𝔖 Bobbio Scriptorium
✦   LIBER   ✦

Combination chemotherapy for soft-tissue sarcomas: A phase III study

✍ Scribed by A. B. Cruz JR.; E. A. Thames JR.; J. B. Aust; G. Metter; G. Ramirez; W. S. Fletcher; S. J. Altman; R. W. Frelick; G. J. Hill II


Publisher
John Wiley and Sons
Year
1979
Tongue
English
Weight
544 KB
Volume
11
Category
Article
ISSN
0022-4790

No coin nor oath required. For personal study only.

✦ Synopsis


A total of 144 patients with advanced sarcomas were entered into a randomized prospective protocol with four treatment arms utilizing different combinations of chemotherapeutic agents. Of these, 120 patients (83%) were judged acceptable. Treatment #1: actinomycin-D (Act-D), 0.01 mg/kg IV, days 1-5; phenylalanine mustard (L-PAM), 4 mg PO, days 1-10 every six weeks. Treatment #2: Act-D, 0.01 mdkg IV, days 1-5; L-PAM, 4 mg PO, days l-lO;vincristine, 1 mg IV, days 1,8, 15,22,29, 36, repeat every six weeks. Treatment #3: Act-D, 0.01 mg/kg IV, days 1-5; L-PAM, 4 mg PO, days 1-10; NSC-1026,200 mdkg IV, days 1-6.Treatment #4: Adriamycin, 0.4 mg/kg IV, days 1.2, 3 , 8 , 9 , 10, then 2XWK starting day 15 (max. 1,200 mg). There was a provision that upon progression of the disease in the first three treatment regimens, patients would be crossed over to Treatment #4. Responses were as follows: #1 -Partial Response (PR) 1/25; No Change (NC) 9/25 (36%). #2 -NC 17/26 (65%). #3 -NC 13/25 (52%). #4 -Complete Response (CR) 1/41; PR 6/41; (15%); NC 27/41 (66%). Clearly Treatment #4 was the best arm, with a 17% response rate and an initial progression rate of 17%. The only other response was a partial in #l. The difference is statistically significant (H = 17.247, P = 0.0006). If the responders to Adriamycin were analyzed without crossovers, the response rate would be 22% (6/27). (H = 14.079, P = 0.003). Median times to progression were 12.5,8.7 weeks for #1 and #2, and 5 weeks for #3 and #4. There was no significant difference in the median survival times among the four treatment arms. It appears that Adriamycin as a single drug is superior to the drug combinations and would probably be even more effective used in combination with known active agents.

.....


πŸ“œ SIMILAR VOLUMES


Gemcitabine and vinorelbine combination
✍ Palma Dileo; Jeffrey A. Morgan; David Zahrieh; Jayesh Desai; Jeanine M. Salesi; πŸ“‚ Article πŸ“… 2007 πŸ› John Wiley and Sons 🌐 English βš– 93 KB

## Abstract ## BACKGROUND. Single‐agent gemcitabine and vinorelbine have activity in treatment of patients with soft‐tissue sarcomas. The combination of gemcitabine plus vinorelbine has activity against several forms of metastatic carcinoma with acceptable toxicity. This study evaluated the effica

A phase II study of ifosfamide/mesna wit
✍ Brian M. J. Cantwell; James Carmichael; Sarah Ghani; Adrian L. Harris πŸ“‚ Article πŸ“… 1988 πŸ› Springer 🌐 English βš– 418 KB

In a phase II study, 16 adult patients with locally advanced or metastatic soft tissue sarcomas were treated with i.v. infusions of ifosfamide/mesna 5 g/m2 plus i.v. doxorubicin 40 mg/m2. Courses were given every 3 weeks up to a maximum of six courses in responding patients. Six patients (37.5%) had