4.2 Article

Dose-intense ifosfamide/doxorubicin/cisplatin based chemotherapy for osteosarcoma in adults

Journal

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/00000421-200210000-00014

Keywords

osteosarcoma; treatment; neoadjuvant; adjuvant chemotherapy; prognosis; ifosfamide; doxorubicin; cisplatin; etoposide; methotrexate

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The efficacy of neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy has been clearly established in the treatment of osteosarcoma; however, the most active regimen remains to be identified. This prospective study evaluated the efficacy and toxicity of a dose-intense ifosfamide, doxorubicin, and cisplatin-based neoadjuvant regimen in adults with osteosarcoma. We prospectively treated 20 patients with osteogenic sarcoma with two cycles of ifosfamide/doxorubicin followed by two cycles of doxorubicin/cisplatin every 2 weeks. Surgical specimens were analyzed for percent tumor necrosis. Patients who demonstrated a good response (GR) to chemotherapy received the same combination postoperatively at a lower dose rate. Patients who demonstrated a poor response (PR) received four cycles of high-dose methotrexate alternating with two cycles of ifosfamide/etoposide and two cycles of cisplatin/etoposide after the surgery. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy was well tolerated with moderate hematologic toxicity. Twelve of 19 evaluable patients (63%) were treated according to the GR arm and 7 according to the PR arm. At median follow-up of 5,5 years, disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) are 68% and 74%, respectively. Patients treated on the GR arm had DFS and OS of 75% and 83%, respectively, whereas patients on the PR arm had DFS and OS of 57%. Intensive neoadjuvant chemotherapy is effective and moderately well tolerated in patients with de novo osteosarcoma, The outcome data suggest that lack of a near complete response to preoperative chemotherapy reflects inherent biologic resistance to chemotherapy and hence a poor prognosis.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available