39 research outputs found
PCN76 SKELETAL-RELATED EVENTS IN PATIENTS WITH BONE METASTASES LEAD TO CONSIDERABLE HEALTH RESOURCE UTILISATION IN EUROPE: ANALYSIS OF A MULTINATIONAL OBSERVATIONAL STUDY
PCN115 Cost of Skeletal-Related Events (SREs) in Patients with Bone Metastases to solid Tumours Based on the Health Resource Utilisation (HRU) Collected in a Prospective European Multinational Observational Study
n/
Results of the treatment of bone metastases with modular prosthetic replacement—analysis of 67 patients
Health resource utilization associated with skeletal-related events in patients with advanced breast cancer: results from a prospective, multinational observational study
Patient preferences for treatment of castration-resistant prostate cancer in Japan: a discrete-choice experiment
PCN9 Modeling Lifetime Effectiveness of Denosumab Versus Placebo in Men With Castration Resistant Prostate Cancer (CRPC) at High Risk of Developing Bone Metastasis (BM)
Impact Of Bone Metastases (Bm) On The Humanistic Burden In Patients With Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer (Crpc)
PCN118 Impact of Bone Metastases on Quality of Life in Patients With Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer (CRPC) at High Risk for Developing Bone Metastases
Prevalence of RAS mutations and individual variation patterns among patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: A pooled analysis of randomised controlled trials
Contains fulltext :
153716.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access)BACKGROUND: The use of epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors to treat metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients requires prior confirmation of tumour wild type (WT) RAS mutation status (exons 2/3/4 for KRAS or NRAS). This retrospective pooled analysis aims to robustly estimate RAS mutation prevalence and individual variation patterns in mCRC patients. METHOD: Individual patient data from five randomised, controlled panitumumab studies (three phase III, one phase II and one phase Ib/II) were pooled for this analysis. The phase III studies included mCRC patients independent of RAS mutation status; the phase II and Ib/II studies included mCRC patients with confirmed WT KRAS exon 2 status. Four studies conducted RAS testing using Sanger sequencing; one study used a combination of next-generation sequencing and Sanger sequencing. In order to assign overall RAS status, the mutation status of all exons 2/3/4 KRAS or NRAS was required to be known. RESULTS: Data from 3196 mCRC patients from 36 countries were included in the analysis. The overall unadjusted RAS mutation prevalence in mCRC patients was 55.9% (95% confidence interval (CI): [53.9-57.9%]), with the following distribution observed: KRAS exon 2 (prevalence 42.6% [40.7-44.5%]); KRAS exon 3 (3.8% [2.9-4.9%]); KRAS exon 4 (6.2% [5.0-7.6%]); NRAS exon 2 (2.9% [2.1-3.9%]); NRAS exon 3 (4.2% [3.2-5.4%]); NRAS exon 4 (0.3% [0.1-0.7%]). Differences in RAS mutation prevalence estimates were observed by study (p=0.001), gender (p=0.030), and by country (p=0.028). CONCLUSIONS: This analysis provides robust estimates of overall RAS mutation prevalence and individual variation patterns in mCRC patients