Sarcoma Unit, Institute of Cancer Research, Royal Marsden Hospital, London, United Kingdom.
Medical Oncology and Hematology, Monter Cancer Center, Northwell Health, New Hyde Park, New York.
Cancer. 2019 Dec 15;125(24):4435-4441. doi: 10.1002/cncr.32462. Epub 2019 Sep 10.
The results of the randomized, phase 3 ET743-SAR-3007 trial demonstrated that trabectedin had a significantly longer progression-free survival (PFS) compared with dacarbazine in patients with advanced leiomyosarcoma/liposarcoma after the failure of prior chemotherapy. Patients randomized to trabectedin received a 24-hour intravenous infusion either in an inpatient or outpatient setting. Herein, the authors reported the safety, efficacy, and patient-reported outcomes based on first infusion site of care.
Patients were randomized 2:1 to trabectedin (at a dose of 1.5 mg/m ) or dacarbazine (1 g/m over 20-120 minutes) with overall survival (OS) as the primary endpoint and PFS, time to disease progression, objective response rate, duration of response, safety, and patient-reported symptom scoring as secondary endpoints. The setting of the trabectedin infusion was based on institutional preference and categorized based on the setting of the first infusion.
Of the 378 patients who were treated with trabectedin, 100 (27%) and 277 (73%), respectively, first received trabectedin in the inpatient and outpatient setting. No differences were observed with regard to PFS or OS based on site of care. The median PFS was 4.1 months versus 4.2 months (hazard ratio, 0.90; P = .49) for inpatients versus outpatients, respectively, and the median OS was 14.3 months versus 13.7 months (hazard ratio, 0.89; P = .40), respectively. Grade 3/4 adverse events (classified according to the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events [version 4.0]) were reported in 87 inpatients (87%) compared with 219 outpatients (79%); grade 3/4 serious adverse events were reported in 43 inpatients (43%) and 92 outpatients (33%). Extravasation occurred in 0 inpatients and 5 outpatients (2%), whereas the incidence of catheter-related complications was similar between groups (16% vs 15%).
Although the majority of patients who were randomized to trabectedin received outpatient therapy, the outcomes of the current study suggested equivalent safety and efficacy in either setting.
随机、3 期 ET743-SAR-3007 试验的结果表明,与达卡巴嗪相比,在前化疗失败后患有晚期平滑肌肉瘤/脂肪肉瘤的患者中,曲贝替定的无进展生存期(PFS)显著延长。接受曲贝替定治疗的患者接受 24 小时静脉输注,可在住院或门诊环境下进行。在此,作者根据首次输注的护理地点报告了安全性、疗效和患者报告的结局。
患者以 2:1 的比例随机分配至曲贝替定(剂量为 1.5mg/m2)或达卡巴嗪(1g/m2,持续 20-120 分钟),以总生存期(OS)为主要终点,以 PFS、疾病进展时间、客观缓解率、缓解持续时间、安全性和患者报告的症状评分作为次要终点。曲贝替定输注的地点基于机构的偏好,并根据首次输注的地点进行分类。
在接受曲贝替定治疗的 378 名患者中,分别有 100 名(27%)和 277 名(73%)患者首次在住院和门诊环境下接受曲贝替定治疗。根据护理地点,在 PFS 或 OS 方面未观察到差异。中位 PFS 分别为 4.1 个月和 4.2 个月(风险比,0.90;P=0.49),中位 OS 分别为 14.3 个月和 13.7 个月(风险比,0.89;P=0.40)。分别有 87 名(87%)住院患者和 219 名(79%)门诊患者报告了 3/4 级不良事件(根据国立癌症研究所不良事件通用术语标准[第 4.0 版]进行分类);分别有 43 名(43%)住院患者和 92 名(33%)门诊患者报告了 3/4 级严重不良事件。在 0 名住院患者和 5 名(2%)门诊患者中发生了外渗,而两组间导管相关并发症的发生率相似(16%比 15%)。
尽管大多数接受曲贝替定治疗的患者接受了门诊治疗,但本研究的结果表明,两种治疗方案的安全性和疗效相当。