Suppr超能文献

一项贝洛替康对比拓扑替康治疗复发性卵巢癌的多中心、随机、开放标签、平行分组 2b 期研究。

A multicentre, randomised, open-label, parallel-group Phase 2b study of belotecan versus topotecan for recurrent ovarian cancer.

机构信息

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, 03080, Republic of Korea.

Center for Uterine Cancer, Research Institute and Hospital, National Cancer Center, Goyang, 10408, Republic of Korea.

出版信息

Br J Cancer. 2021 Jan;124(2):375-382. doi: 10.1038/s41416-020-01098-8. Epub 2020 Sep 30.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

This Phase 2b study compared the efficacy and toxicity of belotecan and topotecan in recurrent ovarian cancer.

METHODS

Patients with platinum-sensitive recurrent or platinum-resistant recurrent ovarian cancer (PRROC) were randomised 1:1 to receive belotecan 0.5 mg/m or topotecan 1.5 mg/m for five consecutive days every 3 weeks. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR); secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and toxicity.

RESULTS

A total of 140 (belotecan, n = 71; topotecan, n = 69) and 130 patients (belotecan, n = 66; topotecan, n = 64) were included in the intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol (PP) populations. ORR did not differ significantly between the belotecan and topotecan groups (ITT, 29.6% versus 26.1%; PP, 30.3% versus 25%). Although PFS did not differ between the groups, belotecan was associated with improved OS compared with topotecan in the PP population (39.7 versus 26.6 months; P = 0.034). In particular, belotecan showed longer OS in PRROC and non-high-grade serous carcinoma (non-HGSC; PP, adjusted hazard ratios, 0.499 and 0.187; 95% confidence intervals 0.255-0.977 and 0.039-0.895). Furthermore, there were no differences in toxicities between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Belotecan was not inferior to topotecan in terms of overall response for recurrent ovarian cancer.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT01630018.

摘要

背景

本 2b 期研究比较了贝洛替康和拓扑替康在复发性卵巢癌中的疗效和毒性。

方法

铂类敏感复发性或铂类耐药复发性卵巢癌(PRROC)患者按 1:1 随机分为贝洛替康 0.5mg/m 或拓扑替康 1.5mg/m 组,每 3 周连续用药 5 天。主要终点为总缓解率(ORR);次要终点为无进展生存期(PFS)、总生存期(OS)和毒性。

结果

共有 140 例(贝洛替康组 n=71;拓扑替康组 n=69)和 130 例(贝洛替康组 n=66;拓扑替康组 n=64)患者分别纳入意向治疗(ITT)和符合方案(PP)人群。贝洛替康组与拓扑替康组的 ORR 无显著差异(ITT:29.6%比 26.1%;PP:30.3%比 25%)。尽管两组的 PFS 无差异,但贝洛替康组在 PP 人群中的 OS 优于拓扑替康组(39.7 比 26.6 个月;P=0.034)。特别是,在 PRROC 和非高级别浆液性癌(非 HGSC;PP,调整后的危险比分别为 0.499 和 0.187;95%置信区间分别为 0.255-0.977 和 0.039-0.895)中,贝洛替康组 OS 更长。此外,两组间毒性无差异。

结论

在复发性卵巢癌的总体缓解方面,贝洛替康并不逊于拓扑替康。

临床试验注册

NCT01630018。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5858/7853132/c6ed4b89ab79/41416_2020_1098_Fig1_HTML.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验