Advertisement
Journal of Clinical Oncology  
Search for:
Limit by:
  Browse by Subject or Issue
Home Search or Browse JCO Subscriptions PDA Services My JCO Customer Service

Journal of Clinical Oncology, Vol 25, No 19 (July 1), 2007: pp. 2755-2763
© 2007 American Society of Clinical Oncology.
DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2006.10.4117

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Publisher's Note
Right arrow Erratum (v25,p3790)
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a colleague
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Save to my personal folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Maki, R. G.
Right arrow Articles by Hensley, M. L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Maki, R. G.
Right arrow Articles by Hensley, M. L.

Randomized Phase II Study of Gemcitabine and Docetaxel Compared With Gemcitabine Alone in Patients With Metastatic Soft Tissue Sarcomas: Results of Sarcoma Alliance for Research Through Collaboration Study 002

Robert G. Maki, J. Kyle Wathen, Shreyaskumar R. Patel, Dennis A. Priebat, Scott H. Okuno, Brian Samuels, Michael Fanucchi, David C. Harmon, Scott M. Schuetze, Denise Reinke, Peter F. Thall, Robert S. Benjamin, Laurence H. Baker, Martee L. Hensley

From the Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center New York, NY; Department of Biostatistics & Applied Mathematics and Sarcoma Center, Department of Medicine, The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Washington Cancer Institute, Section of Hematology/Oncology, Washington, DC; Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; University of Illinois at Chicago, Oncology Specialists, Park Ridge, IL; Winship Cancer Institute, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA; Partners' Health Care/Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Boston, MA; and the University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, MI

Address reprint requests to Robert G. Maki, MD, PhD, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Ave, Box 223, New York, NY 10021; makir{at}mskcc.org

Purpose: Gemcitabine as a single agent and the combination of gemcitabine and docetaxel have activity in patients with metastatic soft tissue sarcoma. To determine if the addition of docetaxel to gemcitabine improved clinical outcome of patients with metastatic soft tissue sarcomas, we compared a fixed dose rate infusion of gemcitabine versus a lower dose of gemcitabine with docetaxel.

Patients and Methods: In this open-label phase II clinical trial, the primary end point was tumor response, defined as complete or partial response or stable disease lasting at least 24 weeks. A Bayesian adaptive randomization procedure was used to produce an imbalance in the randomization in favor of the superior treatment, accounting for treatment-subgroup interactions.

Results: One hundred nineteen of 122 randomly assigned patients had assessable outcomes. The adaptive randomization assigned 73 patients (60%) to gemcitabine-docetaxel and 49 patients (40%) to gemcitabine alone, indicating gemcitabine-docetaxel was superior. The objective Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors response rates were 16% (gemcitabine-docetaxel) and 8% (gemcitabine). Given the data, the posterior probabilities that gemcitabine-docetaxel was superior for progression-free and overall survival were 0.98 and 0.97, respectively. Median progression-free survival was 6.2 months for gemcitabine-docetaxel and 3.0 months for gemcitabine alone; median overall survival was 17.9 months for gemcitabine-docetaxel and 11.5 months for gemcitabine. The posterior probability that patients receiving gemcitabine-docetaxel had a shorter time to discontinuation for toxicity compared with gemcitabine alone was .999.

Conclusion: Gemcitabine-docetaxel yielded superior progression-free and overall survival to gemcitabine alone, but with increased toxicity. Adaptive randomization is an effective method to reduce the number of patients receiving inferior therapy.

Supported by the Kristen Ann Carr Fund, Eli Lilly & Co, and Sanofi-aventis; and in part by a National Cancer Institute program project Grant No. P01-CA47179, the Shuman Fund for GIST Research, and spin4survival.org (R.G.M.).

Presented in part at the 42nd Annual Meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, June 2-6, 2006, Atlanta, GA.

R.G.M. and J.K.W. contributed equally to this manuscript.

Authors’ disclosures of potential conflicts of interest and author contributions are found at the end of this article.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
The OncologistHome page
S. L. Spunt, S. X. Skapek, and C. M. Coffin
Pediatric Nonrhabdomyosarcoma Soft Tissue Sarcomas
Oncologist, June 1, 2008; 13(6): 668 - 678.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
The OncologistHome page
I. Ray-Coquard, A. Le Cesne, J. S. Whelan, P. Schoffski, B. N. Bui, J. Verweij, S. Marreaud, M. van Glabbeke, P. Hogendoorn, and J.-Y. Blay
A Phase II Study of Gefitinib for Patients with Advanced HER-1 Expressing Synovial Sarcoma Refractory to Doxorubicin-Containing Regimens
Oncologist, April 1, 2008; 13(4): 467 - 473.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
The OncologistHome page
R. G. Maki
Gemcitabine and Docetaxel in Metastatic Sarcoma: Past, Present, and Future
Oncologist, August 1, 2007; 12(8): 999 - 1006.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



About
JCO
 Editorial
Roster
 Advertising
Information
 Librarians &
Institutions
 Rights &
Permissions
 Site Map

Copyright © 2007 by the American Society of Clinical Oncology, Online ISSN: 1527-7755. Print ISSN: 0732-183X
Terms and Conditions of Use
  HighWire Press HighWire Press™ assists in the publication of JCO Online