Skip to content

Dacarbazine for Metastatic Soft Tissue and Bone Sarcoma

Determination of Tumor Response Rate by RECIST and FDG-PET Criteria to Dacarbazine in Metastatic Soft Tissue and Bone Sarcoma

Status
Completed
Phases
Phase 2
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT00802880
Enrollment
80
Registered
2008-12-05
Start date
2009-03-31
Completion date
2015-01-31
Last updated
2017-02-13

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Sarcoma

Brief summary

The purpose of this study is to determine the overall best tumor response rate to dacarbazine given until disease progression as assessed by RECIST criteria, CT and clinical exams in patients with metastatic sarcomas.

Detailed description

The two reasons why dacarbazine was eliminated from treatment options for patients with metastatic sarcoma included inability to effectively address the drug's major toxicities (emesis and neutropenia) and the prevailing opinion that the drug was less effective than other chemotherapeutic agents. Specific Aim #1: The primary endpoint of this study is to determine the overall best tumor anatomic response rate (CR- complete response, PR - partial response, SD - stable disease, or PD - progressive disease) to dacarbazine given until disease progression as assessed by RECIST criteria using CT and clinical examination in patients with metastatic sarcoma. The prevailing opinion that dacarbazine was less effective than other chemotherapeutic agents in this setting was not based on data from controlled randomized clinical trials. Indeed, we are not aware of a single randomized trial that was conducted and reported which compared the anti-tumor activity of single agent dacarbazine to that of other active single agents in this patient population. However, phase two trials clearly established that dacarbazine had anti-tumor activity in the treatment of metastatic sarcoma, and our personal experience at this institution has confirmed that this is true. In addition, randomized trials demonstrated that the addition of dacarbazine to doxorubicin increased tumor response rates over doxorubicin alone.12 The literature supports the conclusion that dacarbazine has anti-tumor activity in the treatment of metastatic sarcoma. Historically, in most studies, tumor response to dacarbazine was assessed by WHO criteria. However, current assessment of tumor response usually is based on RECIST criteria, which differ from the WHO criteria, as shown: Studies have not been performed to determine the tumor anatomic response rate of single agent dacarbazine using RECIST criteria. This study will determine the tumor anatomic response rate as assessed by RECIST criteria to dacarbazine in patients with metastatic sarcoma. Modern methods of CT scans will be used to assess tumor response which contrasts with the earlier methods to assess tumor response to dacarbazine used in most of the published reports. These methods included physical examination and conventional X-ray or first generation, lower resolution CT scans. The current methods of radiologic assessment of tumor response are superior to those used over 15 years ago. The latest generation of CT scans more accurately measure and image a tumor mass, which may better assess tumor response to therapy. Specific Aim #2: To determine the overall risk of nausea/emesis (any grade) and neutropenia (grade 3 or 4) with dacarbazine when given with current antiemetic agents (5-hydroxytryptamine-3 serotonin antagonist, dexamethasone, and aprepitant) and with pegfilgrastim. Historically, dacarbazine-induced toxicities such as emesis and myelosuppression were common and led to significant dose reductions and delays which could have negatively impacted the drug's anti-tumor activity. When dacarbazine was initially identified as a potentially effective agent for the treatment of sarcoma, the anti-emetic drugs available had limited efficacy. Also, there were no measures available to prevent chemotherapy-induced neutropenia. Today, there are very effective drugs that can prevent and reduce the frequency of both chemotherapy-induced emesis and neutropenia. Dacarbazine carries the risk of emesis (all grades) of \>90% of cases when administered without antiemetics13. A three-drug anti-emetic combination of a 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 serotonin antagonist, dexamethasone, and aprepitant is the current recommendation from ASCO when administering highly emetogenic chemotherapy drugs13. Hesketh, et al reported that the risk of emesis (all grades) following highly emetogenic chemotherapy (cisplatin) and pre-medication with this three drug anti-emetic regimen was 27% compared to a two drug regimen of ondansetron and dexamethasone in which the risk was 48% (p\< 0.001)14. Prior studies showed that the risk of grade 3 or 4 neutropenia following dacarbazine given without granulocyte- colony stimulating factors was 36%15. Granulocyte- colony stimulating factors (pegfilgrastim or neupogen) are effective agents in preventing chemotherapy-induced neutropenia. Crawford, et al showed in a randomized trial that risk of chemotherapy- induced grade four neutropenia was one day with G-CSF compared to six days with placebo15. Subsequent randomized trials showed equivalent efficacy of pegfilgrastim compared with neupogen16. Vogel, et al reported in a phase three double blinded randomized trial of patients with breast cancer receiving docetaxel 100 mg/m2 that pegfilgrastim compared to placebo reduced the incidence of febrile neutropenia ( 1% vs 17%, p\< 0.001) and febrile neutropenia-related hospitalization (1% vs 14%, p\< 0.001)17. In this trial, we hypothesize that the implementation of these newer anti-nausea agents (5-hydroxytryptamine-3 serotonin antagonist, dexamethasone, and aprepitant) and granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (pegfilgrastim) as a primary prophylactic strategy will reduce the frequency of dacarbazine-induced nausea/emesis (any grade) and neutropenia (grade 3 or 4). Specific Aim #3: To compare the SUV at up to three target tumor sites and to determine the overall tumor metabolic response (complete metabolic response, partial metabolic response, stable metabolic disease or progressive metabolic disease (CMR, PMR, SMD, or PMD) as assessed by FDG-PET/CT performed at baseline and then after every three cycles of treatment with dacarbazine. Studies have not been performed to determine the changes in FDG uptake by PET imaging following dacarbazine in patients with metastatic sarcoma. There is limited published data about changes in FDG uptake by PET imaging following other chemotherapy agents in patients with metastatic sarcoma. However, there is an emerging body of data showing the prognostic impact of early tumor response to targeted agents (imatinib or sunitinib) as assessed by FDG-PET in patients with metastatic GIST18. In this trial, we will determine the tumor metabolic response to dacarbazine as assessed by FDG-PET/CT and correlate this to the tumor anatomic response as assessed by CT scans.

Interventions

DRUGDacarbazine

Sponsors

Washington University School of Medicine
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
NA
Intervention model
SINGLE_GROUP
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Histologically proven diagnosis of soft tissue or bone sarcoma * Metastatic or locally recurrent and unresectable sarcoma which progressed after one or more prior chemotherapy regimens (excluding adjuvant chemotherapy). * At least one measurable tumor lesion (by CT scan) At least one FDG avid (SUV ≥ 3) tumor lesion (by PET/CT) which must have been performed at this institution. At least one of these target lesions must be ≥ 1.5 cm in smallest dimension as measured on the baseline CT * Age greater than 18 yrs old * ECOG Performance Status of 0-2 * Baseline ANC ≥ 1000/uL, Hgb ≥ 8 Gr/dL, platelets ≥ 100,000/ dL. * Baseline serum creatinine \</= 2.0 mg/dL * Baseline serum total bilirubin \</= 2.0, AST or ALT \< 3x ULN * No active infection * Signed Informed Consent by patient or legally authorized representative

Exclusion criteria

* Current pregnancy or breast feeding. * A serious uncontrolled medical disorder that in the opinion of the Investigator would impair the ability of the subject to receive protocol therapy. * Chemotherapy, radiation therapy, or investigational agents given with the last 21 days. * Investigational agents given with the last 30 days * Uncontrolled diabetes mellitus. (Subjects with a fasting blood glucose \> 200 at time of PET scanning may need to reschedule to another day after consulting with appropriate physicians.)

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Best Anatomical Tumor ResponseAfter completion of 3 cycles* Complete response (CR): disappearance of all target lesions, disappearance of all non-target lesions, normalization of tumor level marker * Partial response (PR): at least 30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter (LD) of target lesions taking as reference the baseline sum LD, persistence of one or more non-target lesion and/or maintenance of tumor marker level above the upper limits of normal * Stable disease (SD): neither sufficient shrinkage in target lesions to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for progressive disease taking as references the smallest sum LD since the treatment started, persistence of one or more non-target lesion and/or maintenance of tumor marker level above the normal limits of normal * Progressive disease (PD): at least 20% increase in the sum of the LD of target lesions and/or appearance of one or more new lesions and/or unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Rate of Nausea/Emesis (Any Grade)Completion of 6 cycles of treatment (18 weeks)Approximately 18 weeks
Comparison of the SUV at up to 3 Tumor SitesBaseline and after every three cycles of treatment (up to 1 year)
Overall Tumor Metabolic ResponseAfter completion of 3 cycles* Complete metabolic response (CMR)-complete resolution of all metabolically active target and non-target lesions, and no interval development of new lesions. * Partial metabolic response (PMR) * Target lesions: 20% or greater decrease in maximum SUV from baseline. No unequivocal metabolic progression of non-target disease, and no unequivocal new lesions. * Non-target lesions: decrease in total number of non-target lesions, without complete resolution of metabolically active disease, or unequivocal decrease in degree of FDG activity within \>50% of the lesions. No unequivocal new lesions. * Stable metabolic disease (SMD): does not qualify for CMR, PMR, or PMD. * Progressive metabolic disease (PMD): * Unequivocal development of one more new metabolically active lesions * Target lesion: 20% or greater increase in maximum SUV from baseline. * Non-target lesions: unequivocal increase in FDG activity
Correlate the Tumor Metabolic Response Rate With the Tumor Anatomic Response RateAfter completion of 3 cycles
Overall Disease Control Rate12 months
Rate of Neutropenia (Grade 3/4)Completion of 6 cycles of treatment (18 weeks)* Grade 3 neutropenia = absolute neutrophil count of \<1000 - 500/mm\^3 * Grade 4 neutropenia = absolute neutrophil count of \<500/mm\^3
Overall SurvivalUntil completion of follow-up or patient death (estimated to be 1 year)
Correlate the Time to Progression With Best Anatomic ResponseCompletion of follow-up (estimated to be 1 year)-Progression - At least a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter (LD) of target lesions taking as references the smallest sum LD recorded since the treatment started or the appearance of one or more new lesions.
Correlate Time to Progression With Best Metabolic ResponseCompletion of follow-up (estimated to be 1 year)-Progression - At least a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter (LD) of target lesions taking as references the smallest sum LD recorded since the treatment started or the appearance of one or more new lesions.
Correlate Overall Survival With Best Anatomic ResponseCompletion of follow-up (estimated to be 1 year)
Correlate Overall Survival With Best Metabolic ResponseCompletion of follow-up (estimated to be 1 year)
Time to Progression (TTP)Until completion of follow-up (estimated to be 1 year)-Progression - At least a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter (LD) of target lesions taking as references the smallest sum LD recorded since the treatment started or the appearance of one or more new lesions.

Countries

United States

Participant flow

Recruitment details

The study opened to accrual on 03/16/2009 and closed to accrual on 12/15/2014.

Participants by arm

ArmCount
Dacarbazine
Dacarbazine 850 mg/m\^2 IV Day 1 of each 21 day cycle.
80
Total80

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicDacarbazine
Age, Continuous53 years
Gender
Female
40 Participants
Gender
Male
40 Participants
Region of Enrollment
United States
80 participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
— / —
other
Total, other adverse events
80 / 80
serious
Total, serious adverse events
16 / 80

Outcome results

Primary

Best Anatomical Tumor Response

* Complete response (CR): disappearance of all target lesions, disappearance of all non-target lesions, normalization of tumor level marker * Partial response (PR): at least 30% decrease in the sum of the longest diameter (LD) of target lesions taking as reference the baseline sum LD, persistence of one or more non-target lesion and/or maintenance of tumor marker level above the upper limits of normal * Stable disease (SD): neither sufficient shrinkage in target lesions to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for progressive disease taking as references the smallest sum LD since the treatment started, persistence of one or more non-target lesion and/or maintenance of tumor marker level above the normal limits of normal * Progressive disease (PD): at least 20% increase in the sum of the LD of target lesions and/or appearance of one or more new lesions and/or unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions

Time frame: After completion of 3 cycles

Population: 3 patients failed to complete 3 cycles of treatment due to toxicity. 22 patients failed to complete 3 cycles of treatment due to progressive disease. 1 patient only had PET scan.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
DacarbazineBest Anatomical Tumor ResponseComplete response0 participants
DacarbazineBest Anatomical Tumor ResponsePartial response2 participants
DacarbazineBest Anatomical Tumor ResponseStable disease22 participants
DacarbazineBest Anatomical Tumor ResponseProgressive disease30 participants
Secondary

Comparison of the SUV at up to 3 Tumor Sites

Time frame: Baseline and after every three cycles of treatment (up to 1 year)

Population: The lower confidence limit is 85% and the upper confidence limit is 95%. 51 patients evaluable at baseline, 50 patients evaluable at end of cycle 3, 20 patients evaluable at end of cycle 6, 7 patients evaluable at end of cycle 9, and 5 patients evaluable at end of cycle 12.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)
DacarbazineComparison of the SUV at up to 3 Tumor SitesBaseline7.42 standard uptake value
DacarbazineComparison of the SUV at up to 3 Tumor SitesEnd of cycle 37.57 standard uptake value
DacarbazineComparison of the SUV at up to 3 Tumor SitesEnd of cycle 67.7 standard uptake value
DacarbazineComparison of the SUV at up to 3 Tumor SitesEnd of cycle 96.89 standard uptake value
DacarbazineComparison of the SUV at up to 3 Tumor SitesEnd of cycle 127.48 standard uptake value
Secondary

Correlate Overall Survival With Best Anatomic Response

Time frame: Completion of follow-up (estimated to be 1 year)

Population: 26 patients were not evaluable for this outcome measure for various reasons including unknown survival status, progressive disease prior to cycle 3, no anatomic response noted, and toxicity.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEDIAN)
DacarbazineCorrelate Overall Survival With Best Anatomic ResponsePartial response18.16 months
DacarbazineCorrelate Overall Survival With Best Anatomic ResponseStable disease14.77 months
DacarbazineCorrelate Overall Survival With Best Anatomic ResponseProgressive disease7.96 months
Secondary

Correlate Overall Survival With Best Metabolic Response

Time frame: Completion of follow-up (estimated to be 1 year)

Population: 28 patients were not evaluable for this outcome measure due to various reason such as progressive disease prior to cycle 3, unknown survival status, no target lesion on PET scan, and toxicity.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEDIAN)
DacarbazineCorrelate Overall Survival With Best Metabolic ResponsePartial metabolic response18.16 months
DacarbazineCorrelate Overall Survival With Best Metabolic ResponseStable metabolic disease18.59 months
DacarbazineCorrelate Overall Survival With Best Metabolic ResponseProgressive metabolic disease8.75 months
Secondary

Correlate the Time to Progression With Best Anatomic Response

-Progression - At least a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter (LD) of target lesions taking as references the smallest sum LD recorded since the treatment started or the appearance of one or more new lesions.

Time frame: Completion of follow-up (estimated to be 1 year)

Population: 29 patients were not evaluable due to various reasons such as toxicity, progressive disease prior to completion of cycle 3, patient refusal, and no anatomic response recorded.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEDIAN)
DacarbazineCorrelate the Time to Progression With Best Anatomic ResponsePartial responseNA months
DacarbazineCorrelate the Time to Progression With Best Anatomic ResponseStable disease4.14 months
DacarbazineCorrelate the Time to Progression With Best Anatomic ResponseProgressive disease1.97 months
Secondary

Correlate the Tumor Metabolic Response Rate With the Tumor Anatomic Response Rate

Time frame: After completion of 3 cycles

Population: 31 patients were not evaluable due to various reasons such as toxicity, progressive disease prior to completion of cycle 3, patient refusal, and no target lesions on PET scan.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
DacarbazineCorrelate the Tumor Metabolic Response Rate With the Tumor Anatomic Response RatePR1 participants
DacarbazineCorrelate the Tumor Metabolic Response Rate With the Tumor Anatomic Response RateSD2 participants
DacarbazineCorrelate the Tumor Metabolic Response Rate With the Tumor Anatomic Response RatePD1 participants
DacarbazineCorrelate the Tumor Metabolic Response Rate With the Tumor Anatomic Response RateTotal4 participants
Stable Metabolic DiseaseCorrelate the Tumor Metabolic Response Rate With the Tumor Anatomic Response RateSD10 participants
Stable Metabolic DiseaseCorrelate the Tumor Metabolic Response Rate With the Tumor Anatomic Response RatePD2 participants
Stable Metabolic DiseaseCorrelate the Tumor Metabolic Response Rate With the Tumor Anatomic Response RateTotal12 participants
Stable Metabolic DiseaseCorrelate the Tumor Metabolic Response Rate With the Tumor Anatomic Response RatePR0 participants
Progressive Metabolic DiseaseCorrelate the Tumor Metabolic Response Rate With the Tumor Anatomic Response RatePD24 participants
Progressive Metabolic DiseaseCorrelate the Tumor Metabolic Response Rate With the Tumor Anatomic Response RateSD8 participants
Progressive Metabolic DiseaseCorrelate the Tumor Metabolic Response Rate With the Tumor Anatomic Response RateTotal33 participants
Progressive Metabolic DiseaseCorrelate the Tumor Metabolic Response Rate With the Tumor Anatomic Response RatePR1 participants
TotalCorrelate the Tumor Metabolic Response Rate With the Tumor Anatomic Response RateTotal49 participants
TotalCorrelate the Tumor Metabolic Response Rate With the Tumor Anatomic Response RateSD20 participants
TotalCorrelate the Tumor Metabolic Response Rate With the Tumor Anatomic Response RatePR2 participants
TotalCorrelate the Tumor Metabolic Response Rate With the Tumor Anatomic Response RatePD27 participants
Secondary

Correlate Time to Progression With Best Metabolic Response

-Progression - At least a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter (LD) of target lesions taking as references the smallest sum LD recorded since the treatment started or the appearance of one or more new lesions.

Time frame: Completion of follow-up (estimated to be 1 year)

Population: 31 patients were not evaluable due to various reasons such as toxicity, progressive disease prior to completion of cycle 3, patient refusal, and no target lesions on PET scan.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEDIAN)
DacarbazineCorrelate Time to Progression With Best Metabolic ResponsePartial metabolic response3.95 months
DacarbazineCorrelate Time to Progression With Best Metabolic ResponseStable metabolic disease5.30 months
DacarbazineCorrelate Time to Progression With Best Metabolic ResponseProgressive metabolic disease2.07 months
Secondary

Overall Disease Control Rate

Time frame: 12 months

Population: Only 6 patients were evaluable for response at the end of 12 cycles.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
DacarbazineOverall Disease Control RateComplete response0 participants
DacarbazineOverall Disease Control RatePartial response0 participants
DacarbazineOverall Disease Control RateStable disease5 participants
DacarbazineOverall Disease Control RateProgressive disease1 participants
Secondary

Overall Survival

Time frame: Until completion of follow-up or patient death (estimated to be 1 year)

Population: One patient with invalid time or censoring value was not included.

ArmMeasureValue (MEDIAN)
DacarbazineOverall Survival8.09 months
Secondary

Overall Tumor Metabolic Response

* Complete metabolic response (CMR)-complete resolution of all metabolically active target and non-target lesions, and no interval development of new lesions. * Partial metabolic response (PMR) * Target lesions: 20% or greater decrease in maximum SUV from baseline. No unequivocal metabolic progression of non-target disease, and no unequivocal new lesions. * Non-target lesions: decrease in total number of non-target lesions, without complete resolution of metabolically active disease, or unequivocal decrease in degree of FDG activity within \>50% of the lesions. No unequivocal new lesions. * Stable metabolic disease (SMD): does not qualify for CMR, PMR, or PMD. * Progressive metabolic disease (PMD): * Unequivocal development of one more new metabolically active lesions * Target lesion: 20% or greater increase in maximum SUV from baseline. * Non-target lesions: unequivocal increase in FDG activity

Time frame: After completion of 3 cycles

Population: 29 patients were not evaluable due to various reasons such as toxicity, progressive disease prior to completion of cycle 3, patient refusal, and no target lesions on PET scan.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
DacarbazineOverall Tumor Metabolic ResponseSMD13 participants
DacarbazineOverall Tumor Metabolic ResponseCMR0 participants
DacarbazineOverall Tumor Metabolic ResponsePMR4 participants
DacarbazineOverall Tumor Metabolic ResponsePMD34 participants
Secondary

Rate of Nausea/Emesis (Any Grade)

Approximately 18 weeks

Time frame: Completion of 6 cycles of treatment (18 weeks)

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
DacarbazineRate of Nausea/Emesis (Any Grade)22.5 percentage of participants
Secondary

Rate of Neutropenia (Grade 3/4)

* Grade 3 neutropenia = absolute neutrophil count of \<1000 - 500/mm\^3 * Grade 4 neutropenia = absolute neutrophil count of \<500/mm\^3

Time frame: Completion of 6 cycles of treatment (18 weeks)

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
DacarbazineRate of Neutropenia (Grade 3/4)7.5 percentage of participants
Secondary

Time to Progression (TTP)

-Progression - At least a 20% increase in the sum of the longest diameter (LD) of target lesions taking as references the smallest sum LD recorded since the treatment started or the appearance of one or more new lesions.

Time frame: Until completion of follow-up (estimated to be 1 year)

Population: 10 patient observations with invalid time or censoring values were not included.

ArmMeasureValue (MEDIAN)
DacarbazineTime to Progression (TTP)2.07 months

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026