Randomized comparison of doxorubicin alone versus ifosfamide plus doxorubicin or mitomycin, doxorubicin, and cisplatin against advanced soft tissue sarcomas.

Author:

Edmonson J H,Ryan L M,Blum R H,Brooks J S,Shiraki M,Frytak S,Parkinson D R

Abstract

PURPOSE This three-armed phase III study in adults with advanced soft tissue sarcomas was planned as a comparison of objective regression rates, toxicity, and survival of patients receiving doxorubicin alone, ifosfamide plus doxorubicin, and mitomycin plus doxorubicin plus cisplatin. PATIENTS AND METHODS Between December 1987 and July 1990, 279 patients with histologically confirmed sarcomas were enrolled to receive treatment A (doxorubicin 80 mg/m2), treatment B (ifosfamide 7.5 g/m2 plus doxorubicin 60 mg/m2), or treatment C (mitomycin 8 mg/m2 plus doxorubicin 40 mg/m2 plus cisplatin 60 mg/m2). RESULTS Of 262 assessable patients, 74 (29%) achieved objective tumor regression. Objective regression occurred in 20% of the 90 patients who received doxorubicin alone (complete remission [CR] rate, 2%), in 34% of the 88 who received ifosfamide plus doxorubicin (CR rate, 3%), and in 32% of the 84 who received mitomycin plus doxorubicin plus cisplatin (CR rate, 7%). With grade 3 or greater myelosuppression in 53% of group A, 80% of group B, and 55% of group C, regimen B was significantly more myelosuppressive than either regimen A or C (P = .01) with two, three, and one treatment-related deaths, respectively. Synovial sarcomas were responsive to ifosfamide plus doxorubicin, especially among patients younger than 40 years of age. CONCLUSION Ifosfamide plus doxorubicin produced a significantly higher regression rate (P = .03) than did doxorubicin alone; however, this was achieved at a level of myelosuppression significantly more intense than that produced by the single agent or by the three-drug combination. Mitomycin, doxorubicin, and cisplatin also appeared to be more active than the single agent; however, at a myelosuppression level similar to that of doxorubicin alone, this trend (P = .07) did not attain the usual level for significance. No significant survival differences were observed.

Publisher

American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)

Subject

Cancer Research,Oncology

Cited by 436 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

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3