TY - JOUR
T1 - Perioperative Adriamycin plus ifosfamide vs. gemcitabine plus docetaxel for high-risk soft tissue sarcomas
T2 - randomised, phase II/III study JCOG1306
AU - Tanaka, Kazuhiro
AU - Machida, Ryunosuke
AU - Kawai, Akira
AU - Nakayama, Robert
AU - Tsukushi, Satoshi
AU - Asanuma, Kunihiro
AU - Matsumoto, Yoshihiro
AU - Hiraga, Hiroaki
AU - Hiraoka, Koji
AU - Watanuki, Munenori
AU - Yonemoto, Tsukasa
AU - Abe, Satoshi
AU - Katagiri, Hirohisa
AU - Nishida, Yoshihiro
AU - Nagano, Akihito
AU - Suehara, Yoshiyuki
AU - Kawashima, Hiroyuki
AU - Kawano, Masanori
AU - Morii, Takeshi
AU - Hatano, Hiroshi
AU - Toguchida, Junya
AU - Okuma, Tomotake
AU - Takeyama, Masanobu
AU - Takenaka, Satoshi
AU - Akisue, Toshihiro
AU - Furuta, Taisuke
AU - Emori, Makoto
AU - Hiruma, Toru
AU - Outani, Hidetatsu
AU - Yamamoto, Tetsuji
AU - Kataoka, Tomoko
AU - Fukuda, Haruhiko
AU - Ozaki, Toshifumi
AU - Iwamoto, Yukihide
N1 - Funding Information:
KT received honoraria from Taiho Pharmaceutical, Eisai, and Novartis. AK received honoraria from Lilly, Taiho Pharmaceutical, Eisai, Novartis, and Otsuka Pharmaceutical. H Hiraga received honoraria from Taiho Pharmaceutical, Daiichi-Sankyo, and Novartis. YS received honoraria from Bayer AG, and a grant from LOXO Oncology. HF received honoraria from Chugai Pharmaceutical. The other authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.
Funding Information:
The study was funded in part by the National Cancer Center Research and Development Fund [29-A-3 and 2020-J-3] and by the Agency for Medical Research and Development (AMED) [JP17ck0106336 and JP20ck0106614]. The funding bodies did not play any part in the study design, the data collection, or analysis, or the decision to publish the results.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2022, The Author(s).
PY - 2022
Y1 - 2022
N2 - Background: This randomised phase II/III trial aimed to determine whether perioperative chemotherapy with gemcitabine plus docetaxel (GD) is non-inferior to the standard Adriamycin plus ifosfamide (AI) in terms of overall survival (OS) in patients with soft tissue sarcoma (STS). Methods: Patients with localised high-risk STS in the extremities or trunk were randomised to receive AI or GD. The treatments were repeated for three preoperative and two postoperative courses. The primary endpoint was OS. Results: Among 143 enrolled patients who received AI (70 patients) compared to GD (73 patients), the estimated 3-year OS was 91.4% for AI and 79.2% for GD (hazard ratio 2.55, 95% confidence interval: 0.80–8.14, P = 0.78), exceeding the prespecified non-inferiority margin in the second interim analysis. The estimated 3-year progression-free survival was 79.1% for AI and 59.1% for GD. The most common Grade 3–4 adverse events in the preoperative period were neutropenia (88.4%), anaemia (49.3%), and febrile neutropenia (36.2%) for AI and neutropenia (79.5%) and febrile neutropenia (17.8%) for GD. Conclusions: Although GD had relatively mild toxicity, the regimen—as administered in this study—should not be considered a standard treatment of perioperative chemotherapy for high-risk STS in the extremities and trunk. Clinical trial registration: jRCTs031180003.
AB - Background: This randomised phase II/III trial aimed to determine whether perioperative chemotherapy with gemcitabine plus docetaxel (GD) is non-inferior to the standard Adriamycin plus ifosfamide (AI) in terms of overall survival (OS) in patients with soft tissue sarcoma (STS). Methods: Patients with localised high-risk STS in the extremities or trunk were randomised to receive AI or GD. The treatments were repeated for three preoperative and two postoperative courses. The primary endpoint was OS. Results: Among 143 enrolled patients who received AI (70 patients) compared to GD (73 patients), the estimated 3-year OS was 91.4% for AI and 79.2% for GD (hazard ratio 2.55, 95% confidence interval: 0.80–8.14, P = 0.78), exceeding the prespecified non-inferiority margin in the second interim analysis. The estimated 3-year progression-free survival was 79.1% for AI and 59.1% for GD. The most common Grade 3–4 adverse events in the preoperative period were neutropenia (88.4%), anaemia (49.3%), and febrile neutropenia (36.2%) for AI and neutropenia (79.5%) and febrile neutropenia (17.8%) for GD. Conclusions: Although GD had relatively mild toxicity, the regimen—as administered in this study—should not be considered a standard treatment of perioperative chemotherapy for high-risk STS in the extremities and trunk. Clinical trial registration: jRCTs031180003.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85135091632&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85135091632&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1038/s41416-022-01912-5
DO - 10.1038/s41416-022-01912-5
M3 - Article
C2 - 35871234
AN - SCOPUS:85135091632
SN - 0007-0920
JO - British Journal of Cancer
JF - British Journal of Cancer
ER -