Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
País/Região como assunto
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
País de afiliação
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Gynecol Oncol ; 170: 300-308, 2023 03.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36758420

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: The primary purpose of this study was to determine if farletuzumab, an antifolate receptor-α monoclonal antibody, improved progression-free survival (PFS) versus placebo when added to standard chemotherapy regimens in patients with platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer (OC) in first relapse (platinum-free interval: 6-36 months) with low cancer antigen 125 (CA-125) levels. METHODS: Eligibility included CA-125 ≤ 3 x upper limit of normal (ULN, 105 U/mL), high-grade serous, platinum-sensitive recurrent OC, previous treatment with debulking surgery, and first-line platinum-based chemotherapy with 1st recurrence between 6 and 36 months since frontline platinum-based treatment. Patients received investigator's choice of either carboplatin (CARBO)/paclitaxel (PTX) every 3 weeks or CARBO/pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) every 4 weeks x6 cycles in combination with either farletuzumab [5 mg/kg weekly] or placebo randomized in a 2:1 ratio. Maintenance treatment with farletuzumab (5 mg/kg weekly) or placebo was given until disease progression or intolerance. RESULTS: 214 patients were randomly assigned to farletuzumab+chemotherapy (142 patients) versus placebo+chemotherapy (72 patients). The primary efficacy endpoint, PFS, was not significantly different between treatment groups (1-sided α = 0.10; p-value = 0.25; hazard ratio [HR] = 0.89, 80% confidence interval [CI]: 0.71, 1.11), a median of 11.7 months (95% CI: 10.2, 13.6) versus 10.8 months (95% CI: 9.5, 13.2) for farletuzumab+chemotherapy and placebo+chemotherapy, respectively. No new safety concerns were identified with the combination of farletuzumab+chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Adding farletuzumab to standard chemotherapy does not improve PFS in patients with OC who were platinum-sensitive in first relapse with low CA-125 levels. Folate receptor-α expression was not measured in this study. (Clinical Trial Registry NCT02289950).


Assuntos
Neoplasias Epiteliais e Glandulares , Neoplasias Ovarianas , Humanos , Feminino , Neoplasias Ovarianas/tratamento farmacológico , Antígeno Ca-125 , Neoplasias Epiteliais e Glandulares/tratamento farmacológico , Carcinoma Epitelial do Ovário/tratamento farmacológico , Carboplatina , Paclitaxel , Doxorrubicina , Polietilenoglicóis , Recidiva , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapêutico , Recidiva Local de Neoplasia/tratamento farmacológico
2.
Acta Clin Belg ; 76(1): 10-15, 2021 Feb.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31399016

RESUMO

Objectives: This study evaluated the effect of lipegfilgrastim, a glycopegylated granulocyte-colony stimulating factor, used as primary (PP) or secondary prophylaxis (SP) on chemotherapy (CT) treatment modifications, as well as the incidence of CT-induced neutropenic events in adult patients receiving cytotoxic CT with or without biological therapy (BT) for solid and hematological tumors, in routine clinical practice. Other objectives were to characterize the population of lipegfilgrastim-treated cancer patients and safety assessment. Methods: This phase 4, prospective, observational study was conducted at 15 centers from Belgium and Luxembourg, between 2015 and 2017. Results: Of 139 patients, 82.7% had breast cancer and 54.7% were treated with dose-dense regimens. Most received lipegfilgrastim as PP (82.0%) and were at high-risk of febrile neutropenia (FN) (68.3%). FN and grade III/IV neutropenia were reported for 7.9% and 22.3% patients. Among 123 evaluated patients, CT/BT dose modifications were recorded for 33.3% (PP) and 52.4% (SP) of patients receiving lipegfilgrastim; dose reductions, followed by dose delays, were more frequent than omissions. Among 45 patients with dose modifications, FN was reported for 8.8% and 9.1% patients and grade IV neutropenia for 17.6% and 18.2% of patients when lipegfilgrastim was applied for PP and SP, respectively. Adverse events related to lipegfilgrastim occurred for 55 (39.6%) patients; bone pain and back pain were more frequent. Lipegfilgrastim-related serious adverse events were reported for 9 (6.5%) patients. Conclusion: Use of lipegfilgrastim in real-world settings resulted in limited CT dose modifications and low incidences of neutropenic events, with no new safety concerns arising.


Assuntos
Neutropenia Febril Induzida por Quimioterapia , Filgrastim , Fármacos Hematológicos , Polietilenoglicóis , Adulto , Idoso , Antineoplásicos/administração & dosagem , Antineoplásicos/efeitos adversos , Antineoplásicos/uso terapêutico , Bélgica , Neutropenia Febril Induzida por Quimioterapia/tratamento farmacológico , Neutropenia Febril Induzida por Quimioterapia/epidemiologia , Neutropenia Febril Induzida por Quimioterapia/prevenção & controle , Feminino , Filgrastim/administração & dosagem , Filgrastim/efeitos adversos , Filgrastim/uso terapêutico , Fármacos Hematológicos/administração & dosagem , Fármacos Hematológicos/efeitos adversos , Fármacos Hematológicos/uso terapêutico , Humanos , Incidência , Luxemburgo , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Neoplasias/tratamento farmacológico , Polietilenoglicóis/administração & dosagem , Polietilenoglicóis/efeitos adversos , Polietilenoglicóis/uso terapêutico , Estudos Prospectivos
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA