Table 3.
ORR, RR, DpR and TTF in each ESMO guideline group
| Group 1 | Group 2 | Group 3 | P valuea | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Response rate | ||||
| Number of patients analyzed (N = 531) | 156 | 216 | 159 | |
| Complete response | 8 (5.1%) | 4 (1.9%) | 11 (6.9%) | 0.03555 |
| Partial response | 91 (58.3%) | 116 (53.7%) | 83 (52.2%) | 0.5188 |
| Stable disease | 33 (21.1%) | 51 (23.6%) | 33 (20.8%) | 0.7807 |
| Progressive disease | 13 (8.3%) | 29 (13.4%) | 15 (9.4%) | 0.2462 |
| Not evaluable | 6 (3.8%) | 13 (6.0%) | 12 (7.5%) | |
| Unknown | 5 (3.2%) | 3 (1.4%) | 5 (3.1%) | |
| ORR (56.9%) | 99 (63.5%) | 120 (55.6%) | 94 (59.1%) | 0.3169 |
| Disease control rate (80.9%) | 132 (84.6%) | 171 (79.2%) | 127 (79.9%) | 0.3744 |
| Depth of response | ||||
| Number of patients analyzed (N = 473) | 145 | 189 | 139 | |
| Median | 43.0% | 43.3% | 39.6% | <0.6511 |
| Interquartile range | (20.6, 58.8) | (11.9, 57.9) | (15.0, 58.8) | |
| Range | (0, 100%) | (0, 100%) | (0, 100%) | |
| Group 1 | Group 2 | Group 3 | P valuea | ||
| Resection rate | |||||
| Number of patients analyzed (N = 562) | 165 | 224 | 173 | ||
| Resection | 94 (57.0%) | 25 (11.2%) | 20 (11.6%) | <0.00001 | |
| Liver resection | 66 (40.0%) | 10 (4.5%) | 11 (6.4%) | <0.00001 | |
| R0 resection | 68 (41.2%) | 9 (4.0%) | 7 (4.0%) | <0.00001 | |
| Time to treatment failure | |||||
| Number of patients analyzed (N = 562) | 165 | 224 | 173 | ||
| Median (day) | 126 | 157.5 | 175 | <0.019 | |
| Interquartile range | (64.0, 250.0) | (72.5, 269.0) | (93.0, 322.0) | ||
| Range (day) | (0, 1204) | (0, 1022) | (0, 771) | ||
ORR, overall response rate; RR, resection rate; DpR, depth of response; TTF, time to treatment failure.
aOverall P value for the three groups was evaluated by Fisher’s exact test. When it was <0.05, post hoc pairwise comparisons by Fisher’s exact test were conducted, where multiplicity was adjusted by Holm’s method.