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.
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
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 group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Dacarbazine | Experimental | Dacarbazine 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.
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)
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)
Rate of Nausea/Emesis (Any Grade)
Approximately 18 weeks
Measured: Completion of 6 cycles of treatment (18 weeks)
Comparison of the SUV at up to 3 Tumor Sites
Measured: Baseline and after every three cycles of treatment (up to 1 year)
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
Correlate the Tumor Metabolic Response Rate With the Tumor Anatomic Response Rate
Measured: After completion of 3 cycles
Overall Disease Control Rate
Measured: 12 months
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)
Overall Survival
Measured: Until completion of follow-up or patient death (estimated to be 1 year)
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)
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)
Correlate Overall Survival With Best Anatomic Response
Measured: Completion of follow-up (estimated to be 1 year)
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.
- First posted5 Dec 2008 (estimated)
- Study startMar 2009
- Primary completionJan 2015
- Study completionJan 2015
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, outcome measures and adverse events reported by the sponsor.
- Publications (5)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for SarcomaStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Washington University School of MedicineThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
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)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Washington University School of Medicine
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Brian Van Tine, M.D., Ph.D., Principal investigator, Washington Univerisity School of Medicine
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
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
- 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 8315425Gottlieb 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 769974Buesa 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 1868027Borden 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 3585441Choi 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
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 13 Feb 2017. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Determination of Tumor Response Rate by RECIST and FDG-PET Criteria to Dacarbazine in Metastatic Soft Tissue and Bone Sarcoma
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00802880
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 08-1299 / 201109179
- Conditions
- Sarcoma
- Phase
- Phase 2
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 80 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Washington University School of MedicineUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- Mar 2009
- Primary completion
- Jan 2015 (actual)
- Study completion
- Jan 2015 (actual)
- First posted
- 5 Dec 2008 (estimated)
- Results
- Posted 13 Feb 2017
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
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.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Not applicable
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 1
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Dacarbazine | Experimental | Drug: DacarbazineDacarbazine 850 mg/m^2 IV Day 1 of each 21 day cycle. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (10 listed)
- 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
Key exclusion criteria (5 listed)
- 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.)
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| DacarbazineAlso: DTIC, DTIC-Dome, DIC | Drug | Dacarbazine |
Primary outcome
Best Anatomical Tumor Response
Time frame: After 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
12 secondary outcomes
Rate of Neutropenia (Grade 3/4)
Time frame: Completion of 6 cycles of treatment (18 weeks)
Rate of Nausea/Emesis (Any Grade)
Time frame: Completion of 6 cycles of treatment (18 weeks)
Comparison of the SUV at up to 3 Tumor Sites
Time frame: Baseline and after every three cycles of treatment (up to 1 year)
Overall Tumor Metabolic Response
Time frame: After completion of 3 cycles
Correlate the Tumor Metabolic Response Rate With the Tumor Anatomic Response Rate
Time frame: After completion of 3 cycles
Overall Disease Control Rate
Time frame: 12 months
Time to Progression (TTP)
Time frame: Until completion of follow-up (estimated to be 1 year)
Overall Survival
Time frame: Until completion of follow-up or patient death (estimated to be 1 year)
Correlate the Time to Progression With Best Anatomic Response
Time frame: Completion of follow-up (estimated to be 1 year)
Correlate Time to Progression With Best Metabolic Response
Time frame: Completion of follow-up (estimated to be 1 year)
Correlate Overall Survival With Best Anatomic Response
Time frame: Completion of follow-up (estimated to be 1 year)
Correlate Overall Survival With Best Metabolic Response
Time frame: Completion of follow-up (estimated to be 1 year)
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 13 Feb 2017.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
- Background: PubMed 8315425Antman 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.
- Background: PubMed 769974Gottlieb 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.
- Background: PubMed 1868027Buesa 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.
- Background: PubMed 3585441Borden 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.
- Background: PubMed 17470865Choi 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.
- Alvin J. Siteman Cancer Center at Barnes-Jewish Hospital and Washington University School of MedicineLink provided by the sponsor.
Related trials for Sarcoma
RecruitingPhase 1
Evaluation of Xaluritamig in Adults, Adolescents and Children With Relapsed or Refractory Ewing Sarcoma (EWS)
Ewing Sarcoma
Not yet recruiting
my.naviGATE: A Guide to After-Treatment Effects for Adolescents and Young Adults
Sarcoma, Osteosarcoma
RecruitingPhase 1
International Phase I Trial of Dinutuximab Beta With VDC/IE in GD2-Positive Ewing Sarkoma
High-risk GD2 Positive Ewing Sarkoma
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Dynamic ctDNA Monitoring in Advanced Malignant Phyllodes Tumors of the Breast
Malignant Phyllodes Tumor of the Breast
RecruitingPhase 1
Phase I Trial of TURALIO(R) (Pexidartinib, PLX3397) in Children and Young Adults With Refractory Leukemias and Refractory Solid Tumors Including Neurofibromatosis Type 1 (NF1) Associated Plexiform Neurofibromas (PN) and Tenosynovial Giant Cell Tumor ...
Neurofibroma, Plexiform, Precursor Cell Lymphoblastic Leukemia-Lymphoma
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Brian Van Tine, M.D., Ph.D. principal investigator
Washington Univerisity School of Medicine
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
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.