Search

Purpose: Doxorubicin and trabectedin are considered active drugs in soft tissue sarcoma (STS). The combination of both drugs was hypothesized to be advantageous and safe on the basis of preclinical evidence and a previous phase I trial, respectively. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcome of trabectedin plus doxorubicin with doxorubicin as first-line treatment of advanced STS patients., Patients and Methods: In this open-label randomized phase II trial, the main end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Trabectedin 1.1 mg/m(2) in a 3-hour infusion plus doxorubicin 60 mg/m(2) as the experimental arm and doxorubicin 75 mg/m(2) as the control arm were administered for up to six cycles. Translational research was planned to correlate the expression of apoptotic and DNA repair genes with clinical outcome., Results: In 115 randomly assigned patients, the median PFS was 5.5 months in the control arm and 5.7 months in the experimental arm (hazard ratio, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.79 to 1.71; P = .45) in the intent-to-treat analysis. The trial was stopped for futility after the interim analysis, because the results in the experimental arm showed the risk reduction for the main end point to be < 9.64%. The proportion of patients with grade 3 or 4 thrombocytopenia, asthenia, and liver toxicity was significantly higher in the experimental arm. FAS and p53 were shown to be prognostic factors for PFS (7.0 months if FAS+ and p53-; 3.4 months if FAS+/p53+ or FAS-/p53-; and 0.7 months if FAS- and p53+; P < .001) and for overall survival., Conclusion: Trabectedin plus doxorubicin did not show superiority over doxorubicin alone as first-line treatment of advanced STS. The prognostic role of apoptotic key genes, FAS and p53, was shown to be robust enough to continue this research line., (© 2016 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.)

Background: PM00104 binds guanines at DNA minor grooves, impacting DNA replication and transcription. A phase I study was undertaken to investigate safety, dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs), recommended phase II dose (RP2D), pharmacokinetics (PKs) and preliminary antitumour activity of PM00104 as a 1- or 3-h infusion three-weekly., Methods: Patients with advanced solid tumours received PM00104 in a dose escalation trial, as guided by toxicity and PK data., Results: A total of 47 patients were treated; 27 patients on the 1-h schedule (0.23-3.6 mg m(-2)) and 20 patients on the 3-h schedule (1.8-3.5 mg m(-2)). Dose-limiting toxicities comprised reversible nausea, vomiting, fatigue, elevated transaminases and thrombocytopenia, establishing the 1-h schedule RP2D at 3.0 mg m(-2). With the 3-h schedule, DLTs of reversible hypotension and neutropenia established the RP2D at 2.8 mg m(-2). Common PM00104-related adverse events at the RP2D comprised grade 1-2 nausea, fatigue and myelosuppression. In both schedules, PKs increased linearly, but doses over the 1-h schedule RP2D resulted in higher than proportional increases in exposure. A patient with advanced urothelial carcinoma had RECIST shrinkage by 49%, and three patients had RECIST stable disease ≥6 months., Conclusion: PM00104 is well tolerated, with preliminary evidence of antitumour activity observed. The 1-h 3-weekly schedule is being assessed in phase II clinical trials.