AzTrials
AzTrials

SarcomaPhase 2NCT00802880

Dacarbazine for Metastatic Soft Tissue and Bone Sarcoma

A Phase 2 study testing Dacarbazine in people with Sarcoma, run by Washington University School of Medicine at 1 site in United States.

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial 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. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 18 years and older
Conditions the study is for
Sarcoma
What is being tested?
Dacarbazine
Type of treatment
Injection or infusion
Could I receive a placebo?
No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people
80 participants
Where
1 siteUnited States
Study dates
Mar 2009to Jan 2015
Phase
Phase 2
Are there results?
Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages 18 years and older
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

  • 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.
Show all 10Show fewer
  • 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

Who cannot join

  • 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.)

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country.

United States1 site
  • Washington University School of Medicine

    St Louis, Missouri, 63110

Other trials in United States

About this study

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

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.

Read the 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.

Conditions
Sarcoma
Being tested
Dacarbazine
Medical subject headings
Sarcoma

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • DacarbazineDrug

    Also called DTIC, DTIC-Dome, DIC

Study groups in NCT00802880
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
DacarbazineExperimentalDacarbazine 850 mg/m^2 IV Day 1 of each 21 day cycle.
Receives: Drug: Dacarbazine

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. 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

    Measured: After completion of 3 cycles

Secondary outcomes (12)
  1. 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

    Measured: Completion of 6 cycles of treatment (18 weeks)

  2. Rate of Nausea/Emesis (Any Grade)

    Approximately 18 weeks

    Measured: Completion of 6 cycles of treatment (18 weeks)

  3. Comparison of the SUV at up to 3 Tumor Sites

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

  4. 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

    Measured: After completion of 3 cycles

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

    Measured: After completion of 3 cycles

  6. Overall Disease Control Rate

    Measured: 12 months

  7. 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.

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

  8. Overall Survival

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

  9. 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.

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

  10. 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.

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

  11. Correlate Overall Survival With Best Anatomic Response

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

  12. Correlate Overall Survival With Best Metabolic Response

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

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted5 Dec 2008 (estimated)
  2. Study startMar 2009
  3. Primary completionJan 2015
  4. Study completionJan 2015

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Interventional
Phase
Phase 2
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Not applicable
Intervention model
Single group
Masking
None (open label)
Enrolment
80 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT00802880
Sponsor's protocol ID
08-1299 / 201109179
Status last verified
Dec 2016
First submitted
4 Dec 2008
Last updated
13 Feb 2017
Data monitoring committee
No

Publications

  • Antman K, Crowley J, Balcerzak SP, Rivkin SE, Weiss GR, Elias A, Natale RB, Cooper RM, Barlogie B, Trump DL, et al. An intergroup phase III randomized study of doxorubicin and dacarbazine with or without ifosfamide and mesna in advanced soft tissue and bone sarcomas. J Clin Oncol. 1993 Jul;11(7):1276-85. doi: 10.1200/JCO.1993.11.7.1276.

    PubMed 8315425
  • Gottlieb JA, Benjamin RS, Baker LH, O'Bryan RM, Sinkovics JG, Hoogstraten B, Quagliana JM, Rivkin SE, Bodey GP Sr, Rodriguez V, Blumenschein GR, Saiki JH, Coltman C Jr, Burgess MA, Sullivan P, Thigpen T, Bottomley R, Balcerzak S, Moon TE. Role of DTIC (NSC-45388) in the chemotherapy of sarcomas. Cancer Treat Rep. 1976 Feb;60(2):199-203.

    PubMed 769974
  • Buesa JM, Mouridsen HT, van Oosterom AT, Verweij J, Wagener T, Steward W, Poveda A, Vestlev PM, Thomas D, Sylvester R. High-dose DTIC in advanced soft-tissue sarcomas in the adult. A phase II study of the E.O.R.T.C. Soft Tissue and Bone Sarcoma Group. Ann Oncol. 1991 Apr;2(4):307-9. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.annonc.a057942.

    PubMed 1868027
  • Borden EC, Amato DA, Rosenbaum C, Enterline HT, Shiraki MJ, Creech RH, Lerner HJ, Carbone PP. Randomized comparison of three adriamycin regimens for metastatic soft tissue sarcomas. J Clin Oncol. 1987 Jun;5(6):840-50. doi: 10.1200/JCO.1987.5.6.840.

    PubMed 3585441
  • Choi H, Charnsangavej C, Faria SC, Macapinlac HA, Burgess MA, Patel SR, Chen LL, Podoloff DA, Benjamin RS. Correlation of computed tomography and positron emission tomography in patients with metastatic gastrointestinal stromal tumor treated at a single institution with imatinib mesylate: proposal of new computed tomography response criteria. J Clin Oncol. 2007 May 1;25(13):1753-9. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2006.07.3049.

    PubMed 17470865

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A Phase 2 study testing Dacarbazine in people with Sarcoma, run by Washington University School of Medicine at 1 site in United States.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 10 inclusion and 5 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 13 Feb 2017. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

What does this phase mean?

Phase 2 studies give the treatment to a larger group to see whether it has the intended effect and to keep checking safety.

Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.

Are results available for this study?

Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 13 Feb 2017). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Best Anatomical Tumor Response (time frame: After completion of 3 cycles). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?

On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT00802880, which also lists 5 linked publications.

Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 13 Feb 2017.

Free account

Keep searching with a free account

You’ve used your 3 free searches for this session. Log in or create a free AzTrials account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in
Clinical Trial NCT00802880 | AzTrials