Phase II Randomized Comparison of Topotecan Plus Cyclophosphamide Versus Topotecan Alone in Children With Recurrent or Refractory Neuroblastoma: A Children's Oncology Group Study
- 20 August 2010
- journal article
- research article
- Published by American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) in Journal of Clinical Oncology
- Vol. 28 (24), 3808-3815
- https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2009.27.5016
Abstract
Purpose: Single-agent topotecan (TOPO) and combination topotecan and cyclophosphamide (TOPO/CTX) were compared in a phase II randomized trial in relapsed/refractory neuroblastoma. Because responders often underwent further therapies, novel statistical methods were required to compare the long-term outcome of the two treatments. Patients and Methods: Children with refractory/recurrent neuroblastoma (only one prior aggressive chemotherapy regimen) were randomly assigned to daily 5-day topotecan (2 mg/m2) or combination topotecan (0.75 mg/m2) and cyclophosphamide (250 mg/m2). A randomized two-stage group sequential design enrolled 119 eligible patients. Toxicity and response were estimated. Long-term outcome of protocol therapy was assessed using novel methods—causal inference—which allowed adjustment for the confounding effect of off-study therapies. Results: Seven more responses were observed for TOPO/CTX (complete response [CR] plus partial response [PR], 18 [32%] of 57) than TOPO (CR+PR, 11 [19%] of 59;P = .081); toxicity was similar. At 3 years, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 4% ± 2% and 15% ± 4%, respectively. PFS was significantly better for TOPO/CTX (P = .029); there was no difference in OS. Older age at diagnosis and lack of MYCN amplification predicted increased OS (P < .05). Adjusting for randomized treatment effect and subsequent autologous stem-cell transplantation, there was no difference between TOPO and TOPO/CTX in terms of the proportion alive at 2 years. Conclusion: TOPO/CTX was superior to TOPO in terms of PFS, but there was no OS difference. After adjustment for subsequent therapies, no difference was detected in the proportion alive at 2 years. Causal inference methods for assessing long-term outcomes of phase II therapies after subsequent treatment can elucidate effects of initial therapies.Keywords
This publication has 18 references indexed in Scilit:
- The International Neuroblastoma Risk Group (INRG) Classification System: An INRG Task Force ReportJournal of Clinical Oncology, 2009
- Response to Paclitaxel, Topotecan, and Topotecan-Cyclophosphamide in Children With Untreated Disseminated Neuroblastoma Treated in an Upfront Phase II Investigational Window: A Pediatric Oncology Group StudyJournal of Clinical Oncology, 2004
- Factors Influencing Survival in Children With Recurrent NeuroblastomaJournal of Pediatric Hematology/Oncology, 2004
- Optimal Structural Nested Models for Optimal Sequential DecisionsPublished by Springer Science and Business Media LLC ,2004
- Optimal Dynamic Treatment RegimesJournal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology, 2003
- Up-Front Window Trial of Topotecan in Previously Untreated Children and Adolescents With Metastatic Rhabdomyosarcoma: An Intergroup Rhabdomyosarcoma StudyJournal of Clinical Oncology, 2001
- Topotecan in Pediatric Patients With Recurrent and Progressive Solid TumorsJournal of Pediatric Hematology/Oncology, 1998
- Phase II trial of topotecan administered as 72-hour continuous infusion in children with refractory solid tumors: a collaborative Pediatric Branch, National Cancer Institute, and Children's Cancer Group Study.1998
- Phase I Trial and Pharmacokinetic (PK) and Pharmacodynamics (PD) Study of Topotecan Using a Five-Day Course in Children with Refractory Solid TumorsJournal of Pediatric Hematology/Oncology, 1996
- Nonparametric Estimation from Incomplete ObservationsJournal of the American Statistical Association, 1958