Luc M. Berclaz, Vindi Jurinovic, Anton Burkhard-Meier, Sultan Abdel-Rahman, Markus Albertsmeier, Alexander Klein, Hans Roland Dürr, Nina-Sophie Schmidt-Hegemann, Thomas Knösel, Wolfgang G. Kunz, Emanuel Stutz, Michael von Bergwelt-Baildon, Dorit Di Gioia, Lars H. Lindner
{"title":"多柔比星加达卡巴嗪与多柔比星加伊福法胺联合区域热疗治疗晚期亮肌肉瘤患者：倾向评分匹配分析","authors":"Luc M. Berclaz, Vindi Jurinovic, Anton Burkhard-Meier, Sultan Abdel-Rahman, Markus Albertsmeier, Alexander Klein, Hans Roland Dürr, Nina-Sophie Schmidt-Hegemann, Thomas Knösel, Wolfgang G. Kunz, Emanuel Stutz, Michael von Bergwelt-Baildon, Dorit Di Gioia, Lars H. Lindner","doi":"10.1002/cam4.70655","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Dacarbazine is currently considered the better combination partner for doxorubicin compared to ifosfamide for the treatment of leiomyosarcoma (LMS). Regional hyperthermia (RHT) combined with neoadjuvant chemotherapy has been shown to improve survival in patients with locally advanced high-risk STS. We sought to evaluate the role of doxorubicin and dacarbazine (AD) versus doxorubicin and ifosfamide (AI) in combination with RHT in patients with LMS.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Patients with locally advanced high-grade LMS, including limited metastases, eligible for RHT and first-line treatment with either AI + RHT or AD + RHT between 2014 and 2022 were retrospectively evaluated. Endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Patients were matched using propensity scores, which were estimated with a logistic regression model accounting for tumor site, presence of metastasis, surgery, and radiotherapy.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>A total of 105 patients were included in this study, of which 101 were included in the propensity score-matched cohort. In the matched cohort, treatment with AD + RHT was associated with a significantly improved PFS (HR 0.32, 95% CI 0.13–0.74, <i>p</i> = 0.0081). Multivariable analysis revealed several significant predictors of PFS, including treatment with AD + RHT (HR 0.42, 95% CI 0.19–0.92, <i>p</i> = 0.031).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>Treatment with AD + RHT showed improved PFS and better treatment tolerability compared to AI + RHT. Our results support the use of AD instead of AI for the treatment of patients with LMS in combination with RHT.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":139,"journal":{"name":"Cancer Medicine","volume":"14 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cam4.70655","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Doxorubicin Plus Dacarbazine Versus Doxorubicin Plus Ifosfamide in Combination With Regional Hyperthermia in Patients With Advanced Leiomyosarcoma: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis\",\"authors\":\"Luc M. Berclaz, Vindi Jurinovic, Anton Burkhard-Meier, Sultan Abdel-Rahman, Markus Albertsmeier, Alexander Klein, Hans Roland Dürr, Nina-Sophie Schmidt-Hegemann, Thomas Knösel, Wolfgang G. Kunz, Emanuel Stutz, Michael von Bergwelt-Baildon, Dorit Di Gioia, Lars H. Lindner\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/cam4.70655\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Background</h3>\\n \\n <p>Dacarbazine is currently considered the better combination partner for doxorubicin compared to ifosfamide for the treatment of leiomyosarcoma (LMS). Regional hyperthermia (RHT) combined with neoadjuvant chemotherapy has been shown to improve survival in patients with locally advanced high-risk STS. We sought to evaluate the role of doxorubicin and dacarbazine (AD) versus doxorubicin and ifosfamide (AI) in combination with RHT in patients with LMS.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>Patients with locally advanced high-grade LMS, including limited metastases, eligible for RHT and first-line treatment with either AI + RHT or AD + RHT between 2014 and 2022 were retrospectively evaluated. Endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Patients were matched using propensity scores, which were estimated with a logistic regression model accounting for tumor site, presence of metastasis, surgery, and radiotherapy.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>A total of 105 patients were included in this study, of which 101 were included in the propensity score-matched cohort. In the matched cohort, treatment with AD + RHT was associated with a significantly improved PFS (HR 0.32, 95% CI 0.13–0.74, <i>p</i> = 0.0081). Multivariable analysis revealed several significant predictors of PFS, including treatment with AD + RHT (HR 0.42, 95% CI 0.19–0.92, <i>p</i> = 0.031).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\\n \\n <p>Treatment with AD + RHT showed improved PFS and better treatment tolerability compared to AI + RHT. Our results support the use of AD instead of AI for the treatment of patients with LMS in combination with RHT.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":139,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cancer Medicine\",\"volume\":\"14 4\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cam4.70655\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cancer Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cam4.70655\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cancer Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cam4.70655","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Doxorubicin Plus Dacarbazine Versus Doxorubicin Plus Ifosfamide in Combination With Regional Hyperthermia in Patients With Advanced Leiomyosarcoma: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis
Background
Dacarbazine is currently considered the better combination partner for doxorubicin compared to ifosfamide for the treatment of leiomyosarcoma (LMS). Regional hyperthermia (RHT) combined with neoadjuvant chemotherapy has been shown to improve survival in patients with locally advanced high-risk STS. We sought to evaluate the role of doxorubicin and dacarbazine (AD) versus doxorubicin and ifosfamide (AI) in combination with RHT in patients with LMS.
Methods
Patients with locally advanced high-grade LMS, including limited metastases, eligible for RHT and first-line treatment with either AI + RHT or AD + RHT between 2014 and 2022 were retrospectively evaluated. Endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Patients were matched using propensity scores, which were estimated with a logistic regression model accounting for tumor site, presence of metastasis, surgery, and radiotherapy.
Results
A total of 105 patients were included in this study, of which 101 were included in the propensity score-matched cohort. In the matched cohort, treatment with AD + RHT was associated with a significantly improved PFS (HR 0.32, 95% CI 0.13–0.74, p = 0.0081). Multivariable analysis revealed several significant predictors of PFS, including treatment with AD + RHT (HR 0.42, 95% CI 0.19–0.92, p = 0.031).
Conclusion
Treatment with AD + RHT showed improved PFS and better treatment tolerability compared to AI + RHT. Our results support the use of AD instead of AI for the treatment of patients with LMS in combination with RHT.
期刊介绍：
Cancer Medicine is a peer-reviewed, open access, interdisciplinary journal providing rapid publication of research from global biomedical researchers across the cancer sciences. The journal will consider submissions from all oncologic specialties, including, but not limited to, the following areas:
Clinical Cancer Research
Translational research ∙ clinical trials ∙ chemotherapy ∙ radiation therapy ∙ surgical therapy ∙ clinical observations ∙ clinical guidelines ∙ genetic consultation ∙ ethical considerations
Cancer Biology:
Molecular biology ∙ cellular biology ∙ molecular genetics ∙ genomics ∙ immunology ∙ epigenetics ∙ metabolic studies ∙ proteomics ∙ cytopathology ∙ carcinogenesis ∙ drug discovery and delivery.
Cancer Prevention:
Behavioral science ∙ psychosocial studies ∙ screening ∙ nutrition ∙ epidemiology and prevention ∙ community outreach.
Bioinformatics:
Gene expressions profiles ∙ gene regulation networks ∙ genome bioinformatics ∙ pathwayanalysis ∙ prognostic biomarkers.
Cancer Medicine publishes original research articles, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and research methods papers, along with invited editorials and commentaries. Original research papers must report well-conducted research with conclusions supported by the data presented in the paper.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
