Skip to main page content
Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Clinical Trial
. 2016 Mar 10;34(8):786-93.
doi: 10.1200/JCO.2015.62.4734. Epub 2015 Sep 14.

Efficacy and Safety of Trabectedin or Dacarbazine for Metastatic Liposarcoma or Leiomyosarcoma After Failure of Conventional Chemotherapy: Results of a Phase III Randomized Multicenter Clinical Trial

Affiliations
Free PMC article
Clinical Trial

Efficacy and Safety of Trabectedin or Dacarbazine for Metastatic Liposarcoma or Leiomyosarcoma After Failure of Conventional Chemotherapy: Results of a Phase III Randomized Multicenter Clinical Trial

George D Demetri et al. J Clin Oncol. .
Free PMC article

Abstract

Purpose: This multicenter study, to our knowledge, is the first phase III trial to compare trabectedin versus dacarbazine in patients with advanced liposarcoma or leiomyosarcoma after prior therapy with an anthracycline and at least one additional systemic regimen.

Patients and methods: Patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive trabectedin or dacarbazine intravenously every 3 weeks. The primary end point was overall survival (OS), secondary end points were disease control-progression-free survival (PFS), time to progression, objective response rate, and duration of response-as well as safety and patient-reported symptom scoring.

Results: A total of 518 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to either trabectedin (n = 345) or dacarbazine (n = 173). In the final analysis of PFS, trabectedin administration resulted in a 45% reduction in the risk of disease progression or death compared with dacarbazine (median PFS for trabectedin v dacarbazine, 4.2 v 1.5 months; hazard ratio, 0.55; P < .001); benefits were observed across all preplanned subgroup analyses. The interim analysis of OS (64% censored) demonstrated a 13% reduction in risk of death in the trabectedin arm compared with dacarbazine (median OS for trabectedin v dacarbazine, 12.4 v 12.9 months; hazard ratio, 0.87; P = .37). The safety profiles were consistent with the well-characterized toxicities of both agents, and the most common grade 3 to 4 adverse effects were myelosuppression and transient elevation of transaminases in the trabectedin arm.

Conclusion: Trabectedin demonstrates superior disease control versus conventional dacarbazine in patients who have advanced liposarcoma and leiomyosarcoma after they experience failure of prior chemotherapy. Because disease control in advanced sarcomas is a clinically relevant end point, this study supports the activity of trabectedin for patients with these malignancies.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01343277.

Conflict of interest statement

Authors' disclosures of potential conflicts of interest are found in the article online at www.jco.org. Author contributions are found at the end of this article.

Figures

Fig 1.
Fig 1.
CONSORT diagram.
Fig 2.
Fig 2.
Kaplan-Meier estimates of progression-free survival, subgroup analyses, and overall survival at the interim analysis. (A) Progression-free survival; (B) subgroup analysis (hazard ratios [HRs] and 95% CIs) of progression-free survival; and (C) overall survival. HR was calculated as the hazard in the trabectedin treatment group divided by the hazard in the dacarbazine treatment group. BMI, body mass index.

Comment in

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by 141 articles

See all "Cited by" articles

Publication types

MeSH terms

Associated data

Feedback