TY - JOUR
T1 - Decision making for anti-VEGF inhibitor continuation
T2 - dip stick? or urine protein/creatinine ratio? (VERSiON UP study)
AU - Nakamura, Michio
AU - Funakoshi, Taro
AU - Kataoka, Shigeki
AU - Horimatsu, Takahiro
AU - Nishikawa, Yoshitaka
AU - Matsubara, Takeshi
AU - Mizukami, Takuro
AU - Goto, Tomoyuki
AU - Tsuchihashi, Kenji
AU - Baba, Eishi
AU - Tsumura, Takehiko
AU - Mihara, Yoshiaki
AU - Hamaguchi, Tetsuya
AU - Yanagita, Motoko
AU - Muto, Manabu
N1 - Funding Information:
MN, YM, MY, and MM have received honoraria from Chugai Pharmaceutical. MN and EB have received honoraria from Eli Lilly Japan. MN has honoraria from Sanofi. EB has received a Chugai scholarship donation. MY, and MM have received a donation from Chugai Pharmaceutical. TF and MM belong to a donated course in Chugai Pharmaceutical. MM has received a donation from Sanofi. MM has received institutional research funding from Chugai Pharmaceutical. SK, TH, TM, TM, TG, KT, TT, and TH declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2022, The Author(s).
PY - 2022/12
Y1 - 2022/12
N2 - Background: Monitoring proteinuria is important for the management of patients with cancer treated with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) or anti-VEGF receptor (VEGFR) inhibitors (VEGF/Ri). Here we investigated the difference between the urine protein/creatinine ratio (UPCR) and a qualitative value test (QV) on the decision making of treatment continuation and the usefulness of UPCR testing in patients with gastrointestinal cancer treated with anti-VEGF/Ri. Methods: From January 2017 to December 2018, a survey was conducted based on the medical records of patients with gastrointestinal cancer with a QV of ≥2+ during the use of anti-VEGF/Ri at seven Japanese institutions participating in the Onco-nephrology Consortium. The primary endpoint was the ratio of the worst UPCR < 2.0 (low UPCR) in cases with a QV2+ at the point of the first proteinuria onset. The secondary endpoints were a comparison of low UPCR and worst UPCR ≥2.0 (high UPCR), the concordance rate between UPCR and QV in the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) grading, and the differences in the decision making for anti-VEGF/Ri continuation. Results: Among the 71 patients enrolled, the proportion of low UPCR in onset QV2+ (n = 53) was 66% (n = 35). In a comparison between low (n = 36) and high UPCR cases (n = 24), body weight (P = 0.036), onset QV status (P = 0.0134), and worst QV status (P < 0.0001) were significantly associated with UPCR levels. The concordance rate for CTCAE Grade 2 of both the QV and UPCR was 83%. Regarding the judgment of anti-VEGF/Ri continuation, treatment was continued in 42.4% of cases when the QV became 3+, whereas only 25% continued treatment when the UPCR value became high. Conclusion: Urine dipstick test results may overestimate proteinuria, and the UPCR result tended to be more critical than the QV when deciding the treatment policy. Trial registration: This study is a multiple institutional retrospectively registered observational trial. Clinical Trial number: University Hospital Medical Information Network (UMIN) Clinical Trials Registry (protocol ID UMIN000042545).
AB - Background: Monitoring proteinuria is important for the management of patients with cancer treated with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) or anti-VEGF receptor (VEGFR) inhibitors (VEGF/Ri). Here we investigated the difference between the urine protein/creatinine ratio (UPCR) and a qualitative value test (QV) on the decision making of treatment continuation and the usefulness of UPCR testing in patients with gastrointestinal cancer treated with anti-VEGF/Ri. Methods: From January 2017 to December 2018, a survey was conducted based on the medical records of patients with gastrointestinal cancer with a QV of ≥2+ during the use of anti-VEGF/Ri at seven Japanese institutions participating in the Onco-nephrology Consortium. The primary endpoint was the ratio of the worst UPCR < 2.0 (low UPCR) in cases with a QV2+ at the point of the first proteinuria onset. The secondary endpoints were a comparison of low UPCR and worst UPCR ≥2.0 (high UPCR), the concordance rate between UPCR and QV in the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) grading, and the differences in the decision making for anti-VEGF/Ri continuation. Results: Among the 71 patients enrolled, the proportion of low UPCR in onset QV2+ (n = 53) was 66% (n = 35). In a comparison between low (n = 36) and high UPCR cases (n = 24), body weight (P = 0.036), onset QV status (P = 0.0134), and worst QV status (P < 0.0001) were significantly associated with UPCR levels. The concordance rate for CTCAE Grade 2 of both the QV and UPCR was 83%. Regarding the judgment of anti-VEGF/Ri continuation, treatment was continued in 42.4% of cases when the QV became 3+, whereas only 25% continued treatment when the UPCR value became high. Conclusion: Urine dipstick test results may overestimate proteinuria, and the UPCR result tended to be more critical than the QV when deciding the treatment policy. Trial registration: This study is a multiple institutional retrospectively registered observational trial. Clinical Trial number: University Hospital Medical Information Network (UMIN) Clinical Trials Registry (protocol ID UMIN000042545).
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85129769990&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85129769990&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1186/s12885-022-09611-3
DO - 10.1186/s12885-022-09611-3
M3 - Article
C2 - 35525917
AN - SCOPUS:85129769990
SN - 1471-2407
VL - 22
JO - BMC Cancer
JF - BMC Cancer
IS - 1
M1 - 515
ER -
