PURPOSE: There are currently no approved therapies for patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma previously treated withgemcitabine. This Phase III trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of glufosfamide as compared with best supportive care (BSC) in this patient population. METHODS: Patients were randomised to glufosfamide plus BSC or to BSC alone with baseline performance status as a stratification factor. The primary end-point was overall survival. RESULTS:Three hundred and three patients were randomised: 148 toglufosfamide plus BSC and 155 to BSC alone. There was an 18% increase in overall survival for glufosfamide that was not statistically significant: hazard ratio (HR) 0.85 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.66-1.08, p=0.19). Median survival was 105 (range 5-875) days for glufosfamide and 84 (range 2+ to 761) days for BSC. Grade 3/4 creatinine increase occurred in 6 patients on glufosfamide, including 4 with dosing errors. CONCLUSION: These results suggest low activity of glufosfamide in this very refractory patient population.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: There are currently no approved therapies for patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma previously treated with gemcitabine. This Phase III trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of glufosfamide as compared with best supportive care (BSC) in this patient population. METHODS:Patients were randomised to glufosfamide plus BSC or to BSC alone with baseline performance status as a stratification factor. The primary end-point was overall survival. RESULTS: Three hundred and three patients were randomised: 148 to glufosfamide plus BSC and 155 to BSC alone. There was an 18% increase in overall survival for glufosfamide that was not statistically significant: hazard ratio (HR) 0.85 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.66-1.08, p=0.19). Median survival was 105 (range 5-875) days for glufosfamide and 84 (range 2+ to 761) days for BSC. Grade 3/4 creatinine increase occurred in 6 patients on glufosfamide, including 4 with dosing errors. CONCLUSION: These results suggest low activity of glufosfamide in this very refractory patient population.
Authors: Christos Vaklavas; Apostolia-Maria Tsimberidou; Sijin Wen; David Hong; Jennifer Wheler; Chaan S Ng; Aung Naing; Cynthia Uehara; Robert A Wolff; Razelle Kurzrock Journal: Cancer Date: 2010-08-24 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Casey A Boyd; Daniel W Branch; Kristin M Sheffield; Yimei Han; Yong-Fang Kuo; James S Goodwin; Taylor S Riall Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2012-03-27 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Victoria C Yan; Hannah E Butterfield; Anton H Poral; Matthew J Yan; Kristine L Yang; Cong-Dat Pham; Florian L Muller Journal: Trends Cancer Date: 2020-06-11
Authors: Nicole M A White; Daniel W Newsted; Olena Masui; Alexander D Romaschin; K W Michael Siu; George M Yousef Journal: Tumour Biol Date: 2013-10-19