Hepatic intra-arterial versus intravenous fotemustine in patients with liver metastases from uveal melanoma (EORTC 18021): a multicentric randomized trial.
Fiche du document
2014
- doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdt585
- issn: 0923-7534
Ce document est lié à :
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.1093/annonc/mdt585
Ce document est lié à :
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/pmid/24510314
Ce document est lié à :
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/eissn/1569-8041
Ce document est lié à :
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/urn/urn:nbn:ch:serval-BIB_2BB4E42638302
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess , Copying allowed only for non-profit organizations , https://serval.unil.ch/disclaimer
Sujets proches
Upper limb Limb, Upper Upper extremities Extremity, Upper Pectoral limbs Limb, Pectoral Thoracic limbs Extremities, Upper Upper limbs Limb, Thoracic Arms (Anatomy) Thoracic limb Upper extremity Pectoral limbCiter ce document
S. Leyvraz et al., « Hepatic intra-arterial versus intravenous fotemustine in patients with liver metastases from uveal melanoma (EORTC 18021): a multicentric randomized trial. », Serveur académique Lausannois, ID : 10.1093/annonc/mdt585
Métriques
Partage / Export
Résumé
BACKGROUND: In uveal melanoma (UM) with metastatic disease limited to the liver, the effect of an intrahepatic treatment on survival is unknown. We investigated prospectively the efficacy and toxicity of hepatic intra-arterial (HIA) versus systemic (IV) fotemustine in patients with liver metastases from UM. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned to receive either IV or HIA fotemustine at 100 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8, 15 (and 22 in HIA arm only) as induction, and after a 5-week rest period every 3 weeks as maintenance. Primary end point was overall survival (OS). Response rate (RR), progression-free survival (PFS) and safety were secondary end points. RESULTS: Accrual was stopped after randomization of 171 patients based on the results of a futility OS analysis. A total of 155 patients died and 16 were still alive [median follow-up 1.6 years (range 0.25-6 years)]. HIA did not improve OS (median 14.6 months) when compared with the IV arm (median 13.8 months), hazard ratio (HR) 1.09; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.79-1.50, log-rank P = 0.59. However, there was a significant benefit on PFS for HIA compared with IV with a median of 4.5 versus 3.5 months, respectively (HR 0.62; 95% CI 0.45-0.84, log-rank P = 0.002). The 1-year PFS rate was 24% in the HIA arm versus 8% in the IV arm. An improved RR was seen in the HIA (10.5%) compared with IV treatment (2.4%). In the IV arm, the most frequent grade ≥3 toxicity was thrombocytopenia (42.1%) and neutropenia (62.6%), compared with 21.2% and 28.7% in the HIA arm. The main grade ≥3 toxicity related to HIA was catheter complications (12%) and liver toxicity (4.5%) apart from two toxic deaths. CONCLUSION: HIA treatment with fotemustine did not translate into an improved OS compared with IV treatment, despite better RR and PFS. Intrahepatic treatment should still be considered as experimental. EUDRACT NUMBER AND CLINICALTRIALSGOV IDENTIFIER: 2004-002245-12 and NCT00110123.