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. Issue 2 (November 2015)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Addison, Christina L.; Ding, Keyue; Seymour, Lesley; Zhao, Huijun; Laurie, Scott A.; Shepherd, Frances A.; Goss, Glenwood D.; Bradbury, Penelope A.
• Is Part Of: Lung cancer. Volume 90:Issue 2(2015:Nov.)
• Page Start: 288
• Page End: 295
• Publication Date: 2015-11
• Subjects: Cediranib -- Non-small cell lung cancer -- Biomarker -- VEGF -- sVEGFR -- Prognostic -- Predictive -- Survival; Lungs -- Cancer -- Periodicals; Lung Neoplasms -- Abstracts; Lung Neoplasms -- Periodicals; Poumons -- Cancer -- Périodiques; Lungs -- Cancer; Periodicals; Electronic journals; Electronic journals; 616.99424
• DOI: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2015.09.004
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0169-5002

Abstract

Highlights: Circulating biomarkers were assessed BR.24 NCIC clinical trials group study. Chemotherapy induced changes in circulating VEGF-A, sVEGFR2 and SDF-1α but not in sVEGFR3 levels. High baseline sVEGFR2 was prognostic for better PFS. Low baseline sVEGFR2 or sVEGFR3 were predictive of PFS benefit from cediranib. VEGF-A, sVEGFR2 or sVEGFR3 changes from baseline to on-treatment predicted cediranib response. 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.