User login
VIENNA – A more aggressive combination of doxorubicin and ifosfamide provided no significant overall survival advantage over single-agent doxorubicin as first-line chemotherapy in advanced soft-tissue sarcoma in a phase III trial.
The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) 62012 study’s primary end point of median overall survival reached 14.3 months with the combination and 12.8 months with doxorubicin alone (hazard ratio, 0.83; P = .076). One-year survival rates were 60% and 51%, respectively.
As previously observed, the combination of doxorubicin (Adriamycin) and ifosfamide (Ifex) increased response rates and progression-free survival, but at a cost of considerably more toxicity. "The standard treatment remains single-agent doxorubicin," Dr. Winette van der Graaf said during a Presidential Symposium at the European Society for Medical Oncology Congress.
Combination therapy, she added, can be considered if surgery for unresectable tumors or curative metastasectomy is foreseen, and may be an option for highly symptomatic patients without comorbidity, although the pros and cons should be discussed with the patient.
"The advantage of having the results of this study is that it’s easier now to have this discussion with the patient," said Dr. van der Graaf, of Radboud University Nijmegen (Netherlands) Medical Centre.
The EORTC Soft Tissue and Bone Sarcoma Group designed the trial to answer the long-standing question of whether single-agent doxorubicin or doxorubicin plus ifosfamide is the best first-line treatment for metastatic soft-tissue sarcomas. An earlier EORTC phase III trial (J. Clin. Oncol. 1995;13:1537-45) explored the combination at a lower dose of ifosfamide than is used today, with more recent phase II trials suggesting that a higher dose could increase response rates and progression-free survival.
EORTC 62012 investigators at 38 centers in nine countries randomly assigned 455 patients, aged 18-60 years, with locally advanced unresectable or metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma to receive doxorubicin 75 mg/m2 bolus on day 1 or as a 72-hour continuous IV infusion or doxorubicin 25 mg/m2 on days 1-3 plus ifosfamide 2.5 g/m2 on days 1-4 and pegfilgrastim 6 mg subcutaneous on day 5.
Patients were stratified by age, performance status (0 vs. 1), liver metastases, and histological grade. No prior chemotherapy was allowed for advanced disease.
After a median follow-up of 56 months, median progression-free survival increased significantly from 4.6 months with single-agent doxorubicin to 7.4 months with the addition of ifosfamide (HR 0.74, P = .003), Dr. van der Graaf reported on behalf of lead author Dr. Ian Judson of the Royal Marsden Hospital, London.
Subgroup analyses revealed significantly longer progression-free survival among patients aged 40-49 years, but this significance disappeared when all patients under age 50 were included in the analysis. No subgroups had significantly better overall survival.
The complete response rate was very low, at 0.4% in the doxorubicin arm and 1.8% in the combination arm. Remarkably, partial responses doubled with combination therapy from 13.2% to 24.7%, but overall response rates (13.6% vs. 26.5%) were far less than expected from phase II trials, where they ranged from 52% to 66%, she observed.
At first blush, the difference in progression-free survival with combination therapy may not appear that important, but from the perspective of patients with metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma, who typically have a median survival of only 1 year, this means that they’ll spend about 20% of their lifetime longer with disease control, said discussant Dr. George Demetri, director of the Center for Sarcoma and Bone Oncology at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston.
"The question for us as clinicians is can we target patients who truly would get more benefit from this kind of doubling of tumor response and control, despite the sizable toxicities of the more toxic combination chemotherapy," he said.
Dr. Demetri pointed out that significantly more patients discontinued combination therapy than single-agent doxorubicin due to toxicity (40 patients vs. 6 patients). The most common grade 3 or higher adverse events in the combination and doxorubicin arms were febrile neutropenia (46% vs. 13.5%), anemia (35% vs. 4.6%) and thrombocytopenia (33.5% vs. 0.4%).
Dr. Demetri cautioned that the results should not be blindly extrapolated to clinical practice because patients in the trial were younger and healthier than those typically seen in practice. However, the solid data can be used to make informed choices, he said.
If a patient is asymptomatic, as many metastatic sarcoma patients are, then single-agent doxorubicin, which he described as a strong, aggressive, "truck" of a therapy, "may be sufficient" and "more kind, more humane" to the patient, he said. If the patient is symptomatic or tumor shrinkage is required to improve quality of life because of tumor-related pain, "then perhaps combination therapy, although more toxic, may be more beneficial," he added.
The EORTC sponsored the trial. Dr. van der Graaf and Dr. Judson reported no conflicts of interest. Dr. Demetri reported financial relationships with several pharmaceutical companies.
VIENNA – A more aggressive combination of doxorubicin and ifosfamide provided no significant overall survival advantage over single-agent doxorubicin as first-line chemotherapy in advanced soft-tissue sarcoma in a phase III trial.
The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) 62012 study’s primary end point of median overall survival reached 14.3 months with the combination and 12.8 months with doxorubicin alone (hazard ratio, 0.83; P = .076). One-year survival rates were 60% and 51%, respectively.
As previously observed, the combination of doxorubicin (Adriamycin) and ifosfamide (Ifex) increased response rates and progression-free survival, but at a cost of considerably more toxicity. "The standard treatment remains single-agent doxorubicin," Dr. Winette van der Graaf said during a Presidential Symposium at the European Society for Medical Oncology Congress.
Combination therapy, she added, can be considered if surgery for unresectable tumors or curative metastasectomy is foreseen, and may be an option for highly symptomatic patients without comorbidity, although the pros and cons should be discussed with the patient.
"The advantage of having the results of this study is that it’s easier now to have this discussion with the patient," said Dr. van der Graaf, of Radboud University Nijmegen (Netherlands) Medical Centre.
The EORTC Soft Tissue and Bone Sarcoma Group designed the trial to answer the long-standing question of whether single-agent doxorubicin or doxorubicin plus ifosfamide is the best first-line treatment for metastatic soft-tissue sarcomas. An earlier EORTC phase III trial (J. Clin. Oncol. 1995;13:1537-45) explored the combination at a lower dose of ifosfamide than is used today, with more recent phase II trials suggesting that a higher dose could increase response rates and progression-free survival.
EORTC 62012 investigators at 38 centers in nine countries randomly assigned 455 patients, aged 18-60 years, with locally advanced unresectable or metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma to receive doxorubicin 75 mg/m2 bolus on day 1 or as a 72-hour continuous IV infusion or doxorubicin 25 mg/m2 on days 1-3 plus ifosfamide 2.5 g/m2 on days 1-4 and pegfilgrastim 6 mg subcutaneous on day 5.
Patients were stratified by age, performance status (0 vs. 1), liver metastases, and histological grade. No prior chemotherapy was allowed for advanced disease.
After a median follow-up of 56 months, median progression-free survival increased significantly from 4.6 months with single-agent doxorubicin to 7.4 months with the addition of ifosfamide (HR 0.74, P = .003), Dr. van der Graaf reported on behalf of lead author Dr. Ian Judson of the Royal Marsden Hospital, London.
Subgroup analyses revealed significantly longer progression-free survival among patients aged 40-49 years, but this significance disappeared when all patients under age 50 were included in the analysis. No subgroups had significantly better overall survival.
The complete response rate was very low, at 0.4% in the doxorubicin arm and 1.8% in the combination arm. Remarkably, partial responses doubled with combination therapy from 13.2% to 24.7%, but overall response rates (13.6% vs. 26.5%) were far less than expected from phase II trials, where they ranged from 52% to 66%, she observed.
At first blush, the difference in progression-free survival with combination therapy may not appear that important, but from the perspective of patients with metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma, who typically have a median survival of only 1 year, this means that they’ll spend about 20% of their lifetime longer with disease control, said discussant Dr. George Demetri, director of the Center for Sarcoma and Bone Oncology at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston.
"The question for us as clinicians is can we target patients who truly would get more benefit from this kind of doubling of tumor response and control, despite the sizable toxicities of the more toxic combination chemotherapy," he said.
Dr. Demetri pointed out that significantly more patients discontinued combination therapy than single-agent doxorubicin due to toxicity (40 patients vs. 6 patients). The most common grade 3 or higher adverse events in the combination and doxorubicin arms were febrile neutropenia (46% vs. 13.5%), anemia (35% vs. 4.6%) and thrombocytopenia (33.5% vs. 0.4%).
Dr. Demetri cautioned that the results should not be blindly extrapolated to clinical practice because patients in the trial were younger and healthier than those typically seen in practice. However, the solid data can be used to make informed choices, he said.
If a patient is asymptomatic, as many metastatic sarcoma patients are, then single-agent doxorubicin, which he described as a strong, aggressive, "truck" of a therapy, "may be sufficient" and "more kind, more humane" to the patient, he said. If the patient is symptomatic or tumor shrinkage is required to improve quality of life because of tumor-related pain, "then perhaps combination therapy, although more toxic, may be more beneficial," he added.
The EORTC sponsored the trial. Dr. van der Graaf and Dr. Judson reported no conflicts of interest. Dr. Demetri reported financial relationships with several pharmaceutical companies.
VIENNA – A more aggressive combination of doxorubicin and ifosfamide provided no significant overall survival advantage over single-agent doxorubicin as first-line chemotherapy in advanced soft-tissue sarcoma in a phase III trial.
The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) 62012 study’s primary end point of median overall survival reached 14.3 months with the combination and 12.8 months with doxorubicin alone (hazard ratio, 0.83; P = .076). One-year survival rates were 60% and 51%, respectively.
As previously observed, the combination of doxorubicin (Adriamycin) and ifosfamide (Ifex) increased response rates and progression-free survival, but at a cost of considerably more toxicity. "The standard treatment remains single-agent doxorubicin," Dr. Winette van der Graaf said during a Presidential Symposium at the European Society for Medical Oncology Congress.
Combination therapy, she added, can be considered if surgery for unresectable tumors or curative metastasectomy is foreseen, and may be an option for highly symptomatic patients without comorbidity, although the pros and cons should be discussed with the patient.
"The advantage of having the results of this study is that it’s easier now to have this discussion with the patient," said Dr. van der Graaf, of Radboud University Nijmegen (Netherlands) Medical Centre.
The EORTC Soft Tissue and Bone Sarcoma Group designed the trial to answer the long-standing question of whether single-agent doxorubicin or doxorubicin plus ifosfamide is the best first-line treatment for metastatic soft-tissue sarcomas. An earlier EORTC phase III trial (J. Clin. Oncol. 1995;13:1537-45) explored the combination at a lower dose of ifosfamide than is used today, with more recent phase II trials suggesting that a higher dose could increase response rates and progression-free survival.
EORTC 62012 investigators at 38 centers in nine countries randomly assigned 455 patients, aged 18-60 years, with locally advanced unresectable or metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma to receive doxorubicin 75 mg/m2 bolus on day 1 or as a 72-hour continuous IV infusion or doxorubicin 25 mg/m2 on days 1-3 plus ifosfamide 2.5 g/m2 on days 1-4 and pegfilgrastim 6 mg subcutaneous on day 5.
Patients were stratified by age, performance status (0 vs. 1), liver metastases, and histological grade. No prior chemotherapy was allowed for advanced disease.
After a median follow-up of 56 months, median progression-free survival increased significantly from 4.6 months with single-agent doxorubicin to 7.4 months with the addition of ifosfamide (HR 0.74, P = .003), Dr. van der Graaf reported on behalf of lead author Dr. Ian Judson of the Royal Marsden Hospital, London.
Subgroup analyses revealed significantly longer progression-free survival among patients aged 40-49 years, but this significance disappeared when all patients under age 50 were included in the analysis. No subgroups had significantly better overall survival.
The complete response rate was very low, at 0.4% in the doxorubicin arm and 1.8% in the combination arm. Remarkably, partial responses doubled with combination therapy from 13.2% to 24.7%, but overall response rates (13.6% vs. 26.5%) were far less than expected from phase II trials, where they ranged from 52% to 66%, she observed.
At first blush, the difference in progression-free survival with combination therapy may not appear that important, but from the perspective of patients with metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma, who typically have a median survival of only 1 year, this means that they’ll spend about 20% of their lifetime longer with disease control, said discussant Dr. George Demetri, director of the Center for Sarcoma and Bone Oncology at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston.
"The question for us as clinicians is can we target patients who truly would get more benefit from this kind of doubling of tumor response and control, despite the sizable toxicities of the more toxic combination chemotherapy," he said.
Dr. Demetri pointed out that significantly more patients discontinued combination therapy than single-agent doxorubicin due to toxicity (40 patients vs. 6 patients). The most common grade 3 or higher adverse events in the combination and doxorubicin arms were febrile neutropenia (46% vs. 13.5%), anemia (35% vs. 4.6%) and thrombocytopenia (33.5% vs. 0.4%).
Dr. Demetri cautioned that the results should not be blindly extrapolated to clinical practice because patients in the trial were younger and healthier than those typically seen in practice. However, the solid data can be used to make informed choices, he said.
If a patient is asymptomatic, as many metastatic sarcoma patients are, then single-agent doxorubicin, which he described as a strong, aggressive, "truck" of a therapy, "may be sufficient" and "more kind, more humane" to the patient, he said. If the patient is symptomatic or tumor shrinkage is required to improve quality of life because of tumor-related pain, "then perhaps combination therapy, although more toxic, may be more beneficial," he added.
The EORTC sponsored the trial. Dr. van der Graaf and Dr. Judson reported no conflicts of interest. Dr. Demetri reported financial relationships with several pharmaceutical companies.
AT THE EUROPEAN SOCIETY FOR MEDICAL ONCOLOGY CONGRESS
