4.7 Article

Correlation of cytidine deaminase polymorphisms and activity with clinical outcome in gemcitabine-/platinum-treated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer patients

Journal

ANNALS OF ONCOLOGY
Volume 23, Issue 3, Pages 670-677

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdr280

Keywords

activity; cytidine deaminase; gemcitabine; NSCLC; polymorphisms

Categories

Funding

  1. Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: The aim of this study was to evaluate whether cytidine deaminase (CDA) polymorphisms 79A>C and 435C>T and/or CDA enzymatic activity influenced clinical outcome in 126 advanced non-small-cell lung cancer patients treated with gemcitabine-platinum-regimens. Patients and methods: CDA polymorphisms and activity were analysed by PCR and high-performance liquid chromatography, respectively. Univariate and multivariate analyses compared biological/clinical parameters with response, clinical benefit, time to progression (TtP) and overall survival (OS) using Pearson's chi(2) test, log-rank test and Cox proportional hazards model. Results: Patients with CDA A79A/A79C genotypes had significantly longer TtP (6.0 versus 3.0 months; P = 0.001) and OS (11.0 versus 5.0 months; P = 0.001) than patients with C79C genotype. Patients harbouring CDA C435C/C435T genotypes also had a longer OS (P = 0.025), but no correlations were observed with TtP. Conversely, patients with low-CDA activity had a significantly higher response rate (37.7% versus 13.8%; P = 0.006), clinical benefit (91.8% versus 51.7%; P < 0.001), as well as longer TtP (8.0 versus 3.0 months; P < 0.001) and OS (19.0 versus 6.0 months; P < 0.001). Furthermore, enzymatic activity emerged as an independent predictor for death/progression risk at multivariate analysis. Conclusions: CDA enzymatic activity appears to be the strongest candidate biomarker of activity and efficacy of platinum-gemcitabine-based chemotherapy and should be validated in a prospective study.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available