Literature DB >> 31785463

Randomised phase II trial of trofosfamide vs. doxorubicin in elderly patients with untreated metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma.

Joerg T Hartmann1, Hans-G Kopp2, Viktor Gruenwald3, Sophie Piperno-Neumann4, Annegret Kunitz5, Ralf Hofheinz6, Lothar Mueller7, Michael Geissler8, Marius Horger9, Peter Fix10, Jens M Chemnitz11, Michael Neise12, Thomas Wehler13, Ingo Zander14, Robert Eckert15, Claus Hann von Weyhern16, Sebastian Bauer17, Frank Mayer18.   

Abstract

Doxorubicin represents the standard first-line treatment for metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma. We assessed the efficacy and safety of trofosfamide in elderly patients. In this controlled phase II trial, we randomly (1:2) assigned 120 previously untreated patients with soft-tissue sarcoma, older than 60 years, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group score of 0-2, to receive either doxorubicin for 6 cycles (arm A) or oral trofosfamide (arm B). The primary end-point was a 6-month progression-free rate (PFR) in the experimental arm (clinical trial information: NCT00204568). Between August 2004 and October 2012, forty and 80 patients were randomly assigned to arm A and arm B, respectively, in 16 centres. The median age was 70 years (range, 60-89). The primary study end-point (6-month PFR) was exceeded, with 27.6% in arm B (95% confidence interval [CI], 18.0-39.1) and 35.9% in arm A: (95% CI, 21.2-52.8). Survival data in terms of progression-free survival were 4.3 months (95% CI, 2.2-6.3) and 2.8 months (95% CI, 1.7-3.6) and in terms of overall survival were 9.8 months (95% CI, 6.7-11.6) and 12.3 months (95% CI, 9.6-16.2), respectively. The number of serious adverse event (SAE) was 59% in arm A and 30.3% in arm B (p = 0.005). Trofosfamide caused more often dyspnoea and low-grade fatigue, whereas with doxorubicin, more often leukocytopenia, neutropenia and mucositis were seen. Discontinuation rates for reasons other than disease progression were 15.4% (arm A) vs. 7.9% (arm B). In an elderly population of patients, oral trofosfamide achieved the estimated primary end-point 6-month PFR and was associated with a favourable toxicity profile compared with doxorubicin.
Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Continuous low dose; Doxorubicin; Elderly patients; Metastatic disease; Metronomic; Safety; Soft-tissue sarcoma; Trofosfamide

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31785463     DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2019.10.016

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Cancer        ISSN: 0959-8049            Impact factor:   9.162


  5 in total

1.  Comparison between trabectedin and doxorubicin in soft-tissue sarcomas-reply letter.

Authors:  Jing-Yi Dang; Jun Fu; Zhao Zhang; Dong Liu; Debing Cheng; Hongbin Fan
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2022-04

2.  Comparison between trabectedin and doxorubicin in soft-tissue sarcomas: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Jingyi Dang; Jun Fu; Zhao Zhang; Dong Liu; Debin Cheng; Hongbin Fan
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2021-12

3.  Impact of Value Frameworks on the Magnitude of Clinical Benefit: Evaluating a Decade of Randomized Trials for Systemic Therapy in Solid Malignancies.

Authors:  Ellen Cusano; Chelsea Wong; Eddy Taguedong; Marcus Vaska; Tasnima Abedin; Nancy Nixon; Safiya Karim; Patricia Tang; Daniel Y C Heng; Doreen Ezeife
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2021-11-21       Impact factor: 3.677

4.  Do patients with soft-tissue sarcomas treated with trabectedin have better clinical effects and a longer survival time than those treated with doxorubicin?

Authors:  Jiangfeng Wu; Maoliang Zhang; Chunting Chen; Anli Zhao; Yinghong Guo
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2022-04

5.  Light-Responsive Micelles Loaded With Doxorubicin for Osteosarcoma Suppression.

Authors:  Jiayi Chen; Chenhong Qian; Peng Ren; Han Yu; Xiangjia Kong; Chenglong Huang; Huanhuan Luo; Gang Chen
Journal:  Front Pharmacol       Date:  2021-06-18       Impact factor: 5.810

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.