Comparing the outcomes of noninferiority (NI) and superiority phase III trials.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e13055-e13055
Author(s):  
Everardo D. Saad ◽  
Marc E. Buyse
Keyword(s):  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Median Number ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Experimental Therapy ◽  
Tumor Type ◽  
Margin Width ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Phase Iii Trials ◽  
Superiority Trials

e13055 Background: We compared the outcomes of NI and superiority trials on advanced breast cancer (BC), non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), and colorectal cancer (CRC). Methods: We searched PubMed for phase III trials on systemic antineoplastic treatments for advanced BC, NSCLC and CRC published between 1/1998 and 12/2009 in 11 leading journals. We categorized primary endpoints (PEP) as time-to-event (overall survival or any variant of progression-free survival), response rate, or other (quality of life or toxicity). We used the PEP (defined as the one stated explicitly, used for N calculation, or cited first) to ascertain trial positivity. Results: We retrieved a total of 262 trials (93 on BC, 102 on NSCLC, and 67 on CRC), 36 of which (13.7%) used a NI design (12 in each tumor type). There was no significant trend in the proportion of NI trials in the two 6-year periods compared (1998-2003 vs 2004-9). The median number of patients/arm for NI and superiority trials were 284 and 164, respectively (p<0.001). There was no significant difference in the distribution of the PEP categories between NI and superiority trials. We could ascertain trial positivity in all but six trials: 24 (66.7%, 95% confidence interval [CI], 49.1% to 81.2%) NI trials were positive, compared with 89 (39.4%, 95% CI, 33.0% to 46.1%) superiority trials (p<0.001). NI trial positivity could be determined by finding a CI for the estimated treatment effect that excluded the NI margin in 15 of 27 trials (otherwise, positivity was based on authors’ conclusions, or the experimental therapy was superior to control for the PEP). The overall rates of trial positivity varied across tumor types: 48.4% for BC, 31.4% for NSCLC, and 53.7% for CRC (p=0.002). When adjusted for trial size, NI design (vs. superiority; odds ratio [OR]=4.2; 95% CI, 1.7 to 10.3) and tumor type (BC [OR=2.2; 95% CI, 1.2 to 4.0] and CRC [OR=2.8; 95% CI, 1.4 to 5.5] vs. NSCLC as reference) remained significantly associated with trial positivity. Conclusions: NI trials are more likely than superiority trials to yield positive results. The influence of NI margin width on trial results should be investigated.

scholarly journals Comparing the efficacy and safety of second-line therapies for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a network meta-analysis of phase III trials

2020 ◽  
Vol 13 ◽  
pp. 175628482093248
Author(s):  
Dongxu Wang ◽  
Xu Yang ◽  
Jianzhen Lin ◽  
Yi Bai ◽  
Junyu Long ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Comparative Investigation ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Phase Iii Trials

Background: The prospect for targeted therapies in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has dramatically changed since several recent clinical trials have yielded promising results. The number of second-line therapies is increasing, though the consequent challenge is to consider differences between these interventions. This is a comparative investigation of presently approved second-line drugs for HCC based on findings from phase III randomized controlled trials. Methods: Data related to treatment efficacy including overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR) were extracted and compared using a Bayesian approach. Adverse events (AEs) and the rate of discontinuation due to AEs were assessed and compared with provide a more complete understanding. OS and PFS in patients with alpha fetoprotein (AFP) values greater than 400 were compared and ranked as a subgroup. Results: A total of five trials involving 2571 patients were included. The comparison suggests that regorafenib and cabozantinib significantly prolong OS compared with placebo. The rate of AEs and treatment discontinuation did not significantly differ, although the types of AEs varied substantially. Subgroup analysis did not highlight a significant OS difference between regorafenib [hazard ratio (HR) 0.68; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.50–0.92], cabozantinib (HR 0.71; CI 0.54–0.94) and ramucirumab (HR 0.69; CI 0.57–0.84). Conclusion: Among the four second-line HCC therapies compared, regorafenib and cabozantinib appear to be better choices in terms of OS. Cabozantinib, regorafenib and ramucirumab have similar levels of efficacy for those with AFP >400, although ramucirumab has fewer side effects. No significant difference was observed in AEs, but some AEs related to each of these interventions should be given further consideration.

The use of tumor growth rate (TGR) in evaluating sorafenib and everolimus treatment in mRCC patients: An integrated analysis of the TARGET and RECORD phase III trials data.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4540-4540 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles Ferte ◽  
Laurence Albiges ◽  
Jean-Charles Soria ◽  
Yohann Loriot ◽  
Karim Fizazi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Targeted Therapies ◽  
Great Majority ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Tumor Growth Rate ◽  
Integrated Analysis ◽  
Poor Overall Survival ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Phase Iii Trials

4540 Background: RECIST criteria may not be sufficient to evaluate targeted therapies in mRCC. TGR includes the time between each evaluation and is expected to overcome some of the RECIST pitfalls. How TGR is modified under targeted therapies and how it correlates with outcome in mRCC remains unknown. Methods: Medical records from all patients (pts) prospectively treated at Institut Gustave Roussy (IGR) in the TARGET (n=84) and in the RECORD (n= 52) phase III trials were extracted. Results were subsequently validated in the entire TARGET cohort (TARGET) (n=902). TGR was computed by dividing tumor shrinkage by the time between the two related evaluations (% RECIST x 100 / days). Typical treatment periods were assessed: BEFORE treatment (wash-out), UNDER treatment (first cycle), at PROGRESSION (pts still receiving the drug) and AFTER treatment interruption (wash-out). Results: As compared to placebo, TGR UNDER was significantly decreased following sorafenib (-23.6 vs. 20 (IGR) and -19 vs. 22 (TARGET)) and everolimus (-5.2 vs. 30 (IGR)). The great majority of pts (IGR) had a decrease in the TGR UNDER vs. BEFORE, regardless of the RECIST evaluation, both with sorafenib (28/29) or everolimus (36/37). TGR AFTER sorafenib or everolimus interruption was significantly higher than TGR at PROGRESSION in both settings (IGR) (14.6 vs. 31 and 17.9 vs. 32.1 respectively). No significant difference was observed between TGR AFTER vs. BEFORE either in sorafenib or in everolimus pts (IGR). High TGR UNDER is associated with poor progression free survival (HR= 2.6) and overall survival (HR= 2.3) in sorafenib-treated pts (multivariate analysis, trained in IGR and validated in TARGET cohorts) and with poor overall survival in everolimus-treated pts (IGR)(HR= 1.2). Conclusions: Adding TGR assessment in mRCC unravels interesting traits that make it potentially adaptable for clinical practice: (i) better evaluation of the tumor response, regardless of RECIST criteria, (ii) independent prognosis value, (iii) it suggests that maintaining sorafenib or everolimus after disease progression might benefit to patients and should be prospectively evaluated.

Time trends in overall survival (OS) gain in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e19144-e19144
Author(s):  
Everardo D. Saad ◽  
Marc E. Buyse ◽  
Jacek Jassem
Keyword(s):  
Time Trends ◽  
Pairwise Comparison ◽  
Median Number ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Primary Endpoints ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Phase Iii Trials ◽  
Continued Use ◽  
Tumor Types ◽  
Line P

e19144 Background: There is an ongoing debate about the adequacy of OS as primary endpoint (PEP) in phase III trials in various tumor types, including NSCLC (Soria Ann Oncol 2010). Moreover, median OS and post-progression survival are increasing in NSCLC (Hotta PLoS One 2011 and Hayashi Ann Oncol 2012). We assessed the frequency and time trends in OS gain in recent trials. Methods: We searched PubMed for phase III trials in advanced NSCLC published between January 1998 and December 2011 in 13 leading journals. The PEP was the endpoint stated explicitly, used for N calculation, or listed first. Gain in OS was ascertained when there were significant differences in any pairwise comparison on OS following the original authors’ definitions. Results: We retrieved 148 trials that enrolled a total of 70,716 patients in 325 trial arms. The median number of patients per arm was larger for the 2005-2011 period than for the 1998-2004 period (207 vs 150; P<0.01). OS was used as PEP alone in 99 trials, and as one of the co-primary endpoints in 3 trials (the PEP could not be ascertained for one trial). There was no trend regarding the use of OS as PEP in the two periods compared, either overall (P=0.44) or in first line (P=0.41). Gain in OS according to trial features is shown in the Table. Conclusions: Significant gains in OS appear to decrease along the years, despite the growth in size of NSCLC trials and the continued use of OS as PEP. [Table: see text]

scholarly journals NI-19 Use of 11C-methionine PET for decision of discontinuation of adjuvant chemotherapy with temozolomide

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (Supplement_3) ◽  
pp. ii14-ii14
Author(s):  
Takaaki Beppu ◽  
Yuichi Sato ◽  
Toshiaki Sasaki ◽  
Kazunori Terasaki ◽  
Kuniaki Ogasawara
Keyword(s):  
Adjuvant Chemotherapy ◽  
Small Sample Size ◽  
Standardized Uptake Value ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Residual Tumor ◽  
Small Sample ◽  
Tumor Type ◽  
Diffuse Astrocytoma ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Met Pet

Abstract Background: The aim was to clarify whether positron emission tomography with 11C-methyl-L-methionine (met-PET) is useful to decide on discontinuation of TMZ-adjuvant therapy in patients with residual diffuse astrocytic tumor. Methods: Subjects were 44 patients with residual tumor comprising 17 with IDH1-mutant diffuse astrocytoma (DA), 13 with IDH1-mutant anaplastic astrocytoma (AA), and 14 with IDH1-wild glioblastoma (GB). All patients received TMZ-adjuvant chemotherapy (median, 12 courses), and whether to discontinue or continue TMZ-adjuvant chemotherapy was decided on the basis of the tumor-to-normal ratio in standardized uptake value from met-PET (T/N); patients with T/N &lt; 1.6 immediately discontinued TMZ, and patients with T/N &gt; 1.6 were either to continued or discontinued TMZ. Progression-free survival (PFS) was compared between patients with T/N &gt; 1.6 and T/N &lt; 1.6 in each tumor type. Median observation period was 434 days after met-PET scanning. Results: The number of patient who underwent recurrence was 10 in DA, 7 in AA, and 11 in GB. All patients showing T/N &gt; 1.6 underwent tumor recurrence. PFS was significantly longer in patients with T/N &lt; 1.6 than T/N &gt; 1.6 in DA and AA (p &lt; 0.01 in both types), but was no significant difference between 2 groups in GB (p = 0.06). Sixteen of 17 patients (94%) in DA and AA showed recurrence from residual tumor, whereas 4 of 11 patients (36%) in GB showed recurrent tumor at remote regions which were different from residual tumor. Conclusions: The present study suggested that met-PET is beneficial to decide to discontinue adjuvant chemotherapy with TMZ in patients with residual tumors of DA and AA, but not useful for patients with GB. Reasons for unsuccessful results in GB might have been small sample size, failure of establishing the cut off value in T/N, recurrences at remote regions where not be assessed by met-PET.

Randomized Phase III Trial of Gemcitabine Compared With Pegylated Liposomal Doxorubicin in Patients With Platinum-Resistant Ovarian Cancer

2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (19) ◽  
pp. 2811-2818 ◽  
Author(s):  
David G. Mutch ◽  
Mauro Orlando ◽  
Tiana Goss ◽  
Michael G. Teneriello ◽  
Alan N. Gordon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Liposomal Doxorubicin ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Pegylated Liposomal Doxorubicin ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Therapeutic Index ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
End Points ◽  
Platinum Resistant ◽  
Significant Difference

Purpose Ovarian cancer (OC) patients experiencing progressive disease (PD) within 6 months of platinum-based therapy in the primary setting are considered platinum resistant (Pt-R). Currently, pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) is a standard of care for treatment of recurrent Pt-R disease. On the basis of promising phase II results, gemcitabine was compared with PLD for efficacy and safety in taxane-pretreated Pt-R OC patients. Patients and Methods Patients (n = 195) with Pt-R OC were randomly assigned to either gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m2 (days 1 and 8; every 21 days) or PLD 50 mg/m2 (day 1; every 28 days) until PD or undue toxicity. Optional cross-over therapy was allowed at PD or at withdrawal because of toxicity. Primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Additional end points included tumor response, time to treatment failure, survival, and quality of life. Results In the gemcitabine and PLD groups, median PFS was 3.6 v 3.1 months; median overall survival was 12.7 v 13.5 months; overall response rate (ORR) was 6.1% v 8.3%; and in the subset of patients with measurable disease, ORR was 9.2% v 11.7%, respectively. None of the efficacy end points showed a statistically significant difference between treatment groups. The PLD group experienced significantly more hand-foot syndrome and mucositis; the gemcitabine group experienced significantly more constipation, nausea/vomiting, fatigue, and neutropenia but not febrile neutropenia. Conclusion Although this was not designed as an equivalency study, gemcitabine and PLD seem to have a comparable therapeutic index in this population of Pt-R taxane-pretreated OC patients. Single-agent gemcitabine may be an acceptable alternative to PLD for patients with Pt-R OC.

Initial experience of TAS-102 chemotherapy in Australian patients with chemorefractory metastatic colorectal cancer.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 71-71
Author(s):  
Azim Jalali ◽  
Hui-Li Wong ◽  
Rachel Wong ◽  
Margaret Lee ◽  
Lucy Gately ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Febrile Neutropenia ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Real World ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Median Number ◽  
Ecog Performance Status ◽  
Number Of Patients

71 Background: For patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) treatment with Trifluridine/Tipiracil, also known as TAS-102, improves overall survival. In Australia, TAS-102 was initially made available locally through patients self-funding, later via an industry sponsored Medicine Access Program (MAP) and then via the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS). This study aims to investigate the efficacy and safety of TAS-102 in real world Australian population. Methods: A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from the Treatment of Recurrent and Advanced Colorectal Cancer (TRACC) registry was undertaken. The characteristics and outcomes of patients receiving TAS-102 were assessed and compared to all TRACC patients and those enrolled in the registration study (RECOURSE). Results: Across 13 sites, 107 patients were treated with TAS-102 (non-PBS n = 27, PBS n = 80), The median number of patients per site was 7 (range: 1-17). The median age was 60 years (range: 31-83), compared to 67 for all TRACC patients and 63 for RECOURSE. Comparing registry TAS-102 and RECOURSE patients, 75% vs 100% were ECOG performance status 0-1, 74% vs 79% had initiated treatment more than 18 months from diagnosis of metastatic disease and 39% vs 49% were RAS wild type. Median time on treatment was 10.4 weeks (range: 1.7-32). Median clinician assessed progression-free survival was 3.3 compared to RECIST defined PFS of 2 months in RECOURSE study, while median overall survival was the same at 7.1 months. Two patients (2.3%) had febrile neutropenia and there were no treatment-related deaths in the real-world series, where TAS102 dose at treatment initiation was at clinician discretion. In the RECOURSE study there was a 4% febrile neutropenia rate and one treatment-related death. Conclusions: TRACC registry patients treated with TAS102 were younger than both TRACC patients overall and those from the RECOURSE trial. Less strict application of RECIST criteria and less frequent imaging may have contributed to an apparently longer PFS. However overall survival outcomes achieved with TAS102 in real world patients were comparable to findings from this pivotal trial with an acceptable rate of major adverse events.

Phase III Trial Comparing Radical Radiotherapy With and Without Cisplatin Chemotherapy in Patients With Advanced Squamous Cell Cancer of the Cervix

2002 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 966-972 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Pearcey ◽  
M. Brundage ◽  
P. Drouin ◽  
J. Jeffrey ◽  
D. Johnston ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Squamous Cell ◽  
Squamous Cell Cancer ◽  
Cell Cancer ◽  
Survival Rates ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Lymph Node Involvement ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Gynecology And Obstetrics ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Cancer Of The Cervix

PURPOSE: To test the hypothesis that cisplatin (CDDP) administered concurrently with standard radiotherapy (RT) would improve pelvic control and survival in patients with advanced squamous cell cancer of the cervix. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 259 patients with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage IB to IVA squamous cell cervical cancer with central disease ≥ 5 cm or histologically confirmed pelvic lymph node involvement were randomized to receive RT (external-beam RT plus brachytherapy) plus weekly CDDP chemotherapy (40 mg/m2) (arm 1) or the same RT without chemotherapy (arm 2). RESULTS: A total of 253 patients were available for analysis. Median follow-up was 82 months. No significant difference was found in progression-free survival (P = .33). No significant difference in 3- and 5-year survival rates was found (69% v 66% and 62% v 58%, respectively; P = .42). The hazard ratio for survival (arm 2 to arm 1) was 1.10 (95% confidence interval, 0.75 to 1.62). CONCLUSION: This study did not show a benefit to either pelvic control or survival by adding concurrent weekly CDDP chemotherapy in a dose of 40 mg/m2 to radical RT as given in this trial. Careful attention to RT details is important for achieving optimum outcome for patients with this disease.

Evaluating the benefit of adaptive randomization in the CC-115 arm of the Individualized Screening Trial of Innovative Glioblastoma Therapy (INSIGhT): A phase II randomized Bayesian adaptive platform trial in newly diagnosed MGMT unmethylated glioblastoma.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 2006-2006
Author(s):  
Rifaquat Rahman ◽  
Lorenzo Trippa ◽  
Geoffrey Fell ◽  
Eudocia Quant Lee ◽  
Isabel Arrillaga-Romany ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mammalian Target Of Rapamycin ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Adaptive Randomization ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Enrollment Rates ◽  
Dependent Protein ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Screening Trial

2006 Background: Adaptive randomization adjusts enrollment rates based upon early trial results, which can allow for decreased enrollment for therapies less likely to meet the primary endpoint of a trial. CC-115, a CNS-penetrant, oral inhibitor of mammalian target of rapamycin kinase (mTOR) and deoxyribonucleic acid-dependent protein kinase (DNA-PK), was evaluated in the Individualized Screening Trial of Innovative Glioblastoma Therapy (INSIGhT) trial. As CC-115 was discontinued due to concerns about toxicity and unfavorable risk-to-benefit ratio, we sought to investigate the impact of adaptive randomization in its testing. Methods: In INSIGhT, adults with newly diagnosed MGMT-unmethylated glioblastoma and available genomic data are adaptively randomized to an experimental arm or the control arm of standard radiotherapy with concurrent and adjuvant temozolomide. Patients randomized to CC-115 received it (10mg po BID) with radiotherapy and as adjuvant monotherapy, and a safety lead-in 3+3 design was used for this arm. By simulating the INSIGhT trial with standard uniform randomization, we estimated the reduction of enrollment rate and sample size of the CC-115 arm that was attributable to adaptive randomization. Results: Twelve patients were randomized to CC-115; 58% (n = 7) patients had possible treatment-related CTCAE grade > 3 toxicity. Compared to the control arm, there was no significant difference in progression-free survival (PFS, HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.32-1.36, p = 0.3) or overall survival (OS, HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.43-2.03, p = 0.8). Based on early PFS results, randomization probability to CC-115 decreased from 25% to 16%. At the time of the CC-115 arm closure, 14% of enrolled INSIGhT patients had been randomized to this arm. Compared to average expected enrollment by standard randomization, the use of adaptive randomization decreased the number of patients randomized to CC-115 by 50% (12 patients vs. 18 patients [95% CI 11-25 patients]). Conclusions: The INSIGhT trial, designed with adaptive randomization, facilitated more efficient testing of CC-115 and decreased the number of patients allocated to the CC-115 arm relative to a standard randomization design. Clinical trial information: NCT02977780.

Q-TWiST analysis of tivozanib (T) versus sorafenib (S) in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) in the TIVO-3 study.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 298-298
Author(s):  
Michael Szarek ◽  
Michael N. Needle ◽  
Brian I. Rini ◽  
Sumanta K. Pal ◽  
David F. McDermott ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
P Value ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Health States ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Phase Iii Study ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Similar Survival ◽  
Mean Differences

298 Background: In the randomized phase III study TIVO-3, the VEGFR-TKI tivozanib (TIVO) increased progression-free survival with better tolerability but no difference in overall survival (OS) relative to sorafenib (SORA) as third- or fourth-line therapy in patients with metastatic RCC. These results provide motivation to apply quality-adjusted time without symptoms of disease and toxicity (Q-TWiST) methods to quantify the net health benefits of TIVO, in the presence of similar survival, when compared to SORA. Methods: In application of Q-TWiST, patient-level OS was subdivided into three mutually exclusive states: time with toxicity (TOX), time without symptoms and toxicity (TWiST), and time after progression/relapse (REL). Mean Q-TWiST was calculated by applying utility coefficients of 0.5, 1.0, and 0.5 to the restricted mean (max 36 months follow-up) health states of TOX, TWiST, and REL, respectively; 95% CIs for the means and mean differences were estimated by bootstrap distributions. Relative Q-TWiST gain was defined as the mean absolute Q-TWiST difference divided by the SORA mean OS. Results: Mean TWiST was significantly longer for TIVO than for SORA (10.30 months v.5.35 months; Table). Mean REL time was significantly shorter for TIVO, with no difference in mean TOX time. Mean Q-TWiST was 15.04 and 12.78 months for TIVO and SORA, respectively, a statistically significant difference (p=0.0493). The relative gain for TIVO was 11.2%. Clinical trial information: NCT02627963 . Values in table are mean (95% CI) in months or p-value for difference in treatment group means. Conclusions: The difference in Q-TWiST in TIVO-3 was primarily driven by benefits of TIVO in TWiST, partially offset by superiority of SORA in REL time. As a third- or fourth-line treatment for RCC, TIVO significantly increased Q-TWiST relative to SORA, primarily through an increase in TWiST, which is generally considered to be the state with highest utility to patients. Consequently, Q-TWiST may be considered an alternative patient-centered measure of benefit of TIVO in these settings. [Table: see text]

scholarly journals Anti-Angiogenic Agents in Management of Sarcoma Patients: Overview of Published Trials

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pierre-Yves Cren ◽  
Loïc Lebellec ◽  
Thomas Ryckewaert ◽  
Nicolas Penel
Keyword(s):  
Soft Tissue ◽  
Soft Tissue Sarcoma ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Phase Ii Trials ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Multikinase Inhibitors ◽  
Randomized Phase Ii ◽  
Phase Iii Trials

We reviewed all fully published clinical trials assessing anti-angiogenic agents in sarcoma patients (last issue, January 13, 2020). Anti-angiogenic macromolecules (e.g., bevacizumab or ombrabulin) provide disappointing results. Many multikinase inhibitors have been assessed with non-randomized phase II trials with limited samples and without stratification according to histological subtypes, therefore interpretation of such trials is very challenging. On the contrary, pazopanib, regorafenib, and sorafenib have been assessed using double-blind placebo-controlled randomized phase II or phase III trials. Compared to placebo, sorafenib demonstrates activity in desmoid-type fibromatosis patients. Based on results of phase 3 trial, pazopanib had obtained approval for treatment of pretreated non-adipocytic soft tissue sarcoma. Regorafenib is currently assessed in several clinical settings and provides significant improvement of progression-free survival in pre-treated non-adipocytic soft tissue sarcoma and in advanced pretreated osteosarcoma. Multikinase inhibitors are a breakthrough in sarcoma management. Many trials are ongoing. Nevertheless, predictive factors are still missing.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document