Limits...
European Treatment and Outcome Study score does not predict imatinib treatment response and outcome in chronic myeloid leukemia patients.

Yamamoto E, Fujisawa S, Hagihara M, Tanaka M, Fujimaki K, Kishimoto K, Hashimoto C, Itabashi M, Ishibashi D, Nakajima Y, Tachibana T, Kawasaki R, Kuwabara H, Koharazawa H, Yamazaki E, Tomita N, Sakai R, Fujita H, Kanamori H, Ishigatsubo Y - Cancer Sci. (2014)

Bottom Line: We performed a multicenter retrospective study to validate the effectiveness of each of the three scoring systems.However, there were significant differences in both the Sokal score and Hasford score risk groups.In our retrospective validation study, the EUTOS score did not predict the prognosis of patients with CML in chronic phase treated with imatinib.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Internal Medicine and Clinical Immunology, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama, Japan.

Show MeSH

Related in: MedlinePlus

Overall survival (OS) using (a) the European Treatment and Outcome Study (EUTOS) score, (b) the Sokal score and (c) the Hasford score. There is a significant difference (P = 0.005) in OS between the risk groups according to the Hasford score, but no significant difference according to the EUTOS and Sokal scores. NS, not significant.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4317875&req=5

fig01: Overall survival (OS) using (a) the European Treatment and Outcome Study (EUTOS) score, (b) the Sokal score and (c) the Hasford score. There is a significant difference (P = 0.005) in OS between the risk groups according to the Hasford score, but no significant difference according to the EUTOS and Sokal scores. NS, not significant.

Mentions: The response rates to treatment and outcomes according to each of the scoring systems are listed in Table 3 and Figures 1–3. The cumulative incidence of CCyR at 12 and 18 months, cumulative incidence of MMR at 12 and 18 months, EFS, PFS and OS are also shown. The cumulative incidence of CCyR at 18 months was 86.9% and 87.5% in the EUTOS low- and high-risk groups (P = 0.797), 93.1%, 85.2% and 69.2% in the Sokal low-, intermediate- and high-risk groups (P = 0.002) and 92.2%, 87.2% and 75% in the Hasford low-, intermediate- and high-risk groups (P = 0.002), respectively. According to risk stratifications, there were significant differences in CCyR prediction between the Sokal and Hasford risk groups, but no significant difference among the EUTOS score risk groups. The cumulative incidence of CCyR at 12 months was validated using the Sokal and Hasford scores (P = 0.012 and P < 0.001, respectively), but not by the EUTOS score (P = 0.828). For the cumulative incidence of MMR at 18 months, there were no significant differences between the three risk categories (Table 3). The 5-year OS rates were 92.6% and 93.3% (P = 0.871) in the EUTOS low- and high-risk groups, 95.4%, 100% and 88.4% (P = 0.216) in the Sokal low-, intermediate- and high-risk groups and 100%, 93.7% and 75.5% (P = 0.005) in the Hasford low-, intermediate- and high-risk groups, respectively (Fig. 1a–c). The 5-year PFS rates were 92.1% and 87.1% (P = 0.5) in the EUTOS low- and high-risk groups, 96.4%, 98% and 76.7% (P = 0.004) in the Sokal low-, intermediate- and high-risk groups and 97.5%, 94.2% and 49.9% (P < 0.001) in the Hasford low-, intermediate- and high-risk groups, respectively (Fig. 2a–c). The 5-year EFS rates were 80.9% and 87.9% (P = 0.66) in the EUTOS low- and high-risk groups, 91.9%, 70.6% and 76.1% (P = 0.009) in the Sokal low-, intermediate- and high-score groups and 88.9%, 81.8% and 49.9% (P < 0.001) in the Hasford low-, intermediate- and high-risk groups, respectively (Fig. 3a–c).


European Treatment and Outcome Study score does not predict imatinib treatment response and outcome in chronic myeloid leukemia patients.

Yamamoto E, Fujisawa S, Hagihara M, Tanaka M, Fujimaki K, Kishimoto K, Hashimoto C, Itabashi M, Ishibashi D, Nakajima Y, Tachibana T, Kawasaki R, Kuwabara H, Koharazawa H, Yamazaki E, Tomita N, Sakai R, Fujita H, Kanamori H, Ishigatsubo Y - Cancer Sci. (2014)

Overall survival (OS) using (a) the European Treatment and Outcome Study (EUTOS) score, (b) the Sokal score and (c) the Hasford score. There is a significant difference (P = 0.005) in OS between the risk groups according to the Hasford score, but no significant difference according to the EUTOS and Sokal scores. NS, not significant.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4317875&req=5

fig01: Overall survival (OS) using (a) the European Treatment and Outcome Study (EUTOS) score, (b) the Sokal score and (c) the Hasford score. There is a significant difference (P = 0.005) in OS between the risk groups according to the Hasford score, but no significant difference according to the EUTOS and Sokal scores. NS, not significant.
Mentions: The response rates to treatment and outcomes according to each of the scoring systems are listed in Table 3 and Figures 1–3. The cumulative incidence of CCyR at 12 and 18 months, cumulative incidence of MMR at 12 and 18 months, EFS, PFS and OS are also shown. The cumulative incidence of CCyR at 18 months was 86.9% and 87.5% in the EUTOS low- and high-risk groups (P = 0.797), 93.1%, 85.2% and 69.2% in the Sokal low-, intermediate- and high-risk groups (P = 0.002) and 92.2%, 87.2% and 75% in the Hasford low-, intermediate- and high-risk groups (P = 0.002), respectively. According to risk stratifications, there were significant differences in CCyR prediction between the Sokal and Hasford risk groups, but no significant difference among the EUTOS score risk groups. The cumulative incidence of CCyR at 12 months was validated using the Sokal and Hasford scores (P = 0.012 and P < 0.001, respectively), but not by the EUTOS score (P = 0.828). For the cumulative incidence of MMR at 18 months, there were no significant differences between the three risk categories (Table 3). The 5-year OS rates were 92.6% and 93.3% (P = 0.871) in the EUTOS low- and high-risk groups, 95.4%, 100% and 88.4% (P = 0.216) in the Sokal low-, intermediate- and high-risk groups and 100%, 93.7% and 75.5% (P = 0.005) in the Hasford low-, intermediate- and high-risk groups, respectively (Fig. 1a–c). The 5-year PFS rates were 92.1% and 87.1% (P = 0.5) in the EUTOS low- and high-risk groups, 96.4%, 98% and 76.7% (P = 0.004) in the Sokal low-, intermediate- and high-risk groups and 97.5%, 94.2% and 49.9% (P < 0.001) in the Hasford low-, intermediate- and high-risk groups, respectively (Fig. 2a–c). The 5-year EFS rates were 80.9% and 87.9% (P = 0.66) in the EUTOS low- and high-risk groups, 91.9%, 70.6% and 76.1% (P = 0.009) in the Sokal low-, intermediate- and high-score groups and 88.9%, 81.8% and 49.9% (P < 0.001) in the Hasford low-, intermediate- and high-risk groups, respectively (Fig. 3a–c).

Bottom Line: We performed a multicenter retrospective study to validate the effectiveness of each of the three scoring systems.However, there were significant differences in both the Sokal score and Hasford score risk groups.In our retrospective validation study, the EUTOS score did not predict the prognosis of patients with CML in chronic phase treated with imatinib.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Internal Medicine and Clinical Immunology, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama, Japan.

Show MeSH
Related in: MedlinePlus