4.7 Article

Activity of Eribulin in Patients With Advanced Liposarcoma Demonstrated in a Subgroup Analysis From a Randomized Phase III Study of Eribulin Versus Dacarbazine

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
Volume 35, Issue 30, Pages 3433-+

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2016.71.6605

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. Novartis
  2. Pfizer
  3. Bayer AG
  4. AbbVie
  5. Janssen Oncology
  6. Eisai
  7. Amgen
  8. GlaxoSmithKline
  9. CoBioRes NV
  10. Exelixis
  11. Plexxikon
  12. Blueprint Medicines
  13. Roche
  14. PharmaMar
  15. Eli Lilly
  16. MSD
  17. Bristol-Myers Squibb
  18. TRACON Pharma
  19. Immune Design
  20. Regeneron Pharmaceuticals
  21. Morphotek
  22. CytRx
  23. Epizyme
  24. Threshold Pharmaceuticals
  25. Bayer
  26. Johnson Johnson

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose A phase III study comparing eribulin with dacarbazine in patients with advanced liposarcoma (LPS) or leiomyosarcoma showed a significant improvement in overall survival (OS) for the eribulin arm, with a manageable toxicity profile. We now report the histology-specific subgroup analysis of the efficacy and safety of eribulin compared with dacarbazine in patients with LPS, an independently randomized stratified subgroup of this phase III trial. Methods Patients >= 18 years with advanced or metastatic dedifferentiated, myxoid/round cell, or pleomorphic LPS incurable by surgery or radiotherapy were included. Patients with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status <= 2 and two or more prior systemic treatment regimens, including one with anthracycline, were randomly assigned 1: 1 to receive eribulin mesylate (1.4 mg/m(2) intravenously on days 1 and 8) or dacarbazine (850, 1,000, or 1,200 mg/m(2) intravenously on day 1) every 21 days. OS, progression-free survival (PFS), and safety were analyzed. Results In the LPS subgroup, OS was significantly improved: 15.6 versus 8.4 months (hazard ratio, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.35 to 0.75; P <.001) with eribulin versus dacarbazine, respectively. Longer OS with eribulin was observed in all LPS histologic subtypes and in all geographic regions evaluated. PFS was also improved with eribulin versus dacarbazine (2.9 v 1.7 months, respectively; hazard ratio, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.35 to 0.78; P =.0015). Adverse events were similar between arms. Conclusion In patients with previously treated LPS, eribulin was associated with significantly superior OS and PFS compared with dacarbazine. Eribulin represents an important treatment option for patients with LPS, a sarcoma subtype for which limited effective systemic treatments are available. Further studies are justified to explore the role of eribulin in earlier lines of therapy as well as in combination with other agents. (C) 2017 by American Society of Clinical Oncology

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