MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1245/s10434-025-17231-x

Медицинская библиотека · Annals of surgical oncology · 2025

An Open-label, Randomized Study of Melphalan/Hepatic Delivery System Versus Best Alternative Care in Patients with Unresectable Metastatic Uveal Melanoma.

Zager Jonathan S, Orloff Marlana, Ferrucci Pier Francesco, Choi Junsung, Eschelman David J, Glazer Evan S, Ejaz Aslam, Howard J Harrison, Richtig Erika, Ochsenreither Sebastian, Reddy Sunil A, Lowe Michael C, Beasley Georgia M, Gesierich Anja, Bender Armin, Gschnell Martin, Dummer Reinhard, Rivoire Michel, Arance Ana, Fenwick Stephen William, Sacco Joseph J, Haferkamp Sebastian, Weishaupt Carsten, John Johnny, Wheater Matthew, Ottensmeier Christian H

СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеСравнительное исследованиеПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

BACKGROUND

Metastatic uveal melanoma (mUM) has a poor prognosis, with liver metastases typically presenting a therapeutic challenge. Melphalan/Hepatic Delivery System (Melphalan/HDS) is a drug/medical device combination used for liver-directed treatment of unresectable mUM patients. This study assessed efficacy and safety of Melphalan/HDS versus best alternative care (BAC).

METHODS

Eligible patients with unresectable mUM were randomized (1:1) to receive Melphalan/HDS (3 mg/kg ideal body weight) once every 6 to 8 weeks for a maximum of 6 cycles or BAC. Due to slow enrollment and patient reluctance to receive BAC treatment, the study design was amended to a single-arm Melphalan/HDS study, and all efficacy analyses of the randomized study were treated as exploratory.

RESULTS

The study enrolled 85 patients. Eligible patients were randomized to receive Melphalan/HDS (n = 43) or BAC (n = 42), and 72 patients received study treatment (Melphalan/HDS [n = 40]; BAC [n = 32]). Exploratory analyses of efficacy endpoints showed numerical differences consistently favoring the Melphalan/HDS arm versus BAC (median overall survival: 18.5 vs. 14.5 months; median progression-free survival: 9.1 vs. 3.3 months; objective response rate: 27.5% vs. 9.4%; and disease control rate: 80.0% vs. 46.9%). Serious adverse events (SAEs) occurred in 51.2% of Melphalan/HDS and in 21.9% of BAC patients. The most common (>5%) SAEs included thrombocytopenia (19.5%), neutropenia (9.8%), leukopenia (9.8%) and febrile neutropenia (7.3%) in Melphalan/HDS patients and cholecystitis, nausea and vomiting (6.3% each) in BAC patients. No treatment-related deaths were observed.

CONCLUSION

Treatment with Melphalan/HDS shows clinically meaningful efficacy and demonstrates a favorable benefit-risk profile in patients with unresectable mUM as compared to BAC.

Для цитирования: Zager Jonathan S, Orloff Marlana, Ferrucci Pier Francesco, Choi Junsung, Eschelman David J, Glazer Evan S, Ejaz Aslam, Howard J Harrison, Richtig Erika, Ochsenreither Sebastian, Reddy Sunil A, Lowe Michael C, Beasley Georgia M, Gesierich Anja, Bender Armin, Gschnell Martin, Dummer Reinhard, Rivoire Michel, Arance Ana, Fenwick Stephen William, Sacco Joseph J, Haferkamp Sebastian, Weishaupt Carsten, John Johnny, Wheater Matthew, Ottensmeier Christian H. An Open-label, Randomized Study of Melphalan/Hepatic Delivery System Versus Best Alternative Care in Patients with Unresectable Metastatic Uveal Melanoma.. Annals of surgical oncology. 2025. DOI: 10.1245/s10434-025-17231-x.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.