materials and methods: Biomarker levels were assessed by ELISA in serum from 149/296 enrolled patients at baseline and 146/149 patients after one treatment cycle. Experimental cut-offs for baseline measures determined using a graphic method were:

Vegf-a: < or ≥1 ng/ml, SDF-1α: ≤ or >3.5 ng/ml, sVEGFR2: < or ≥11 ng/ml and sVEGFR3: < or ≥35.5 ng/ml. Changes in markers from baseline to on-treatment were predefined as increased ≥10%, stable within 10% or decreased ≥10%. Cox regression models were used to correlate biomarkers with patient characteristics and outcomes including progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS).

Results: No baseline biomarker was prognostic for OS, however, high baseline sVEGFR2 was prognostic for better PFS (p=0.0008) in the chemotherapy alone arm. Low baseline sVEGFR2 or sVEGFR3 were predictive of PFS benefit from cediranib (interaction p=0.06 and p=0.05, respectively). While on treatment, VEGF-A increases were associated with better PFS (p=0.02) and OS (p=0.01) for cediranib treated patients. Decreases in sVEGFR2 (p=0.01) or sVEGFR3 (p=0.02) were also predictive of better OS in cediranib treated patients.

Conclusions: Low baseline sVEGFR2 and sVEGFR3 were predictive for PFS benefit from cediranib, whereas increases in VEGF-A and decreases in sVEGFR2 or sVEGFR3 levels from baseline to on-treatment were predictive of an OS benefit from cediranib in chemotherapy treated NSCLC patients. Validation of these results is warranted.

Keywords: Biomarker; Cediranib; Non-small cell lung cancer; Predictive; Prognostic; Survival; VEGF; sVEGFR.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources