Gemcitabine and docetaxel versus doxorubicin as first-line treatment in previously untreated advanced unresectable or metastatic soft-tissue sarcomas (GeDDiS): a randomised controlled phase 3 trial

Beatrice Seddon, Sandra J Strauss, Jeremy Whelan, Michael Leahy, Penella J Woll, Fiona Cowie, Christian Rothermundt, Zoe Wood, Charlotte Benson, Nasim Ali, Maria Marples, Gareth J Veal, David Jamieson, Katja Küver, Roberto Tirabosco, Sharon Forsyth, Stephen Nash, Hakim-Moulay Dehbi, Sandy Beare, Beatrice Seddon, Sandra J Strauss, Jeremy Whelan, Michael Leahy, Penella J Woll, Fiona Cowie, Christian Rothermundt, Zoe Wood, Charlotte Benson, Nasim Ali, Maria Marples, Gareth J Veal, David Jamieson, Katja Küver, Roberto Tirabosco, Sharon Forsyth, Stephen Nash, Hakim-Moulay Dehbi, Sandy Beare

Abstract

Background: For many years, first-line treatment for locally advanced or metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma has been doxorubicin. This study compared gemcitabine and docetaxel versus doxorubicin as first-line treatment for advanced or metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma.

Methods: The GeDDiS trial was a randomised controlled phase 3 trial done in 24 UK hospitals and one Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research (SAKK) hospital. Eligible patients had histologically confirmed locally advanced or metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma of Trojani grade 2 or 3, disease progression before enrolment, and no previous chemotherapy for sarcoma or previous doxorubicin for any cancer. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive six cycles of intravenous doxorubicin 75 mg/m2 on day 1 every 3 weeks, or intravenous gemcitabine 675 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 and intravenous docetaxel 75 mg/m2 on day 8 every 3 weeks. Treatment was assigned using a minimisation algorithm incorporating a random element. Randomisation was stratified by age (≤18 years vs >18 years) and histological subtype. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients alive and progression free at 24 weeks in the intention-to-treat population. Adherence to treatment and toxicity were analysed in the safety population, consisting of all patients who received at least one dose of their randomised treatment. The trial was registered with the European Clinical Trials (EudraCT) database (no 2009-014907-29) and with the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial registry (ISRCTN07742377), and is now closed to patient entry.

Findings: Between Dec 3, 2010, and Jan 20, 2014, 257 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to the two treatment groups (129 to doxorubicin and 128 to gemcitabine and docetaxel). Median follow-up was 22 months (IQR 15·7-29·3). The proportion of patients alive and progression free at 24 weeks did not differ between those who received doxorubicin versus those who received gemcitabine and docetaxel (46·3% [95% CI 37·5-54·6] vs 46·4% [37·5-54·8]); median progression-free survival (23·3 weeks [95% CI 19·6-30·4] vs 23·7 weeks [18·1-20·0]; hazard ratio [HR] for progression-free survival 1·28, 95% CI 0·99-1·65, p=0·06). The most common grade 3 and 4 adverse events were neutropenia (32 [25%] of 128 patients who received doxorubicin and 25 [20%] of 126 patients who received gemcitabine and docetaxel), febrile neutropenia (26 [20%] and 15 [12%]), fatigue (eight [6%] and 17 [14%]), oral mucositis (18 [14%] and two [2%]), and pain (ten [8%] and 13 [10%]). The three most common serious adverse events, representing 111 (39%) of all 285 serious adverse events recorded, were febrile neutropenia (27 [17%] of 155 serious adverse events in patients who received doxorubicin and 15 [12%] of 130 serious adverse events in patients who received gemcitabine and docetaxel, fever (18 [12%] and 19 [15%]), and neutropenia (22 [14%] and ten [8%]). 154 (60%) of 257 patients died in the intention-to-treat population: 74 (57%) of 129 patients in the doxorubicin group and 80 (63%) of 128 in the gemcitabine and docetaxel group. No deaths were related to the treatment, but two deaths were due to a combination of disease progression and treatment.

Interpretation: Doxorubicin should remain the standard first-line treatment for most patients with advanced soft-tissue sarcoma. These results provide evidence for clinicians to consider with their patients when selecting first-line treatment for locally advanced or metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma.

Funding: Cancer Research UK, Sarcoma UK, and Clinical Trial Unit Kantonsspital St Gallen.

Copyright © 2017 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Trial profile *Other reasons were: 43 multidisciplinary team decision not to approach patient, five deaths, three referred to or treated at other hospital, one patient did not fully understand trial, one trial closed before patient finished radiotherapy. †Clinical decision made not to treat (doxorubicin group), withdrawn consent (gemcitabine and docetaxel group), disease progression (gemcitabine and docetaxel group). ‡Histology review reclassified as ineligible histological subtypes (one gastrointestinal tumour in the doxorubicin group and one extra-skeletal myxoid chondrosarcoma in the gemcitabine and docetaxel group). §Two moved away, one being treated locally. ¶One moved away. ||See appendix p 6 for a breakdown of reasons for treatment discontinuation.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Progression-free survival HR=hazard ratio.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Overall survival HR=hazard ratio.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Quality-of-life outcomes at 12 weeks post-randomisation The plotted points represent the mean treatment effect between the groups (a positive number for the treatment effect indicates a better quality of life on gemcitabine and docetaxel than doxorubicin). For symptom scales and FA13 scores, lower scores are associated with better quality of life. Consequently, values are the opposite between table 4 and figure 4); horizontal lines are 99% CIs. FA13=fatigue questionnaire.

References

    1. Francis MDN, Charman J, Lawrence G, Grimer R. Bone and soft tissue sarcomas UK Incidence and Survival: 1996 to 2010. National Cancer Intelligence Network. 2013. (accessed Aug 25, 2017).
    1. Judson I, Verweij J, Gelderblom H. Doxorubicin alone versus intensified doxorubicin plus ifosfamide for first-line treatment of advanced or metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma: a randomised controlled phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15:415–423.
    1. Karavasilis V, Seddon BM, Ashley S, Al-Muderis O, Fisher C, Judson I. Significant clinical benefit of first-line palliative chemotherapy in advanced soft-tissue sarcoma: retrospective analysis and identification of prognostic factors in 488 patients. Cancer. 2008;112:1585–1591.
    1. Ryan CW, Merimsky O, Agulnik M. PICASSO III: a phase III, placebo-controlled study of doxorubicin with or without palifosfamide in patients with metastatic soft tissue sarcoma. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34:3898–3905.
    1. Tap WD, Papai Z, van Tine BA. Doxorubicin plus evofosfamide versus doxorubicin alone in locally advanced, unresectable or metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma (TH CR-406/SARC021): an international, multicentre, open-label, randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2017;18:1089–1103.
    1. Hensley ML, Maki R, Venkatraman E. Gemcitabine and docetaxel in patients with unresectable leiomyosarcoma: results of a phase II trial. J Clin Oncol. 2002;20:2824–2831.
    1. Leu KM, Ostruszka LJ, Shewach D. Laboratory and clinical evidence of synergistic cytotoxicity of sequential treatment with gemcitabine followed by docetaxel in the treatment of sarcoma. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22:1706–1712.
    1. Hensley ML, Blessing JA, Degeest K, Abulafia O, Rose PG, Homesley HD. Fixed-dose rate gemcitabine plus docetaxel as second-line therapy for metastatic uterine leiomyosarcoma: a Gynecologic Oncology Group phase II study. Gynecol Oncol. 2008;109:323–328.
    1. Hensley ML, Blessing JA, Mannel R, Rose PG. Fixed-dose rate gemcitabine plus docetaxel as first-line therapy for metastatic uterine leiomyosarcoma: a Gynecologic Oncology Group phase II trial. Gynecol Oncol. 2008;109:329–334.
    1. Pautier P, Floquet A, Penel N. Randomized multicenter and stratified phase II study of gemcitabine alone versus gemcitabine and docetaxel in patients with metastatic or relapsed leiomyosarcomas: a Federation Nationale des Centres de Lutte Contre le Cancer (FNCLCC) French Sarcoma Group Study (TAXOGEM study) Oncologist. 2012;17:1213–1220.
    1. Seddon B, Scurr M, Jones RL. A phase II trial to assess the activity of gemcitabine and docetaxel as first line chemotherapy treatment in patients with unresectable leiomyosarcoma. Clin Sarcoma Res. 2015;5:13.
    1. Bay JO, Ray-Coquard I, Fayette J. Docetaxel and gemcitabine combination in 133 advanced soft-tissue sarcomas: a retrospective analysis. Int J Cancer. 2006;119:706–711.
    1. Maki RG, Wathen JK, Patel SR. 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 [corrected] J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:2755–2763.
    1. Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1) Eur J Cancer. 2009;45:228–247.
    1. Alvarellos ML, Lamba J, Sangkuhl K. PharmGKB summary: gemcitabine pathway. Pharmacogenet Genomics. 2014;24:564–574.
    1. Chew SC, Singh O, Chen X. The effects of CYP3A4, CYP3A5, ABCB1, ABCC2, ABCG2 and SLCO1B3 single nucleotide polymorphisms on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of docetaxel in nasopharyngeal carcinoma patients. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol. 2011;67:1471–1478.
    1. Edvardsen H, Brunsvig PF, Solvang H. SNPs in genes coding for ROS metabolism and signalling in association with docetaxel clearance. Pharmacogenomics J. 2010;10:513–523.
    1. Bray J, Sludden J, Griffin MJ. Influence of pharmacogenetics on response and toxicity in breast cancer patients treated with doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide. Br J Cancer. 2010;102:1003–1009.
    1. Sissung TM, Danesi R, Price DK. Association of the CYP1B1*3 allele with survival in patients with prostate cancer receiving docetaxel. Mol Cancer Ther. 2008;7:19–26.
    1. Baker SD, Verweij J, Cusatis GA. Pharmacogenetic pathway analysis of docetaxel elimination. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2009;85:155–163.
    1. Jamieson D, Cresti N, Bray J. Two minor NQO1 and NQO2 alleles predict poor response of breast cancer patients to adjuvant doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide therapy. Pharmacogenet Genomics. 2011;21:808–819.
    1. Lorigan P, Verweij J, Papai Z. Phase III trial of two investigational schedules of ifosfamide compared with standard-dose doxorubicin in advanced or metastatic soft tissue sarcoma: a European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Soft Tissue and Bone Sarcoma Group Study. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:3144–3150.
    1. Wampler GL, Fryer JG. Calculation of received dose intensity for combinations of drugs using small-cell lung carcinoma treatment regimens as examples. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol. 1992;30:199–206.
    1. Group EESNW. Soft tissue and visceral sarcomas: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2012;23(suppl 7):vii92–vii99.
    1. Verschraegen CF, Arias-Pulido H, Lee SJ. Phase IB study of the combination of docetaxel, gemcitabine, and bevacizumab in patients with advanced or recurrent soft tissue sarcoma: the Axtell regimen. Ann Oncol. 2012;23:785–790.
    1. Dickson MA, D'Adamo DR, Keohan ML. Phase II trial of gemcitabine and docetaxel with bevacizumab in soft tissue sarcoma. Sarcoma. 2015;2015:532478.
    1. Munhoz RR, D'Angelo SP, Gounder MM. A phase Ib/II study of gemcitabine and docetaxel in combination with pazopanib for the neoadjuvant treatment of soft tissue sarcomas. Oncologist. 2015;20:1245–1246.
    1. Hensley ML, Miller A, O'Malley DM. Randomized phase III trial of gemcitabine plus docetaxel plus bevacizumab or placebo as first-line treatment for metastatic uterine leiomyosarcoma: an NRG Oncology/Gynecologic Oncology Group study. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33:1180–1185.
    1. Fern LA, Lewandowski JA, Coxon KM. Available, accessible, aware, appropriate, and acceptable: a strategy to improve participation of teenagers and young adults in cancer trials. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15:e341–e350.
    1. Falk AT, Moureau-Zabotto L, Ouali M. Effect on survival of local ablative treatment of metastases from sarcomas: a study of the French sarcoma group. Clinical Oncol. 2015;27:48–55.

Source: PubMed

3
S'abonner