Thomas Schmitt, Florentina Kosely, Patrick Wuchter, Johann-Wilhelm Schmier, Anthony D Ho, Gerlinde Egerer
{"title":"吉西他滨和多西紫杉醇治疗转移性软组织肉瘤-单中心经验。","authors":"Thomas Schmitt, Florentina Kosely, Patrick Wuchter, Johann-Wilhelm Schmier, Anthony D Ho, Gerlinde Egerer","doi":"10.1159/000353564","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Prognosis and survival for patients with metastatic soft tissue sarcoma (STS) are dismal. Standard first-line systemic chemotherapy is anthracycline-based. Gemcitabine/docetaxel (GD) is a therapeutic option in the second-line setting. Here we present the data of our single center retrospective analysis, using GD in locally advanced or metastatic disease.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>Between 2005 and 2012, a total of 34 patients were identified. The majority of tumors were located in the extremities (19/34, 56%) and abdomen/retroperitoneum (10/34, 29%). Most frequent histologies included leiomyosarcoma (13/34, 38%), liposarcoma (7/34, 21%), and pleomorphic sarcoma (6/34, 18%).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Objective response to treatment by RECIST criteria after 3 cycles was low with 6% partial responses (PR, 2/34), 65% stable disease (SD, 22/34), and 29% progressive disease (PD, 10/34). Progression-free survival at 3 and 6 months was 77 and 62%, respectively. Patients with a clinical benefit (defined as PR or SD after the 3rd treatment cycle) had a significantly prolonged median progression-free and overall survival with 8.6 months (p < 0.0001; hazard ratio (HR) 33.1) and 22.4 months (p < 0.0001; HR 12.9), respectively. Most common toxicities included hand-foot syndrome, edema, pancytopenia, febrile neutropenia, and mucositis.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Overall, we conclude that GD is an active second-line regimen in metastatic STS, with manageable side effects.</p>","PeriodicalId":19684,"journal":{"name":"Onkologie","volume":"36 7-8","pages":"415-20"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2013-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1159/000353564","citationCount":"10","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Gemcitabine and docetaxel for metastatic soft tissue sarcoma - a single center experience.\",\"authors\":\"Thomas Schmitt, Florentina Kosely, Patrick Wuchter, Johann-Wilhelm Schmier, Anthony D Ho, Gerlinde Egerer\",\"doi\":\"10.1159/000353564\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Prognosis and survival for patients with metastatic soft tissue sarcoma (STS) are dismal. Standard first-line systemic chemotherapy is anthracycline-based. Gemcitabine/docetaxel (GD) is a therapeutic option in the second-line setting. Here we present the data of our single center retrospective analysis, using GD in locally advanced or metastatic disease.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>Between 2005 and 2012, a total of 34 patients were identified. The majority of tumors were located in the extremities (19/34, 56%) and abdomen/retroperitoneum (10/34, 29%). Most frequent histologies included leiomyosarcoma (13/34, 38%), liposarcoma (7/34, 21%), and pleomorphic sarcoma (6/34, 18%).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Objective response to treatment by RECIST criteria after 3 cycles was low with 6% partial responses (PR, 2/34), 65% stable disease (SD, 22/34), and 29% progressive disease (PD, 10/34). Progression-free survival at 3 and 6 months was 77 and 62%, respectively. Patients with a clinical benefit (defined as PR or SD after the 3rd treatment cycle) had a significantly prolonged median progression-free and overall survival with 8.6 months (p < 0.0001; hazard ratio (HR) 33.1) and 22.4 months (p < 0.0001; HR 12.9), respectively. Most common toxicities included hand-foot syndrome, edema, pancytopenia, febrile neutropenia, and mucositis.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Overall, we conclude that GD is an active second-line regimen in metastatic STS, with manageable side effects.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19684,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Onkologie\",\"volume\":\"36 7-8\",\"pages\":\"415-20\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2013-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1159/000353564\",\"citationCount\":\"10\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Onkologie\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1159/000353564\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2013/7/8 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Onkologie","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000353564","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2013/7/8 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
Gemcitabine and docetaxel for metastatic soft tissue sarcoma - a single center experience.
Background: Prognosis and survival for patients with metastatic soft tissue sarcoma (STS) are dismal. Standard first-line systemic chemotherapy is anthracycline-based. Gemcitabine/docetaxel (GD) is a therapeutic option in the second-line setting. Here we present the data of our single center retrospective analysis, using GD in locally advanced or metastatic disease.
Patients and methods: Between 2005 and 2012, a total of 34 patients were identified. The majority of tumors were located in the extremities (19/34, 56%) and abdomen/retroperitoneum (10/34, 29%). Most frequent histologies included leiomyosarcoma (13/34, 38%), liposarcoma (7/34, 21%), and pleomorphic sarcoma (6/34, 18%).
Results: Objective response to treatment by RECIST criteria after 3 cycles was low with 6% partial responses (PR, 2/34), 65% stable disease (SD, 22/34), and 29% progressive disease (PD, 10/34). Progression-free survival at 3 and 6 months was 77 and 62%, respectively. Patients with a clinical benefit (defined as PR or SD after the 3rd treatment cycle) had a significantly prolonged median progression-free and overall survival with 8.6 months (p < 0.0001; hazard ratio (HR) 33.1) and 22.4 months (p < 0.0001; HR 12.9), respectively. Most common toxicities included hand-foot syndrome, edema, pancytopenia, febrile neutropenia, and mucositis.
Conclusion: Overall, we conclude that GD is an active second-line regimen in metastatic STS, with manageable side effects.