Journal
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
Volume 18, Issue 10, Pages 2081-2086Publisher
AMER SOC CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2000.18.10.2081
Keywords
-
Categories
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Purpose: To assess antitumor response and time to progression (TTP) with docetaxel compared with doxorubicin in first-line treatment of advanced and/or metastatic soft tissue sarcoma. Patients and Methods: patients with measurable soft tissue sarcoma lesions and adequate bone marrow, liver, and renal function were entered onto the study. They were randomized to either docetaxel 100 mg/m(2) given as a 1-hour intravenous infusion every 3 weeks or doxorubicin 75 mg/m(2) given as a bolus injection every 3 weeks. A maximum of seven cycles of treatment were scheduled. The study was designed as a randomized phase III study evaluating TTP by log-rank model. There was a clause for premature closure of the trial if fewer than five responses were observed among the first 25 assessable patients in the docetaxel treatment arm. Results: Eighty-six patients were entered onto the study; 85 were assessable for toxicity and 83 for response. The rate of severe granulocytopenia was not significantly different between the two arms. Nausea (P =.001), vomiting (P <.001), and stomatitis (P =.005) were more common with doxorubicin therapy, whereas neurotoxicity was more frequent with docetaxel treatment. The response rate to doxorubicin therapy was 30% (95% confidence interval, 17% to 46%), whereas no responses to docetaxel therapy were seen (P <.001). In view of this, the trial was closed prematurely and the phase III study part was not conducted. Conclusion: Docetaxel is inactive in soft tissue sarcomas and cannot be recommended for further use in treatment of this disease. J Clin Oncol 18:2081-2086. (C) 2000 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
Recommended
No Data Available