Poster Presentation NSW State Cancer Conference 2023

Estimating survival scenarios in patients with advanced oesophageal and gastric (AOG) adenocarcinoma treated with systemic therapy: A systematic review of randomised-controlled trials (RCT). (#198)

Sayeda Dr Naher 1 , Rebecca Dr Mercieca-Bebber 1 , Peter Ass/Prof Grimison 2 , Martin Prof Stockler 1 , Derrick Dr Siu 1 , Belinda Dr Kiely 1
  1. National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Clinical Trials Centre (CTC), University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
  2. Chris O’Brien Lifehouse, Camperdown, Sydney, NSW, Australia

Background:

Prognostic information can help inform decision making. The aim of this study was to find, organise, and summarize survival data from recent RCTs in patients with AOG adenocarcinoma to help clinicians estimate and explain worst-case, typical and best-case scenarios of survival time.

Methods

We searched for RCTs of first and subsequent-line systemic therapies for patients with AOG adenocarcinoma published between 2000 to 2022.  Overall survival (OS) curves were analysed and the following key percentiles (representative scenario) were extracted from each curve: 90th (worst-case), 75th (lower-typical), 25th (upper-typical), and 10th (best-case). Based on previous work we tested if simple multiples of median overall survival (mOS) could be used to estimate these percentiles: 0.25 for  90thpercentile, 0.5 for 75th, 2 for 25th, and 3 for 10th. We classified estimates ‘accurate’ if within 0.66 to 1.33 times the actual value.

Results

We identified 44 trials (n=22,447 patients), 30 first line - three immunotherapy and chemotherapy combined (CI), 27 chemotherapy with or without other therapy, 14 subsequent line – nine with chemotherapy and five with others.

For first line CI trials survival range from 4 months to not reached and other trials 3 months to 30 months and subsequent line  one month to 23 months. Table 1 summarize survival scenarios. Simple multiples of mOS were accurate for estimating percentiles in majority treatment groups apart from  10thpercentiles (longer term outcomes) could not be estimated for CI trials in first line.

Conclusions

We provide personalized prognostic information presented as scenarios for survival time that are evidence-based, realistic, and can inform clinical decision-making.  Simple multiples of the mOS accurately estimated the percentiles for majority groups.

 

 Table 1:

 

Survival scenarios according to different treatment groups and lines

Treatment line and regimen

Number of KM curves

Number of

patients

Survival scenario in months

(mean)

 

 

 

90th

worst

75th

lower typical  

50th

median

25th

upper typical  

10th

best

First line

 

 

16,457

 

 

 

 

 

Chemotherapy + immune checkpoint inhibitor

3

1408

4.4

7.7

14.5

24.8

NR

Chemotherapy with or without targeted therapy

59

15,049

3.6

6.4

11

19

30

Subsequent line

 

5990

 

 

 

 

 

Chemotherapy + antiVEGF

1

330

3

5

9.5

15.2

22.5

Chemotherapy

14

4044

2.4

4.2

7.4

12.8

21.3

Immunotherapy

3

711

1.4

2.8

6.4

13.6

22.1

TKI

1

238

1.3

2.4

5.1

9.8

17.3

Best supportive care

4

667

1.1

2

3.9

7.9

13.1

*TKI (Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors)

*VEGF (Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor)

NR (not reached)

KM (Kaplan Meier curve)