Summary Background Until now, only imatinib and sunitinib have proven clinical benefit in patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GIST), but almost all metastatic GIST eventually develop ...resistance to these agents, resulting in fatal disease progression. We aimed to assess efficacy and safety of regorafenib in patients with metastatic or unresectable GIST progressing after failure of at least imatinib and sunitinib. Methods We did this phase 3 trial at 57 hospitals in 17 countries. Patients with histologically confirmed, metastatic or unresectable GIST, with failure of at least previous imatinib and sunitinib were randomised in a 2:1 ratio (by computer-generated randomisation list and interactive voice response system; preallocated block design (block size 12); stratified by treatment line and geographical region) to receive either oral regorafenib 160 mg daily or placebo, plus best supportive care in both groups, for the first 3 weeks of each 4 week cycle. The study sponsor, participants, and investigators were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). At disease progression, patients assigned placebo could crossover to open-label regorafenib. Analyses were by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT01271712. Results From Jan 4, to Aug 18, 2011, 240 patients were screened and 199 were randomised to receive regorafenib (n=133) or matching placebo (n=66). Data cutoff was Jan 26, 2012. Median PFS per independent blinded central review was 4·8 months (IQR 1·4–9·2) for regorafenib and 0·9 months (0·9–1·8) for placebo (hazard ratio HR 0·27, 95% CI 0·19–0·39; p<0·0001). After progression, 56 patients (85%) assigned placebo crossed over to regorafenib. Drug-related adverse events were reported in 130 (98%) patients assigned regorafenib and 45 (68%) patients assigned placebo. The most common regorafenib-related adverse events of grade 3 or higher were hypertension (31 of 132, 23%), hand-foot skin reaction (26 of 132, 20%), and diarrhoea (seven of 132, 5%). Interpretation The results of this study show that oral regorafenib can provide a significant improvement in progression-free survival compared with placebo in patients with metastatic GIST after progression on standard treatments. As far as we are aware, this is the first clinical trial to show benefit from a kinase inhibitor in this highly refractory population of patients. Funding Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals.
Summary Background The optimum treatment for high-risk soft-tissue sarcoma (STS) in adults is unclear. Regional hyperthermia concentrates the action of chemotherapy within the heated tumour region. ...Phase 2 studies have shown that chemotherapy with regional hyperthermia improves local control compared with chemotherapy alone. We designed a parallel-group randomised controlled trial to assess the safety and efficacy of regional hyperthermia with chemotherapy. Methods Patients were recruited to the trial between July 21, 1997, and November 30, 2006, at nine centres in Europe and North America. Patients with localised high-risk STS (≥5 cm, Fédération Nationale des Centres de Lutte Contre le Cancer FNCLCC grade 2 or 3, deep to the fascia) were randomly assigned to receive either neo-adjuvant chemotherapy consisting of etoposide, ifosfamide, and doxorubicin (EIA) alone, or combined with regional hyperthermia (EIA plus regional hyperthermia) in addition to local therapy. Local progression-free survival (LPFS) was the primary endpoint. Efficacy analyses were done by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT 00003052. Findings 341 patients were enrolled, with 169 randomly assigned to EIA plus regional hyperthermia and 172 to EIA alone. All patients were included in the analysis of the primary endpoint, and 332 patients who received at least one cycle of chemotherapy were included in the safety analysis. After a median follow-up of 34 months (IQR 20–67), 132 patients had local progression (56 EIA plus regional hyperthermia vs 76 EIA). Patients were more likely to experience local progression or death in the EIA-alone group compared with the EIA plus regional hyperthermia group (relative hazard RH 0·58, 95% CI 0·41–0·83; p=0·003), with an absolute difference in LPFS at 2 years of 15% (95% CI 6–26; 76% EIA plus regional hyperthermia vs 61% EIA). For disease-free survival the relative hazard was 0·70 (95% CI 0·54–0·92, p=0·011) for EIA plus regional hyperthermia compared with EIA alone. The treatment response rate in the group that received regional hyperthermia was 28·8%, compared with 12·7% in the group who received chemotherapy alone (p=0·002). In a pre-specified per-protocol analysis of patients who completed EIA plus regional hyperthermia induction therapy compared with those who completed EIA alone, overall survival was better in the combined therapy group (HR 0·66, 95% CI 0·45–0·98, p=0·038). Leucopenia (grade 3 or 4) was more frequent in the EIA plus regional hyperthermia group compared with the EIA-alone group (128 of 165 vs 106 of 167, p=0·005). Hyperthermia-related adverse events were pain, bolus pressure, and skin burn, which were mild to moderate in 66 (40·5%), 43 (26·4%), and 29 patients (17·8%), and severe in seven (4·3%), eight (4·9%), and one patient (0·6%), respectively. Two deaths were attributable to treatment in the combined treatment group, and one death was attributable to treatment in the EIA-alone group. Interpretation To our knowledge, this is the first randomised phase 3 trial to show that regional hyperthermia increases the benefit of chemotherapy. Adding regional hyperthermia to chemotherapy is a new effective treatment strategy for patients with high-risk STS, including STS with an abdominal or retroperitoneal location. Funding Deutsche Krebshilfe, Helmholtz Association (HGF), European Organisation of Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC), European Society for Hyperthermic Oncology (ESHO), and US National Institute of Health (NIH).
Summary Background Effective targeted treatment is unavailable for most sarcomas and doxorubicin and ifosfamide—which have been used to treat soft-tissue sarcoma for more than 30 years—still have an ...important role. Whether doxorubicin alone or the combination of doxorubicin and ifosfamide should be used routinely is still controversial. We assessed whether dose intensification of doxorubicin with ifosfamide improves survival of patients with advanced soft-tissue sarcoma compared with doxorubicin alone. Methods We did this phase 3 randomised controlled trial (EORTC 62012) at 38 hospitals in ten countries. We included patients with locally advanced, unresectable, or metastatic high-grade soft-tissue sarcoma, age 18–60 years with a WHO performance status of 0 or 1. They were randomly assigned (1:1) by the minimisation method to either doxorubicin (75 mg/m2 by intravenous bolus on day 1 or 72 h continuous intravenous infusion) or intensified doxorubicin (75 mg/m2 ; 25 mg/m2 per day, days 1–3) plus ifosfamide (10 g/m2 over 4 days with mesna and pegfilgrastim) as first-line treatment. Randomisation was stratified by centre, performance status (0 vs 1), age (<50 vs ≥50 years), presence of liver metastases, and histopathological grade (2 vs 3). Patients were treated every 3 weeks till progression or unacceptable toxic effects for up to six cycles. The primary endpoint was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT00061984. Findings Between April 30, 2003, and May 25, 2010, 228 patients were randomly assigned to receive doxorubicin and 227 to receive doxorubicin and ifosfamide. Median follow-up was 56 months (IQR 31–77) in the doxorubicin only group and 59 months (36–72) in the combination group. There was no significant difference in overall survival between groups (median overall survival 12·8 months 95·5% CI 10·5–14·3 in the doxorubicin group vs 14·3 months 12·5–16·5 in the doxorubicin and ifosfamide group; hazard ratio HR 0·83 95·5% CI 0·67–1·03; stratified log-rank test p=0·076). Median progression-free survival was significantly higher for the doxorubicin and ifosfamide group (7·4 months 95% CI 6·6–8·3) than for the doxorubicin group (4·6 months 2·9–5·6; HR 0·74 95% CI 0·60–0·90, stratified log-rank test p=0·003). More patients in the doxorubicin and ifosfamide group than in the doxorubicin group had an overall response (60 26% of 227 patients vs 31 14% of 228; p<0·0006). The most common grade 3 and 4 toxic effects—which were all more common with doxorubicin and ifosfamide than with doxorubicin alone—were leucopenia (97 43% of 224 patients vs 40 18% of 223 patients), neutropenia (93 42% vs 83 37%), febrile neutropenia (103 (46%) vs 30 13%), anaemia (78 35% vs 10 5%), and thrombocytopenia (75 33%) vs one <1%). Interpretation Our results do not support the use of intensified doxorubicin and ifosfamide for palliation of advanced soft-tissue sarcoma unless the specific goal is tumour shrinkage. These findings should help individualise the care of patients with this disease. Funding Cancer Research UK, EORTC Charitable Trust, UK NHS, Canadian Cancer Society Research Institute, Amgen.
Summary Background Complete lymph node dissection is recommended in patients with positive sentinel lymph node biopsy results. To date, the effect of complete lymph node dissection on prognosis is ...controversial. In the DeCOG-SLT trial, we assessed whether complete lymph node dissection resulted in increased survival compared with observation. Methods In this multicentre, randomised, phase 3 trial, we enrolled patients with cutaneous melanoma of the torso, arms, or legs from 41 German skin cancer centres. Patients with positive sentinel lymph node biopsy results were eligible. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to undergo complete lymph node dissection or observation with permuted blocks of variable size and stratified by primary tumour thickness, ulceration of primary tumour, and intended adjuvant interferon therapy. Treatment assignment was not masked. The primary endpoint was distant metastasis-free survival and analysed by intention to treat. All patients in the intention-to-treat population of the complete lymph node dissection group were included in the safety analysis. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT02434107 . Follow-up is ongoing, but the trial no longer recruiting patients. Findings Between Jan 1, 2006, and Dec 1, 2014, 5547 patients were screened with sentinel lymph node biopsy and 1269 (23%) patients were positive for micrometastasis. Of these, 483 (39%) agreed to randomisation into the clinical trial; due to difficulties enrolling and a low event rate the trial closed early on Dec 1, 2014. 241 patients were randomly assigned to the observation group and 242 to the complete lymph node dissection group. Ten patients did not meet the inclusion criteria, so 233 patients were analysed in the observation group and 240 patients were analysed in the complete lymph node dissection group, as the intention-to-treat population. 311 (66%) patients (158 in the observation group and 153 in the dissection group) had sentinel lymph node metastases of 1 mm or less. Median follow-up was 35 months (IQR 20–54). Distant metastasis-free survival at 3 years was 77·0% (90% CI 71·9–82·1; 55 events) in the observation group and 74·9% (69·5–80·3; 54 events) in the complete lymph node dissection group. In the complete lymph node dissection group, grade 3 and 4 events occurred in 15 patients (6%) and 19 patients (8%) patients, respectively. Adverse events included lymph oedema (grade 3 in seven patients, grade 4 in 13 patients), lymph fistula (grade 3 in one patient, grade 4 in two patients), seroma (grade 3 in three patients, no grade 4), infection (grade 3 in three patients, no grade 4), and delayed wound healing (grade 3 in one patient, grade 4 in four patients); no serious adverse events were reported. Interpretation Although we did not achieve the required number of events, leading to the trial being underpowered, our results showed no difference in survival in patients treated with complete lymph node dissection compared with observation only. Consequently, complete lymph node dissection should not be recommended in patients with melanoma with lymph node micrometastases of at least a diameter of 1 mm or smaller. Funding German Cancer Aid.
Summary Background The effect of adjuvant chemotherapy on survival for resected soft-tissue sarcoma remains unknown. We investigated the effect of intensive adjuvant chemotherapy on survival in ...patients after resection of high-risk soft-tissue sarcomas. Methods In this multicentre randomised trial, patients with macroscopically resected, Trojani grade II–III soft-tissue sarcomas at any site, no metastases, performance status lower than 2 and aged between 16 and 70 years were eligible within 4 weeks of definitive surgery. Patients were randomly assigned to receive adjuvant chemotherapy or no chemotherapy (control group). Randomisation was done with a minimisation technique, stratified by hospital, site of primary tumour, tumour size, planned radiotherapy, and isolated limb perfusion therapy. Chemotherapy consisted of five cycles of doxorubicin 75 mg/m2 , ifosfamide 5 g/m2 , and lenograstim every 3 weeks. Patients in both groups received radiotherapy if the resection was marginal or the tumour recurrent. The primary endpoint was overall survival and analyses were done by intention to treat. The final results are presented. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT00002641. Findings Between February, 1995, and December, 2003, 351 patients were randomly assigned to the adjuvant chemotherapy group (175 patients) or to the control group (176). 258 (73%) of 351 patients received radiotherapy, 129 in each group. Overall survival did not differ significantly between groups (hazard ratio HR 0·94 95% CI 0·68–1·31, p=0·72) nor did relapse-free survival (HR 0·91 0·67–1·22, p=0·51). 5-year overall survival rate was 66·5% (58·8–73·0) in the chemotherapy group and 67·8% (60·3–74·2) in the control group. Chemotherapy was well tolerated, with 130 (80%) of 163 patients who started it completing all five cycles. 16 (10%) patients had grade 3 or 4 fever or infection, but no deaths due to toxic effects were recorded. Interpretation Adjuvant chemotherapy with doxorubicin and ifosfamide in resected soft-tissue sarcoma showed no benefit in relapse-free survival or overall survival. Future studies should focus on patients with larger, grade III, and extremity sarcomas. Funding European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer, Rhone-Poulenc-Rorer.
Summary Background Eribulin inhibits microtubule dynamics via a mechanism distinct from that of other tubulin-targeting drugs, inducing cell-cycle arrest and tumour regression in preclinical models. ...We assessed the activity and safety of eribulin in four strata of patients with different types of soft-tissue sarcoma. Methods In this non-randomised multicentre phase 2 study, patients were included if they had progressive or high-grade soft-tissue sarcoma and had received no more than one previous combination chemotherapy or up to two single drugs for advanced disease. They were stratified by the type of soft-tissue sarcoma they had. Eribulin was given intravenously at a concentration of 1·4 mg/m2 over 2–5 min at days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks to primarily assess progression-free survival at 12 weeks (RECIST 1.0), which we evaluated in all patients who started treatment. Safety analyses were done in all patients who started treatment. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT00413192. Findings Of 128 patients included, 37 had adipocytic sarcoma, 40 had leiomyosarcoma, 19 had synovial sarcoma, and 32 had other sarcomas. 12 (31·6%) of 38 patients with leiomyosarcoma evaluable for the primary endpoint, 15 (46·9%) of 32 patients with adipocytic sarcoma, four (21·1%) of 19 with synovial sarcoma, and five (19·2%) of 26 in other sarcomas were progression-free at 12 weeks. The most common grade 3–4 adverse events were neutropenia (66 52% of 127 patients evaluable for safety), leucopenia (44 35%), anaemia (nine 7%), fatigue (nine 7%), febrile neutropenia (eight 6%), abnormal alanine aminotransferase concentrations (six 5%), mucositis (four 3%), and sensory neuropathy (four 3%). Interpretation Eribulin deserves further study in this setting, based on progression-free survival at 12 weeks in leiomyosarcoma and adipocytic sarcoma. Funding Eisai Limited, Hatfield, UK.
Summary Background A non-randomised, phase 2 study showed activity and tolerability of eribulin in advanced or metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma. In this phase 3 study, we aimed to compare overall ...survival in patients with advanced or metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma who received eribulin with that in patients who received dacarbazine (an active control). Methods We did this randomised, open-label, phase 3 study across 110 study sites in 22 countries. We enrolled patients aged 18 years or older with intermediate-grade or high-grade advanced liposarcoma or leiomyosarcoma who had received at least two previous systemic regimens for advanced disease (including an anthracycline). Using an interactive voice and web response system, an independent statistician randomly assigned (1:1) patients to receive eribulin mesilate (1·4 mg/m2 intravenously on days 1 and 8) or dacarbazine (850 mg/m2 , 1000 mg/m2 , or 1200 mg/m2 dose dependent on centre and clinician intravenously on day 1) every 21 days until disease progression. Randomisation was stratified by disease type, geographical region, and number of previous regimens for advanced soft-tissue sarcoma and in blocks of six. Patients and investigators were not masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT01327885 , and is closed to recruitment, but treatment and follow-up continue. Findings Between March 10, 2011 and May 22, 2013, we randomly assigned patients to eribulin (n=228) or dacarbazine (n=224). Overall survival was significantly improved in patients assigned to eribulin compared with those assigned to dacarbazine (median 13·5 months 95% CI 10·9–15·6 vs 11·5 months 9·6–13·0; hazard ratio 0·77 95% CI 0·62–0·95; p=0·0169). Treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 224 (99%) of 226 patients who received eribulin and 218 (97%) of 224 who received dacarbazine. Grade 3 or higher adverse events were more common in patients who received eribulin (152 67%) than in those who received dacarbazine (126 56%), as were deaths (10 4% vs 3 1%); one death (in the eribulin group) was considered treatment-related by the investigators. Interpretation Overall survival was improved in patients assigned to eribulin compared with those assigned to an active control, suggesting that eribulin could be a treatment option for advanced soft-tissue sarcoma. Funding Eisai.
Summary Gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GISTs) are mesenchymal neoplasms that arise in the gastrointestinal tract, usually in the stomach or the small intestine and rarely elsewhere in the abdomen. ...They can occur at any age, the median age being 60–65 years, and typically cause bleeding, anaemia, and pain. GISTs have variable malignant potential, ranging from small lesions with a benign behaviour to fatal sarcomas. Most tumours stain positively for the mast/stem cell growth factor receptor KIT and anoctamin 1 and harbour a kinase-activating mutation in either KIT or PDGFRA . Tumours without such mutations could have alterations in genes of the succinate dehydrogenase complex or in BRAF , or rarely RAS family genes. About 60% of patients are cured by surgery. Adjuvant treatment with imatinib is recommended for patients with a substantial risk of recurrence, if the tumour has an imatinib-sensitive mutation. Tyrosine kinase inhibitors substantially improve survival in advanced disease, but secondary drug resistance is common.
Summary Background Pazopanib, a multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor, has single-agent activity in patients with advanced non-adipocytic soft-tissue sarcoma. We investigated the effect of ...pazopanib on progression-free survival in patients with metastatic non-adipocytic soft-tissue sarcoma after failure of standard chemotherapy. Methods This phase 3 study was done in 72 institutions, across 13 countries. Patients with angiogenesis inhibitor-naive, metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma, progressing despite previous standard chemotherapy, were randomly assigned by an interactive voice randomisation system in a 2:1 ratio in permuted blocks (with block sizes of six) to receive either pazopanib 800 mg once daily or placebo, with no subsequent cross-over. Patients, investigators who gave the treatment, those assessing outcomes, and those who did the analysis were masked to the allocation. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival. Efficacy analysis was by intention to treat. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT00753688. Findings 372 patients were registered and 369 were randomly assigned to receive pazopanib (n=246) or placebo (n=123). Median progression-free survival was 4·6 months (95% CI 3·7–4·8) for pazopanib compared with 1·6 months (0·9–1·8) for placebo (hazard ratio HR 0·31, 95% CI 0·24–0·40; p<0·0001). Overall survival was 12·5 months (10·6–14·8) with pazopanib versus 10·7 months (8·7–12·8) with placebo (HR 0·86, 0·67–1·11; p=0·25). The most common adverse events were fatigue (60 in the placebo group 49% vs 155 in the pazopanib group 65%), diarrhoea (20 16% vs 138 58%), nausea (34 28% vs 129 54%), weight loss (25 20% vs 115 48%), and hypertension (8 7% vs 99 41%). The median relative dose intensity was 100% for placebo and 96% for pazopanib. Interpretation Pazopanib is a new treatment option for patients with metastatic non-adipocytic soft-tissue sarcoma after previous chemotherapy. Funding GlaxoSmithKline.
SummaryBackgroundPathological complete response to preoperative treatment in adults with soft-tissue sarcoma can be achieved in only a few patients receiving radiotherapy. This phase 2–3 trial ...evaluated the safety and efficacy of the hafnium oxide (HfO 2) nanoparticle NBTXR3 activated by radiotherapy versus radiotherapy alone as a pre-operative treatment in patients with locally advanced soft-tissue sarcoma. MethodsAct.In.Sarc is a phase 2–3 randomised, multicentre, international trial. Adults (aged ≥18 years) with locally advanced soft-tissue sarcoma of the extremity or trunk wall, of any histological grade, and requiring preoperative radiotherapy were included. Patients had to have a WHO performance status of 0–2 and a life expectancy of at least 6 months. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) by an interactive web response system to receive either NBTXR3 (volume corresponding to 10% of baseline tumour volume at a fixed concentration of 53·3 g/L) as a single intratumoural administration before preoperative external-beam radiotherapy (50 Gy in 25 fractions) or radiotherapy alone, followed by surgery. Randomisation was stratified by histological subtype (myxoid liposarcoma vs others). This was an open-label study. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with a pathological complete response, assessed by a central pathology review board following European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer guidelines in the intention-to-treat population full analysis set. Safety analyses were done in all patients who received at least one puncture and injection of NBTXR3 or at least one dose of radiotherapy. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02379845, and is ongoing for long-term follow-up, but recruitment is complete. FindingsBetween March 3, 2015, and Nov 21, 2017, 180 eligible patients were enrolled and randomly assigned and 179 started treatment: 89 in the NBTXR3 plus radiotherapy group and 90 in the radiotherapy alone group. Two patients in the NBTXR3 group and one patient in the radiotherapy group were excluded from the efficacy analysis because they were subsequently discovered to be ineligible; thus, a total of 176 patients were analysed for the primary endpoint in the intention-to-treat full analysis set (87 in the NBTXR3 group and 89 in the radiotherapy alone group). A pathological complete response was noted in 14 (16%) of 87 patients in the NBTXR3 group and seven (8%) of 89 in the radiotherapy alone group (p=0·044). In both treatment groups, the most common grade 3–4 treatment-emergent adverse event was postoperative wound complication (eight 9% of 89 patients in the NBTXR3 group and eight 9% of 90 in the radiotherapy alone group). The most common grade 3–4 adverse events related to NBTXR3 administration were injection site pain (four 4% of 89) and hypotension (four 4%) and the most common grade 3–4 radiotherapy-related adverse event was radiation skin injury in both groups (five 6% of 89 in the NBTXR3 group and four 4% of 90 in the radiotherapy alone group). The most common treatment-emergent grade 3–4 adverse event related to NBTXR3 was hypotension (six 7% of 89 patients). Serious adverse events were observed in 35 (39%) of 89 patients in the NBTXR3 group and 27 (30%) of 90 patients in the radiotherapy alone group. No treatment-related deaths occurred. InterpretationThis trial validates the mode of action of this new class of radioenhancer, which potentially opens a large field of clinical applications in soft-tissue sarcoma and possibly other cancers. FundingNanobiotix SA and PharmaEngine, Inc.
PDF
