Final report of randomized phase II study of two different outpatient setting regimens, vinorelbine (VNR) with cyclophosphamide (CPA) and temozolomide (TMZ) with etoposide (VP).

Authors

null

Atsushi Ogawa

Niigata Cancer Center, Niigata, Japan

Atsushi Ogawa , Hiroshi Kawamoto , Mari Saito Oba , Ako Hosono , Yoshiyuki Kosaka , Junichi Hara , Yuji Ishida , Kenji Yamada , Katsuyoshi Koh , Yasuhiro Okamoto , Hideo Mugishima , Atsushi Kikuta , Takashi Taga

Organizations

Niigata Cancer Center, Niigata, Japan, National Cancer Center Hospital East, Kashiwa, Chiba, Japan, Toho University, Tokyo, Japan, National Cancer Center Hospital East, Kashiwa, Japan, Hyogo Children's Hospital, Kobe, Japan, Osaka City General Hospital, Osaka, Japan, The Shizuoka Cancer Center, Nagaizumi, Japan, Aichi Cancer Center Aichi Hospital, Okazaki, Japan, Saitama Children's Medical Center, Saitama, Japan, Kagoshima University Hospital, Kagoshima, Japan, Nihon University, Tokyo, Japan, Fukushima Medical University, Fukushima, Japan, Shiga University of Medical Science, Otsu, Japan

Research Funding

Other Foundation

Background: The efficacy, safety, and feasibility of TMZ with VP (TE) have not been evaluated in pediatric patients (pts) and those of VNR with CPA (VC) have not been confirmed in Japanese pts. Methods: This multicenter, crossover randomized phase II study included children and young adults with recurrent or refractory solid cancer who received disease-specific standard chemotherapies. The study design has been reported in ASCO2010 (TPS328). In group A, VNR (25 mg/m2) and CPA (25 mg/m2) (VC) were administered intravenously on days 1, 8, and 15, and orally on days 1–28, every 28 days, then switched to TMZ (150 mg/m2) and VP (50 mg/m2) (TE) which were administered orally on days 1 - 5 and 1 - 12, every 28 days if they became progressive or intolerant. In group B, TE was given first, then switched to VC. Response was evaluated according to RECIST 1.1. Toxicity and complaints were assessed by using CTCAE v4.0. and face scales, respectively. Results: In group A, 34 pts (median age 15 years, range 3–29) included 8 neuroblastoma (NB), 4 rhabdomyosarcoma (RMS), 7 Ewing sarcoma family tumor (ES), 2 osteosarcoma (OS), 4 CNS tumors (BT), and 9 others. In group B, 33 pts (median age 14 years, range 3–30) included 7 NB, 5 RMS, 6 ES, 8 OS, 3 BT and 4 others. Treatment was well tolerated. No unexpected toxicities were observed. Febrile neutropenia occurred only in VC. In the first regimen, the response rates were 2.9% in VC with 1 PR and 18.2% in TE with 2 CR and 4 PR. The disease control rates were 29.4% in VC with 1 PR, 9 SD and 30.3% in TE with 2 CR, 4 PR and 4 SD. VC and TE improved pain, dyspnea, agitation, fatigue, and anorexia in 40%, 12%, 34%, 43% and 40%, and 38%, 23%, 33%, 28%, 33%, respectively. The 1-year overall survival for groups A and B were 35% (95% CI 21%-51%) and 45% (95% CI 31%-64%). The median survival days for A and B were 271.5 days (95% CI 164-411) and 354 days (95% CI 174-449). The 1-year last progression free survival for A and B were 24% (95% CI 11%-39%) and 21% (95% CI 9%-36%). Conclusions: In recurrent or refractory pediatric solid cancer with poor prognosis, VC, TE and those sequential administration are effective and alleviate tumor associated symptoms without severe toxicity. Clinical trial information: UMIN000003002.

Disclaimer

This material on this page is ©2024 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org

Abstract Details

Meeting

2016 ASCO Annual Meeting

Session Type

Poster Session

Session Title

Pediatric Oncology

Track

Pediatric Oncology

Sub Track

Pediatric Solid Tumors

Clinical Trial Registration Number

UMIN000003002

Citation

J Clin Oncol 34, 2016 (suppl; abstr 10550)

DOI

10.1200/JCO.2016.34.15_suppl.10550

Abstract #

10550

Poster Bd #

241

Abstract Disclosures