Doxorubicin alone versus intensified doxorubicin plus ifosfamide for first-line treatment of advanced or metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma: a randomised controlled phase 3 trial

I Judson, Jaap Verweij, H Gelderblom, JT Hartmann, P Schoffski, JY Blay, JM Kerst, J Sufliarsky, J Whelan, P Hohenberger, A Krarup-Hansen, T Alcindor, S Marreaud, S Litiere, C Hermans, C Fisher, PCW Hogendoorn, AP Dei Tos, WTA van der Graaf

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

812 Citations (Scopus)


Background Effective targeted treatment is unavailable for most sarcomas and doxorubicin and ifosfamide-which have been used to treat soft-tissue sarcoma for more than 30 years-still have an important role. Whether doxorubicin alone or the combination of doxorubicin and ifosfamide should be used routinely is still controversial. We assessed whether dose intensification of doxorubicin with ifosfamide improves survival of patients with advanced soft-tissue sarcoma compared with doxorubicin alone. Methods We did this phase 3 randomised controlled trial (EORTC 62012) at 38 hospitals in ten countries. We included patients with locally advanced, unresectable, or metastatic high-grade soft-tissue sarcoma, age 18-60 years with a WHO performance status of 0 or 1. They were randomly assigned (1: 1) by the minimisation method to either doxorubicin (75 mg/ m(2) by intravenous bolus on day 1 or 72 h continuous intravenous infusion) or intensified doxorubicin (75 mg/ m(2); 25 mg/ m(2) per day, days 1-3) plus ifosfamide (10 g/ m(2) over 4 days with mesna and pegfilgrastim) as first-line treatment. Randomisation was stratified by centre, performance status (0 vs 1), age (< 50 vs >= 50 years), presence of liver metastases, and histopathological grade (2 vs 3). Patients were treated every 3 weeks till progression or unacceptable toxic eff ects for up to six cycles. The primary endpoint was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials. gov, number NCT00061984. Findings Between April 30, 2003, and May 25, 2010, 228 patients were randomly assigned to receive doxorubicin and 227 to receive doxorubicin and ifosfamide.Median follow-up was 56 months (IQR 31-77) in the doxorubicin only group and 59 months (36-72) in the combination group.There was no significant difference in overall survival between groups (median overall survival 12 .8 months [95.5% CI 10.5-14.3] in the doxorubicin group vs 14.3 months [12.5-16.5] in the doxorubicin and ifosfamide group; hazard ratio [HR] 0.83 [95.5% CI 0.67-1.03]; stratified logrank test p=0.076).Median progression-free survival was significantly higher for the doxorubicin and ifosfamide group (7.4 months [95% CI 6.6-8.3]) than for the doxorubicin group (4.6 months [2.9-5.6]; HR 0.74 [95% CI 0 .60-0 .90], stratifi ed log-rank test p= 0 .003).More patients in the doxorubicin and ifosfamide group than in the doxorubicin group had an overall response (60 [26%] of 227 patients vs 31 [14%] of 228; p<0.0006).The most common grade 3 and 4 toxic eff ects-which were all more common with doxorubicin and ifosfamide than with doxorubicin alone-were leucopenia (97 [43%] of 224 patients vs 40 [18%] of 223 patients), neutropenia (93 [42%] vs 83 [37%]), febrile neutropenia (103 (46%) vs 30 [13%]), anaemia (78 [35%] vs 10 [5%]), and thrombocytopenia (75 [33%]) vs one [< 1%]). Interpretation Our results do not support the use of intensified doxorubicin and ifosfamide for palliation of advanced soft-tissue sarcoma unless the specific goal is tumour shrinkage. These findings should help individualise the care of patients with this disease.
Original languageUndefined/Unknown
Pages (from-to)415-423
Number of pages9
JournalLancet Oncology
Issue number4
Publication statusPublished - 2014

Research programs

  • EMC MM-03-86-08

Cite this