4.7 Article

A randomized, open-label, phase 2, multicenter trial of gemcitabine with pazopanib or gemcitabine with docetaxel in patients with advanced soft-tissue sarcoma

Journal

CANCER
Volume 127, Issue 6, Pages 894-904

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/cncr.33216

Keywords

adverse events; best overall response; gemcitabine and pazopanib; soft‐ tissue sarcoma

Categories

Funding

  1. GlaxoSmithKline
  2. Novartis Corporation
  3. Biostatistics Shared Resource of the Hollings Cancer Center of the Medical University of South Carolina [P30 CA138313]
  4. National Cancer Institute [P30 CA08686217, P30 CA046592, P30 CA023074]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study demonstrated that the combination of gemcitabine plus pazopanib (G+P) is a safe and effective alternative treatment for patients with advanced nonadipocytic soft-tissue sarcoma (STS). G+P showed similar efficacy and lower rates of adverse events compared to gemcitabine plus docetaxel (G+T).
Background Therapeutic options for patients with advanced soft-tissue sarcoma (STS) are limited. The goal of the current phase 2 study was to examine the clinical activity and safety of the combination of gemcitabine plus pazopanib, a multityrosine kinase inhibitor with activity in STS. Methods The current randomized, phase 2 trial enrolled patients with advanced nonadipocytic STS who had received prior anthracycline-based therapy. Patients were assigned 1:1 to receive gemcitabine at a dose of 1000 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 with pazopanib at a dose of 800 mg daily (G+P) or gemcitabine at a dose of 900 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 and docetaxel at a dose of 100 mg/m(2) on day 8 (G+T) every 3 weeks. Crossover was allowed at the time of disease progression. The study used a noncomparative statistical design based on the precision of 95% confidence intervals for reporting the primary endpoints of median progression-free survival (PFS) and rate of grade >= 3 adverse events (AEs) for these 2 regimens based on the intent-to-treat patient population (AEs were graded using version 4.0 of the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events). Results A total of 90 patients were enrolled: 45 patients on each treatment arm. The median PFS was 4.1 months for each arm (P = .3, log-rank test). The best overall response of stable disease or better (complete response + partial response + stable disease) was the same for both treatment arms (64% for both the G+T and G+P arms). The rate of related grade >= 3 AEs was 82% for the G+T arm and 78% for the G+P arm. Related grade >= 3 AEs occurring in >= 10% of patients in the G+T and G+P arms were anemia (36% and 20%, respectively), fatigue (29% and 13%, respectively), thrombocytopenia (53% and 49%, respectively), neutropenia (20% and 49%, respectively), lymphopenia (13% and 11%, respectively), and hypertension (2% and 20%, respectively). Conclusions The data from the current study have demonstrated the safety and efficacy of G+P as an alternative to G+T for patients with nonadipocytic STS.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available