Technology Assessment: Report on the Relative Efficacy of Oral Cancer Therapy for Medicare Beneficiaries Versus Currently Covered Therapy, Part 2. Imatinib for Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GISTs). Table 10

You Are Here: AHRQ Home > Clinical Information > Technology Assessments > Report on the Relative Efficacy of Oral Cancer Therapy for Medicare Beneficiaries Versus Currently Covered Therapy

Table 10. Other Clinical Predictors of Disease Response or Survival

Characteristic	Prognostic Factor	Studies Indicating an Association and Quality	Strength of Association with Tumor Response	Strength of Association with Survival
Performance status	Poor vs. good performance status at baseline	Heinrich, et al., 2003 (quality = 6/6)⁴⁷ Verweij, et al., 2004 (quality = 6/6)⁴⁹	HR: 1.57 (1.18-2.1) p = 0.0022* No significant relationship	HR: 2.8 (1.57-5.02) p = 0.0005*
Dose of imatinib	600 mg vs. 400 mg dose	Heinrich, et al., 2003 (quality = 6/6)⁴⁷	HR: 0.57 (0.36-0.91) p = 0.018*
Creatinine	Elevated creatinine at baseline vs. not elevated	Heinrich, et al., 2003 (quality = 6/6)⁴⁷		HR: 2.9 (0.86-9.80) p = 0.0866*
Prior chemotherapy	Prior chemotherapy vs. no prior chemotherapy	Heinrich, et al., 2003 (quality = 6/6)⁴⁷		HR: 2.6 (0.98-7.06) p = 0.0558*

Abbreviations: PET = FDG positive emission tomography; CT = computed tomography; TTP = time to progression; OS = overall survival; EFS = event free survival; HR = hazard ratio; RECIST = RECIST response criteria—go to Table 2; NS = not significant

*In this study hazard rations greater than one are predictive of poorer prognosis.

Return to Document