The British journal of dermatology · 2012
Efficacy and safety of bexarotene combined with psoralen-ultraviolet A (PUVA) compared with PUVA treatment alone in stage IB-IIA mycosis fungoides: final results from the EORTC Cutaneous Lymphoma Task Force phase III randomized clinical trial (NCT00056056).
Клиническое исследование III фазыСравнительное исследованиеСтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
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.
Whittaker S, Ortiz P, Dummer R, Ranki A, Hasan B, Meulemans B, Gellrich S, Knobler R, Stadler R, Karrasch M
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Psoralen plus ultraviolet A (PUVA) is the standard treatment for early stages of mycosis fungoides. There have been no adequate randomized controlled trials with sufficient power comparing this modality with other therapies.
OBJECTIVE: To assess disease response and to compare the response rates of patients treated with PUVA alone or PUVA and bexarotene.
METHODS: EORTC 21011 (NCT 00056056) was a randomized phase III study comparing combined bexarotene (Targretin(®) ) and PUVA vs. PUVA alone in patients with stage IB and IIA mycosis fungoides (MF). The primary endpoint was the overall response rate [complete clinical response (CCR) plus partial response (PR)].
RESULTS: The study was prematurely closed due to low accrual after 93 of 145 required patients (65%) were randomized. Of the 93 randomized patients, 87 started treatment, 41 received PUVA and 46 received PUVA + bexarotene. Total UVA doses received were 107 J cm(-2) (range 1·4-489·9) in the PUVA arm vs. 101·7 J cm(-2) (0·2-529·9) in the combination arm. The safety profile was acceptable with few grade 3-4 toxicities observed in either arm. More drop-outs due to toxicity were observed in the combination arm compared with the PUVA-alone arm. The best overall response (CCR + PR) rate was 71% for PUVA alone and 77% for the combination arm (P = 0·57). The median duration of response was 9·7 months for PUVA vs. 5·8 months for the combination arm (P = 0·33). CCR was seen in 25 patients of whom 10 received PUVA alone (CCR 22%) and 15 received combination therapy (CCR 31%) (P = 0·45). CCR was sustained in 25% of patients regardless of therapy. There was a trend towards fewer PUVA sessions needed to achieve CCR in the combination arm (median 22) compared with the PUVA arm (median 27·5) (P = 0·11). Similarly, a trend towards lower UVA dose required to achieve CCR in the combination arm (median 55·8 J cm(-2) ) compared with the PUVA arm alone (median 117·5 J cm(-2) ) (P = 0·5) was observed.
CONCLUSIONS: No significant difference in response rate or response duration was observed in this study. However, there was a trend towards fewer PUVA sessions and lower UVA dose required to achieve CCR in the combination arm (PUVA + bexarotene) but this did not achieve statistical significance due to insufficient power.
OBJECTIVE: To assess disease response and to compare the response rates of patients treated with PUVA alone or PUVA and bexarotene.
METHODS: EORTC 21011 (NCT 00056056) was a randomized phase III study comparing combined bexarotene (Targretin(®) ) and PUVA vs. PUVA alone in patients with stage IB and IIA mycosis fungoides (MF). The primary endpoint was the overall response rate [complete clinical response (CCR) plus partial response (PR)].
RESULTS: The study was prematurely closed due to low accrual after 93 of 145 required patients (65%) were randomized. Of the 93 randomized patients, 87 started treatment, 41 received PUVA and 46 received PUVA + bexarotene. Total UVA doses received were 107 J cm(-2) (range 1·4-489·9) in the PUVA arm vs. 101·7 J cm(-2) (0·2-529·9) in the combination arm. The safety profile was acceptable with few grade 3-4 toxicities observed in either arm. More drop-outs due to toxicity were observed in the combination arm compared with the PUVA-alone arm. The best overall response (CCR + PR) rate was 71% for PUVA alone and 77% for the combination arm (P = 0·57). The median duration of response was 9·7 months for PUVA vs. 5·8 months for the combination arm (P = 0·33). CCR was seen in 25 patients of whom 10 received PUVA alone (CCR 22%) and 15 received combination therapy (CCR 31%) (P = 0·45). CCR was sustained in 25% of patients regardless of therapy. There was a trend towards fewer PUVA sessions needed to achieve CCR in the combination arm (median 22) compared with the PUVA arm (median 27·5) (P = 0·11). Similarly, a trend towards lower UVA dose required to achieve CCR in the combination arm (median 55·8 J cm(-2) ) compared with the PUVA arm alone (median 117·5 J cm(-2) ) (P = 0·5) was observed.
CONCLUSIONS: No significant difference in response rate or response duration was observed in this study. However, there was a trend towards fewer PUVA sessions and lower UVA dose required to achieve CCR in the combination arm (PUVA + bexarotene) but this did not achieve statistical significance due to insufficient power.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
AdolescentAdultAgedAnticarcinogenic AgentsBexaroteneChildChild, PreschoolCombined Modality TherapyDose-Response Relationship, DrugDose-Response Relationship, RadiationEarly Termination of Clinical TrialsHumansInfantMethoxsalenMiddle AgedMycosis FungoidesPUVA TherapyPhotosensitizing AgentsSkin NeoplasmsTetrahydronaphthalenesTreatment OutcomeYoung Adult