Skip to main content
. 2010 Oct 5;6:463–483. doi: 10.2147/TCRM.S3348

Table 9.

Randomized studies with pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) alone or in combinations in salvage setting

Author Pts (No.) Drugs/dose No. RR (%) PFS mts OS mts % Grade 3/4 toxicity/patient
Hgb Neu PLT HFS
O’Byrne106 REC (214) PLD (50 mg/m2) q28 vs 107 17.8 5.4 11.4
PTX (175 mg/m2) q21 107 22.4 6.0 14.0
Gordon107,108 RES (255) PLD (50 mg/m2) d1, q28 vs 130 12.3 2.3 8.9 5 12 1 23
TPT (1.5 mg/m2) d1–5 q21 125 6.5 3.4 10.3 28 77 34 0
SEN (219) PLD (50 mg/m2) d1, q28 vs 109 28.4 7.2 27
TPT (1.5 mg/m2) d1–5, q21 110 28.8 5.8* 17.5*
Mutch109 RESa (195) PLD (50 mg/m2) d1, q28 vs 96 8.3 3.6 12.7 2.1 18.7 5.2 10.4
GEM (1,000 mg/m2) d1,8, q21 99 6.1 3.1 13.5 3.0 38.4 6.1 0
Ferrandina110 RESb (153) PLD (40 mg/m2) q28 vs 76 16 4.0 14 5 6 0 5
GEM (1,000 mg/m2) d1,8,15 q28 77 29 5.0 12.7* 7 23 5 0
Vergote112 ASSIST-1 RESc (461) PLD (50 mg/m2) d1, q28 or TPT
1.5 mg/m2 d1–5 q21 vs
229 10.9 4.3* 13.5*
CAN (1,000 mg/m2) q21 232 4.3 2.3 8.5
Vergote113 ASSIST-5 RESc (125) PLD (50 mg/m2) d1
CAN (1000 mg/m2) q28 vs
65 12.3d 5.6d
PLD (50 mg/m2) d1, q28 60 8.3 3.7
Monk117 OVA-301 ALL (672) PLD (30 mg/m2) d1
TRAB (1.1 mg/m2) d1,q21 vs
335 28.0* 7.3* 20.5e 14.0 63.0 18.0 4.0
PLD (50 mg/m2) q28 337 19.0 5.9 19.4 6.0 22.0 2.0 20.0
SEN (430) PLD (30 mg/m2) d1
TRAB (1.1 mg/m2) d1,q21 vs
35* 9.2*
PLD (50 mg/m2) q28 23 7.5

Abbreviations: CAN, canfosfamide; GEM, gemcitabine; HFS, hand–foot syndrome; Hgb, anemia; Neu, neutropenia; OS, overall survival; PFS, progression-free survival; PLT, platelet toxicity; PTX, paclitaxel; REC, not otherwise specified recurrent disease; RES, platinum-resistant recurrent disease; RR, response rate; SEN, platinum-sensitive recurrent disease; TRAB, trabectedin; q, every; d, day.

*

statistically significant.

a

up to 2 prior regimens allowed;

b

platinum resistance = recurrence/progression within 12 months from primary chemotherapy;

c

patients progressed on 2nd line treatment;

d

in the subgroup of platinum refractory/resistant (n = 75), the combination achieved a high response rate (15.0% vs 5.7%) and a longer PFS (median = 5.6 months vs 2.9 months) (HR = 0.55; P = 0.042);

e

results from interim analysis.