Randomised phase II trial of trofosfamide vs. doxorubicin in elderly patients with untreated metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma

Doxorubicin represents the standard first-line treatment for metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma. We assessed the efficacy and safety of trofosfamide in elderly patients. In this controlled phase II trial, we randomly (1:2) assigned 120 previously untreated patients with soft-tissue sarcoma, older than 60 years, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group score of 0e2, to receive either doxorubicin for 6 cycles (arm A) or oral trofosfamide (arm B). The primary end-point was a 6-month progression-free rate (PFR) in the experimental arm (clinical trial information: NCT00204568). Between August 2004 and October 2012, forty and 80 patients were randomly assigned to arm A and arm B, respectively, in 16 centres. The median age was 70 years (range, 60-89). The primary study end-point (6-month PFR) was exceeded, with 27.6% in arm B (95% confidence interval [CI], 18.0-39.1) and 35.9% in arm A: (95% CI, 21.2-52.8). Survival data in terms of progression-free survival were 4.3 months (95% CI, 2.2 e6.3) and 2.8 months (95% CI, 1.7-3.6) and in terms of overall survival were 9.8 months (95% CI, 6.7-11.6) and 12.3 months (95% CI, 9.6-16.2), respectively. The number of serious adverse event (SAE) was 59% in arm A and 30.3% in arm B (p = 0.005). Trofosfamide caused more often dyspnoea and low-grade fatigue, whereas with doxorubicin, more often leukocytopenia, neutropenia and mucositis were seen. Discontinuation rates for reasons other than disease progression were 15.4% (arm A) vs. 7.9% (arm B). In an elderly population of patients, oral trofosfamide achieved the estimated primary end-point 6-month PFR and was associated with a favourable toxicity profile compared with doxorubicin. (C) 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.