A multicentre, randomised, open-label, parallel-group Phase 2b study of belotecan versus topotecan for recurrent ovarian cancer
-
Published:2020-09-30
Issue:2
Volume:124
Page:375-382
-
ISSN:0007-0920
-
Container-title:British Journal of Cancer
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Br J Cancer
Author:
Kim Hee Seung,Park Sang-Yoon,Park Chan-Yong,Kim Young Tae,Kim Beob-Jong,Song Yong Jung,Kim Byoung-Gie,Kim Yong Beom,Cho Chi-Heum,Kim Jong-Hyeok,Song Yong Sang
Abstract
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/m2 or topotecan 1.5 mg/m2 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.
Funder
Chong Kun Dang Pharmaceutical.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Cancer Research,Oncology
Reference30 articles.
1. Heintz, A. P., Odicino, F., Maisonneuve, P., Quinn, M. A., Benedet, J. L., Creasman, W. T. et al. Carcinoma of the ovary. FIGO 26th Annual Report on the Results of Treatment in Gynecological Cancer. Int. J. Gynaecol. Obstet. 95(Suppl 1), S161–S192 (2006). 2. González Martín, A., Bratos, R., Márquez, R., Alonso, S. & Chiva, L. Bevacizumab as front-line treatment for newly diagnosed epithelial cancer. Expert. Rev. Anticancer. Ther. 13, 123–129 (2013). 3. Markman, M., Markman, J., Webster, K., Zanotti, K., Kulp, B., Peterson, G. et al. Duration of response to second-line, platinum-based chemotherapy for ovarian cancer: implications for patient management and clinical trial design. J. Clin. Oncol. 22, 3120–3125 (2004). 4. Eisenhauer, E. A., Vermorken, J. B. & van Glabbeke, M. Predictors of response to subsequent chemotherapy in platinum pretreated ovarian cancer: a multivariate analysis of 704 patients. Ann. Oncol. 8, 963–968 (1997). 5. Lee, J. H., Lee, J. M., Kim, J. K., Ahn, S. K., Lee, S. J. & Kim, M. Y. et al. Antitumor activity of 7-[2-(N-isopropylamino)ethyl]-(20S)-camptothecin, CKD602, as a potent DNA topoisomerase I inhibitor. Arch. Pharm. Res. 21, 581–590 (1998).
Cited by
6 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
|
|