Table 1.
Patient demographics according to first-line TKI therapy and all patients.
| Italy | Europe | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| First-line TKI | First-line TKI | |||||||||
| Imatinib (Retro) | Imatinib (Pro) | Dasatinib | Nilotinib | All patients | Imatinib (Retro) | Imatinib (Pro) | Dasatinib | Nilotinib | All patients | |
| Cohort, N | 31 | 106 | 56 | 73 | 266 | 35 | 65 | 51 | 65 | 216 |
| Sex, n (%) | ||||||||||
| Male | 18 (58.1) | 64 (60.4) | 25 (44.6) | 37 (50.7) | 144 (54.1) | 19 (54.3) | 39 (60.0) | 32 (62.7) | 34 (52.3) | 124 (57.4) |
| Median (IQR) age at diagnosis (years) | ||||||||||
| 49.9 (40.6–69.2) | 61.4 (46.1–70.6) | 62.3 (47.3–73.1) | 53.1 (40.6–63.5) | 57.1 (44.8–69.5) | 46.7 (39.2–65.5) | 61.8 (49.2–74.7) | 57.9 (44.7–73.8) | 53.9 (47.2–65.6) | 57.8 (44.8–69.4) | |
| Median (IQR) age at first-line TKI (years) | ||||||||||
| 50.0 (40.7–69.3) | 61.4 (46.2–70.6) | 62.4 (47.4–73.1) | 53.1 (40.6–63.5) | 57.1 (44.9–69.6) | 49.6 (39.2–65.6) | 61.9 (49.2–74.8) | 57.9 (44.8–73.8) | 53.9 (47.3–65.6) | 57.8 (44.8–69.8) | |
| Age at first-line TKI (years), n (%) | ||||||||||
| <50 | 16 (51.6) | 32 (30.2) | 17 (30.4) | 31 (42.5) | 96 (36.1) | 20 (57.1) | 18 (27.7) | 18 (35.3) | 22 (33.8) | 78 (36.1) |
| 50–64 | 7 (22.6) | 30 (28.3) | 13 (23.2) | 26 (35.6) | 76 (28.6) | 6 (17.1) | 18 (27.7) | 15 (29.4) | 26 (40.0) | 65 (30.1) |
| ≥65 | 8 (25.8) | 44 (41.5) | 26 (46.4) | 16 (21.9) | 94 (35.3) | 9 (25.7) | 29 (44.6) | 18 (35.3) | 17 (26.2) | 73 (33.8) |
| Race/ethnicity, n (%) | ||||||||||
| White non-Hispanic | 23 (74.2) | 89 (84.0) | 35 (62.5) | 50 (68.5) | 197 (74.1) | 21 (60.0) | 48 (73.8) | 33 (64.7) | 41 (63.1) | 143 (66.2) |
| Other/unknown | 8 (25.8) | 17 (16.0) | 21 (37.5) | 23 (31.5) | 69 (25.9) | 14 (40.0) | 17 (26.2) | 18 (35.3) | 24 (36.9) | 73 (33.8) |
| Baseline comorbidities | 21 (67.7) | 75 (70.8) | 43 (76.8) | 38 (52.1) | 177 (66.5)* | 21 (60.0) | 53 (81.5) | 34 (66.7) | 51 (78.4) | 159 (73.6) |
| Median no. comorbidities (IQR) | 1.0 (0.0–2.0) | 1.0 (0.0–3.0) | 1.0 (1.0–3.0) | 1.0 (0.0–2.0) | 1.0 (0.0–3.0) | 1.0 (0.0–2.0) | 2.0 (1.0–4.0) | 1.0 (0.0–3.0) | 1.0 (1.0–3.0) | 1.0 (0.0–3.0) |
| ECOG performance status,† n (%) | ||||||||||
| 0 – fully active | 14 (77.8) | 33 (54.1) | 19 (59.4) | 38 (69.1) | 104 (62.7) | 14 (53.8) | 20 (45.5) | 21 (58.3) | 31 (66.0) | 86 (56.2) |
| 1 – restricted strenuous activity | 2 (11.1) | 16 (26.2) | 8 (25.0) | 10 (18.2) | 36 (21.7) | 10 (38.5) | 14 (31.8) | 9 (25.0) | 12 (25.5) | 45 (29.4) |
| 2 – ambulatory and capable of all self-care, no work | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 2 (6.3) | 0 (0.0) | 2 (1.2) | 0 (0.0) | 3 (6.8) | 2 (5.6) | 0 (0.0) | 5 (3.3) |
| 4 – completely disabled | 0 (0.0) | 1 (1.6) | 0 (0.0) | 1 (1.8) | 2 (1.2) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) |
| Not assessed | 2 | 11 | 3 | 6 | 22 | 2 | 7 | 4 | 4 | 17 |
| Cohort, N | 31 (11.1) | 106 (18.0) | 56 (9.4) | 73 (10.9) | 266 (13.3) | 35 (7.7) | 65 (15.9) | 51 (11.1) | 65 (8.5) | 216 (11.1) |
| Sokal category at diagnosis‡ | ||||||||||
| Low (<0.8) | 13 (41.9) | 24 (22.6) | 8 (14.3) | 20 (27.4) | 65 (24.4) | 5 (14.3) | 14 (21.5) | 9 (17.6) | 16 (24.6) | 44 (20.4) |
| Intermediate (0.8–1.2) | 11 (35.5) | 36 (34.0) | 20 (35.7) | 29 (39.7) | 96 (36.1) | 6 (17.1) | 20 (30.8) | 8 (15.7) | 8 (12.3) | 42 (19.4) |
| High (>1.2) | 3 (9.7) | 14 (13.2) | 16 (28.6) | 19 (26.0) | 52 (19.5) | 6 (17.1) | 7 (10.8) | 13 (25.5) | 11 (16.9) | 37 (17.1) |
| Missing | 4 (12.9) | 32 (30.2) | 12 (21.4) | 5 (6.8) | 53 (19.9) | 18 (51.4) | 24 (36.9) | 21 (41.2) | 30 (46.2) | 93 (43.1) |
| Hasford score at diagnosis¶ | ||||||||||
| Low-risk, n (%) | 10 (32.3) | 30 (28.3) | 14 (25.0) | 30 (41.1) | 84 (31.6) | 8 (22.9) | 25 (38.5) | 21 (41.2) | 21 (32.3) | 75 (34.7) |
| Intermediate-risk, n (%) | 4 (12.9) | 33 (31.1) | 23 (41.1) | 30 (41.1) | 90 (33.8) | 5 (14.3) | 15 (23.1) | 9 (17.6) | 9 (13.8) | 38 (17.6) |
| High-risk, n (%) | 1 (3.2) | 4 (3.8) | 6 (10.7) | 6 (8.2) | 17 (6.4) | 3 (8.6) | 2 (3.1) | 3 (5.9) | 2 (3.1) | 10 (4.6) |
| Missing, n (%) | 16 (51.6) | 39 (36.8) | 13 (23.2) | 7 (9.6) | 75 (28.2) | 19 (54.3) | 23 (35.4) | 18 (35.3) | 33 (50.8) | 93 (43.1) |
| Practice type, n (%) | ||||||||||
| Academic centre | 19 (61.3) | 101 (95.3) | 56 (100.0) | 73 (100.0) | 249 (93.6) | 14 (40.0) | 23 (35.4) | 25 (49.0) | 19 (29.2) | 81 (37.5) |
| Private / community practices | 12 (38.7) | 5 (4.7) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 17 (6.4) | 21 (60.0) | 42 (64.6) | 26 (51.0) | 46 (70.8) | 135 (62.5) |
†
Percentages are calculated using the total number of patients for whom data on ECOG performance status are available as the denominator. ECOG performance status is defined as: 0, fully active; 1, restricted strenuous activity; 2, ambulatory and capable of all self-care, no work; 3, capable of only limited self-care; 4, completely disabled.
‡
Sokal score categories; low-risk: Sokal score <0.8; intermediate-risk: Sokal score 0.8–1.2; high-risk: >1.2.
¶
Hasford score categories; low-risk: Hasford score ≤780); intermediate-risk: Hasford score >780–≤1480; high-risk: Hasford score >1480.
ECOG: Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group; IQR: interquartile range; Pro: prospective; Retro: retrospective; TKI: tyrosine kinase inhibitor.