PICASSO III: A Phase III, Placebo-Controlled Study of Doxorubicin With or Without Palifosfamide in Patients With Metastatic Soft Tissue Sarcoma

2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (32) ◽  
pp. 3898-3905 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher W. Ryan ◽  
Ofer Merimsky ◽  
Mark Agulnik ◽  
Jean-Yves Blay ◽  
Scott M. Schuetze ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Soft Tissue ◽  
Soft Tissue Sarcoma ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Hazard Ratio ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Metastatic Soft Tissue Sarcoma ◽  
To Receive

Purpose Palifosfamide is the active metabolite of ifosfamide and does not require prodrug activation, thereby avoiding the generation of toxic metabolites. The PICASSO III trial compared doxorubicin plus palifosfamide with doxorubicin plus placebo in patients who had received no prior systemic therapy for metastatic soft tissue sarcoma. Patients and Methods Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive doxorubicin 75 mg/m2 intravenously day 1 plus palifosfamide 150 mg/m2/d intravenously days 1 to 3 or doxorubicin plus placebo once every 21 days for up to six cycles. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) by independent radiologic review. Results In all, 447 patients were randomly assigned to receive doxorubicin plus palifosfamide (n = 226) or doxorubicin plus placebo (n = 221). Median PFS was 6.0 months for doxorubicin plus palifosfamide and 5.2 months for doxorubicin plus placebo (hazard ratio, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.68 to 1.08; P = .19). Median overall survival was 15.9 months for doxorubicin plus palifosfamide and 16.9 months for doxorubicin plus placebo (hazard ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.79 to 1.39; P = .74). There was a higher incidence of grade 3 to 4 adverse events in the doxorubicin plus palifosfamide arm (63.6% v 50.9%) including a higher rate of febrile neutropenia (21.4% v 12.6%). Conclusion No significant difference in PFS was observed in patients receiving doxorubicin plus palifosfamide compared with those receiving doxorubicin plus placebo. The observed median PFS and overall survival in this large, international study can serve as a benchmark for future studies of doxorubicin in metastatic soft tissue sarcoma.

Olaratumab plus anthracyline in advanced/metastatic soft tissue sarcoma: Data of real-world utilization in Austria.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e22550-e22550
Author(s):  
Florian Kocher ◽  
Andreas Seeber ◽  
Lukas Weiss ◽  
Franz Romeder ◽  
Joanna Szkandera ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Soft Tissue ◽  
Soft Tissue Sarcoma ◽  
Real World ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Growth Factor Receptor ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Phase Iii Trial ◽  
Metastatic Soft Tissue Sarcoma ◽  
Third Line

e22550 Background: Olaratumab is a humanized monoclonal anti platelet-derived growth factor receptor α antibody that has been approved in combination with doxorubicin for the treatment of patients with metastatic soft tissue sarcoma (STS). The purpose of this retrospective study was to assess the clinical efficacy in STS patients treated with olaratumab in a real-world setting in Austria. Methods: Retrospectively collected, longitudinal data from patients treated between November 2016 and September 2018 at 9 Austrian centers were obtained from respective medical charts. Eligible patients were all patients who received at least one dose of olaratumab. Parameters of most interest collected were response rates, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Results: Altogether 55 patients were included into analysis. Median age was 58 years. In total, 65.5% (n = 36), 21.8% (n = 12) and 12.7% (n = 7) received olaratumab as first-, second- or ≥ third-line treatment, respectively. Olaratumab was administered either in combination with doxorubicin (81.8%, n = 45) or liposomal doxorubicin (16.4%, n = 9); 1 patient received olaratumab as upfront monotherapy. Median PFS and OS were 2.6 and 11.4 months. The objective response rate was 11.4 % and the disease control rate was 40.9 %. Conclusions: In this real-world analysis outcome was less pronounced compared to the results of the Phase Ib/II approval trial ( Tap WD et al. Lancet 2016). Thus, the results of the ongoing phase III trial (NCT02451943) are urgently needed to confirm the efficacy of the combination of olaratumab and doxorubicin in STS patients.

Phase III Trial of Two Investigational Schedules of Ifosfamide Compared With Standard-Dose Doxorubicin in Advanced or Metastatic Soft Tissue Sarcoma: A European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Soft Tissue and Bone Sarcoma Group Study

2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (21) ◽  
pp. 3144-3150 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Lorigan ◽  
Jaap Verweij ◽  
Zsuzsa Papai ◽  
Sjoerd Rodenhuis ◽  
Axel Le Cesne ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Soft Tissue ◽  
Soft Tissue Sarcoma ◽  
Standard Dose ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Advanced Soft Tissue Sarcoma ◽  
Phase Iii Trial ◽  
Free Survival

Purpose Single-agent doxorubicin remains the standard treatment for advanced soft tissue sarcomas. Combining doxorubicin with standard-dose ifosfamide has not been shown to improve survival and is associated with a significantly increased toxicity; it is not known whether higher dose single-agent ifosfamide is superior to doxorubicin. Patients and Methods This randomized prospective multicenter phase III trial was designed to compare progression-free survival of patients with advanced soft tissue sarcoma receiving either regimen of standard doxorubicin 75 mg/m2 every 21 days, ifosfamide 9 g/m2 over 3 days continuous infusion, or ifosfamide 3 g/m2 per day in 3 hours over 3 days. The primary end point was progression-free survival. Secondary end points included overall survival, response rate, and toxicity. Results The study included 326 patients. Grade 4 leukopenia, neutropenia, febrile neutropenia, and encephalopathy were more frequent in the ifosfamide arms. Progression-free survival, overall survival, and response rates were not significantly different between the three arms. An independent data monitoring committee reviewed the interim data and recommended early closure of the trial for futility (ie, no significant difference would be shown). Conclusion Single-agent doxorubicin remains the treatment of choice for patients with advanced soft tissue sarcoma.

scholarly journals Gemcitabine-Containing Chemotherapy for the Treatment of Metastatic Myxofibrosarcoma Refractory to Doxorubicin: A Case Series

2021 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 813-817
Author(s):  
Arielle Elkrief ◽  
Suzanne Kazandjian ◽  
Thierry Alcindor
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Soft Tissue ◽  
Soft Tissue Sarcoma ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Distant Metastases ◽  
First Line ◽  
Pleomorphic Sarcoma ◽  
Line Setting

Background: Myxofibrosarcoma is a type of soft-tissue sarcoma that is associated with high rates of local recurrence and distant metastases. The first-line treatment for metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma has conventionally been doxorubicin-based. Recent evidence suggests that myxofibrosarcoma may be molecularly similar to undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma (UPS), which is particularly sensitive to gemcitabine-based therapy. The goal of this study was to evaluate the activity of gemcitabine-containing regimens for the treatment of metastatic myxofibrosarcoma refractory to doxorubicin. Material and Methods: We retrospectively evaluated seven consecutive cases of metastatic myxofibrosarcoma at our institution treated with gemcitabine-based therapy in the second-line setting, after progression on doxorubicin. Baseline clinical and baseline characteristics were collected. Primary endpoints were objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Results: After progression on first-line doxorubicin, a partial, or complete radiological response was observed in four of seven patients who received gemcitabine-based chemotherapy. With a median follow-up of 14 months, median progression-free and overall survival were 8.5 months and 11.4 months, respectively. Conclusions: Gemcitabine-based chemotherapy was associated with encouraging response rates in this cohort, similar to those seen in UPS. Both entities could be studied together for novel gemcitabine-based regimens.

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.

Efficacy of Melphalan and Prednisone Plus Thalidomide in Patients Older Than 75 Years With Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma: IFM 01/01 Trial

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (22) ◽  
pp. 3664-3670 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cyrille Hulin ◽  
Thierry Facon ◽  
Philippe Rodon ◽  
Brigitte Pegourie ◽  
Lotfi Benboubker ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Elderly Patients ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Standards Of Care ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
To Receive

Purpose Until recently, melphalan and prednisone were the standards of care in elderly patients with multiple myeloma. The addition of thalidomide to this combination demonstrated a survival benefit for patients age 65 to 75 years. This randomized, placebo-controlled, phase III trial investigated the efficacy of melphalan and prednisone plus thalidomide in patients older than 75 years with newly diagnosed myeloma. Patients and Methods Between April 2002 and December 2006, 232 previously untreated patients with myeloma, age 75 years or older, were enrolled and 229 were randomly assigned to treatment. All patients received melphalan (0.2 mg/kg/d) plus prednisone (2 mg/kg/d) for 12 courses (day 1 to 4) every 6 weeks. Patients were randomly assigned to receive 100 mg/d of oral thalidomide (n = 113) or placebo (n = 116), continuously for 72 weeks. The primary end point was overall survival. Results After a median follow-up of 47.5 months, overall survival was significantly longer in patients who received melphalan and prednisone plus thalidomide compared with those who received melphalan and prednisone plus placebo (median, 44.0 v 29.1 months; P = .028). Progression-free survival was significantly prolonged in the melphalan and prednisone plus thalidomide group (median, 24.1 v 18.5 months; P = .001). Two adverse events were significantly increased in the melphalan and prednisone plus thalidomide group: grade 2 to 4 peripheral neuropathy (20% v 5% in the melphalan and prednisone plus placebo group; P < .001) and grade 3 to 4 neutropenia (23% v 9%; P = .003). Conclusion This trial confirms the superiority of the combination melphalan and prednisone plus thalidomide over melphalan and prednisone alone for prolonging survival in very elderly patients with newly diagnosed myeloma. Toxicity was acceptable.

scholarly journals Final Results of the IELSG-19 Randomized Trial of Mucosa-Associated Lymphoid Tissue Lymphoma: Improved Event-Free and Progression-Free Survival With Rituximab Plus Chlorambucil Versus Either Chlorambucil or Rituximab Monotherapy

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (17) ◽  
pp. 1905-1912 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emanuele Zucca ◽  
Annarita Conconi ◽  
Giovanni Martinelli ◽  
Reda Bouabdallah ◽  
Alessandra Tucci ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Randomized Trial ◽  
Lymphoid Tissue ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Final Sample ◽  
Phase Iii Study ◽  
To Receive

Purpose There is no consensus on the optimal systemic treatment of patients with extranodal marginal zone lymphoma of mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue. The IELSG-19 phase III study, to our knowledge, was the first such study to address the question of first-line treatment in a randomized trial. Patients and Methods Eligible patients were initially randomly assigned (1:1 ratio) to receive either chlorambucil monotherapy (6 mg/m2/d orally on weeks 1 to 6, 9 to 10, 13 to 14, 17 to 18, and 21 to 22) or a combination of chlorambucil (same schedule as above) and rituximab (375 mg/m2 intravenously on day 1 of weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, 9, 13, 17, and 21). After the planned enrollment of 252 patients, the protocol was amended to continue with a three-arm design (1:1:6 ratio), with a new arm that included rituximab alone (same schedule as the combination arm) and with a final sample size of 454 patients. The main end point was event-free survival (EFS). Analysis of chlorambucil versus the combination arm was performed and reported separately before any analysis of the third arm. Results At a median follow-up of 7.4 years, addition of rituximab to chlorambucil led to significantly better EFS (hazard ratio, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.77). EFS at 5 years was 51% (95% CI, 42 to 60) with chlorambucil alone, 50% (95% CI, 42 to 59) with rituximab alone, and 68% (95% CI, 60 to 76) with the combination ( P = .0009). Progression-free survival was also significantly better with the combination ( P = .0119). Five-year overall survival was approximately 90% in each arm. All treatments were well tolerated. No unexpected toxicities were recorded. Conclusion Rituximab in combination with chlorambucil demonstrated superior efficacy in mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue lymphoma; however, improvements in EFS and progression-free survival did not translate into longer overall survival.

Combination chemotherapy using adriamycin, DTIC, cyclophosphamide, and actinomycin D for advanced soft tissue sarcomas: a randomized comparative trial. A phase III, Southwest Oncology Group Study (7613).

1987 ◽  
Vol 5 (6) ◽  
pp. 851-861 ◽  
Author(s):  
L H Baker ◽  
J Frank ◽  
G Fine ◽  
S P Balcerzak ◽  
R L Stephens ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Soft Tissue ◽  
Soft Tissue Sarcoma ◽  
Actinomycin D ◽  
Malignant Tumors ◽  
Soft Tissue Sarcomas ◽  
Comparative Trial ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Oncology Group ◽  
Southwest Oncology Group ◽  
Significant Difference

The term soft tissue sarcoma refers to a large variety of malignant tumors arising in extraskeletal connective tissues that connect, support, and surround discrete anatomic structures. All visceral organs also contain a connective stroma that can undergo malignant transformation. Because of the histological similarities of this group of tumors and their relative rarity, treatment prescriptions for patients that have disseminated disease are most often uniform. In this study, we asked the question whether adding a third drug (cyclophosphamide or actinomycin D) to Adriamycin (Adr [Adria Laboratories, Columbus, OH])-(3,3-dimethyl-1-triazeno)- imidazole-4-carboxamide (DTIC) would improve the response rate and/or survival. A unique feature of this cooperative group clinical trial was the mandatory pathology review of the histological material. All patients of the Southwest Oncology Group between June 1, 1976, and November 17, 1979, who had a biopsy-confirmed diagnosis of a soft tissue sarcoma with convincing clinical or biopsy-documented evidence of metastatic disease were eligible for the study. Patients were randomized to receive (1) Adr, 60 mg/m2 intravenously, day 1, and DTIC, 250 mg/m2 every 3 weeks (104 patients); (2) Adr and DTIC as in (1) and cyclophosphamide, 500 mg/m2, day 1 (112 patients); or (3) Adr and DTIC as in (1) and actinomycin D, 1.2 mg/m2, day 1, (119 patients). There was no statistically significant difference in response rates (33%, 34%, and 24%) (P = .25). Median durations of response were 31 weeks in the Adr-DTIC arm, 26 weeks in the cyclophosphamide-DTIC-Adr arm, and 23 weeks in the Adr-DTIC-Actinomycin D arm (P = .78). Median durations of survival were 37, 42, and 50 weeks, respectively. Again, no statistically significant differences were observed (P = .59). Toxicities from each of these treatment arms were formidable and were equivalent. Prognostic factor analysis showed a prognosis based on bone marrow reserve, sex, and pathology subtype favorable to patients.

Phase III Trial of Gemcitabine Plus Tipifarnib Compared With Gemcitabine Plus Placebo in Advanced Pancreatic Cancer

2004 ◽  
Vol 22 (8) ◽  
pp. 1430-1438 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. Van Cutsem ◽  
H. van de Velde ◽  
P. Karasek ◽  
H. Oettle ◽  
W.L. Vervenne ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Survival Rates ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Free Survival

Purpose To determine whether addition of the farnesyltransferase inhibitor tipifarnib (Zarnestra, R115777; Johnson and Johnson Pharmaceutical Research and Development, Beerse, Belgium) to standard gemcitabine therapy improves overall survival in advanced pancreatic cancer. Patients and Methods This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study compared gemcitabine + tipifarnib versus gemcitabine + placebo in patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma previously untreated with systemic therapy. Tipifarnib was given at 200 mg bid orally continuously; gemcitabine was given at 1,000 mg/m2 intravenously weekly × 7 for 8 weeks, then weekly × 3 every 4 weeks. The primary end point was overall survival; secondary end points included 6-month and 1-year survival rates, progression-free survival, response rate, safety, and quality of life. Results Six hundred eighty-eight patients were enrolled. Baseline characteristics were well balanced between the two treatment arms. No statistically significant differences in survival parameters were observed. The median overall survival for the experimental arm was 193 v 182 days for the control arm (P = .75); 6-month and 1-year survival rates were 53% and 27% v 49% and 24% for the control arm, respectively; median progression-free survival was 112 v 109 days for the control arm. Ten drug-related deaths were reported for the experimental arm and seven for the control arm. Neutropenia and thrombocytopenia grade ≥ 3 were observed in 40% and 15% in the experimental arm versus 30% and 12% in the control arm. Incidences of nonhematologic adverse events were similar in two groups. Conclusion The combination of gemcitabine and tipifarnib has an acceptable toxicity profile but does not prolong overall survival in advanced pancreatic cancer compared with single-agent gemcitabine.

scholarly journals Doxorubicin-Based Chemotherapy for the Palliative Treatment of Adult Patients with Locally Advanced or Metastatic Soft-Tissue Sarcoma: A Meta-Analysis and Clinical Practice Guideline

Sarcoma ◽  
2000 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 103-112 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vivien H. C. Bramwell ◽  
Dale Anderson ◽  
Manya L. Charette
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Soft Tissue ◽  
Soft Tissue Sarcoma ◽  
Adverse Effects ◽  
Combination Therapy ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Metastatic Soft Tissue Sarcoma ◽  
Single Agent Chemotherapy

Purpose.To make recommendations for the use of doxorubicin-based chemotherapy in patients with soft-tissue sarcoma.Patients.The recommendations apply to patients with symptomatic unresectable locally advanced or metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma who are candidates for palliative chemotherapy.Methods.A systematic review of the published literature was combined with a consensus process around the interpretation of the evidence in the context of conventional practice to develop an evidence-based practice guideline.Results.Eight randomized trials comparing doxorubicin-based combination versus doxorubicin single-agent chemotherapy were reviewed. Response rates and overall survival were evaluated using pooled statistical analysis.The pooled response data in 2281 patients showed a slight trend favouring the combination therapy, although this did not reach statistical significance (odds ratio (OR), 0.79; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.60–1.05;p=0.10). Survival data could only be abstracted from six studies involving 2097 patients, and showed no significant advantage for combination therapy (OR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.67–1.06;p=0.13). Data on adverse effects could not be combined in a meta-analysis; however nausea, vomiting and myelosuppression were consistently more severe with combination chemotherapy than with single-agent chemotherapy.Discussion.Single-agent doxorubicin is an appropriate first-line chemotherapy option for advanced or metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma. Some doxorubicin-based combination chemotherapy regimens, given in conventional doses, produce only marginal increases in response rates, at the expense of increased adverse effects, and with no improvements in overall survival. Future randomized clinical trials should compare new regimens, whose activity has been established in single-arm studies, with single-agent doxorubicin, and include quality of life as an outcome measure.

A randomized, double-blind, placebo (Pbo)-controlled phase III study of ombrabulin plus cisplatin in patients (pts) with advanced-stage soft-tissue sarcoma after failure of anthracycline and ifosfamide chemotherapies.

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 10506-10506
Author(s):  
Zsuzsanna Papai ◽  
Anthony W. Tolcher ◽  
Antoine Italiano ◽  
Didier Cupissol ◽  
Antonio Lopez-Pousa ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Soft Tissue ◽  
Soft Tissue Sarcoma ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Primary Objective ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Advanced Soft Tissue Sarcoma ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Vascular Disrupting Agent ◽  
Phase Iii Study

10506 Background: Ombrabulin (AVE8062) is a vascular disrupting agent that damages established tumor vasculature and has demonstrated synergistic antitumor activity with cisplatin in vivo. In a phase I study, ombrabulin 25 mg/m² plus cisplatin 75 mg/m² was identified as the recommended dose in pts with solid tumors (AACR 2008; Abs 08-AB-4925). This phase III study evaluated the efficacy and safety of ombrabulin plus cisplatin in pts with advanced soft-tissue sarcoma (NCT00699517). Methods: Pts (aged ≥18 yrs, ECOG PS ≤2) with metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma who had received prior anthracycline and ifosfamide, with ≤2 prior chemotherapies for advanced disease, were randomized (1:1) to receive either ombrabulin 25 mg/m² or Pbo plus cisplatin 75 mg/m² every 3 weeks. The primary objective was to compare progression-free survival (PFS) between arms; secondary objectives included overall survival (OS) and safety. Results: Overall, 355 pts (median age 52 yrs; 51.5% male) were randomized (176 ombrabulin, 179 Pbo) in 44 centers worldwide. Median duration of follow-up was 27.9 and 30.5 months in Pbo and ombrabulin arms, respectively. PFS analysis showed a statistically significant improvement with ombrabulin (median 1.54 vs 1.41 months Pbo; HR=0.76, 95% CI 0.59–0.98; p=0.0302), with 3- and 6-month rates in favor of ombrabulin vs Pbo: 35.4% vs 24.9% and 19.3% vs 10.6%, respectively. A trend for an improvement with ombrabulin was observed in 3 of the 4 prespecified histology strata: liposarcoma, leiomyosarcoma, and “other”, but not for pleomorphic. Analysis of OS did not show statistically significant improvement with ombrabulin (median 11.43 vs 9.33 months Pbo, HR=0.85, 95% CI 0.67–1.09). OS rates at 1 year were in favor of ombrabulin (48.6% vs 42.4% Pbo). Grade 3/4 TEAEs more frequently seen with ombrabulin included neutropenia (19.2% vs 7.9% Pbo) and thrombocytopenia (8.5% vs 3.4% Pbo). Conclusions: Although this trial met its primary efficacy endpoint, the combination of ombrabulin and cisplatin did not demonstrate sufficient clinical benefit in pts with advanced soft-tissue sarcoma to warrant further study. Clinical trial information: NCT00699517.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document