The subgroup analysis of outcomes among patients with advanced liposarcoma from a pivotal phase III trial comparing eribulin (Halaven) vs dacarbazine in previously treated liposarcoma or leiomyosarcoma was reported in the Journal of Clinical Oncology by Demetri et al. Overall, the phase III trial in 452 patients showed significantly improved overall survival with eribulin, with the benefit being greater in patients with liposarcoma than in those with leiomyosarcoma. The trial supported the 2016 approval of eribulin in previously treated liposarcoma.
Outcomes in Liposarcoma Subgroup
The liposarcoma subgroup was an independently randomized stratified subgroup of the phase III trial. Overall, 143 patients with liposarcoma (32% of the overall population) were randomized to receive eribulin (n = 71) or dacarbazine (n = 72) and were included in the current analysis.
Among the liposarcoma patients, median overall survival was 15.6 months in the eribulin group vs 8.4 months in the dacarbazine group (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.51, P < .001). Survival benefit of eribulin was observed among all liposarcoma histologic subtypes. Median progression-free survival was 2.9 vs 1.7 months (HR = 0.52, P = .0015).
Grade ≥ 3 adverse events occurred in 62.9% of eribulin patients vs 51.4% of dacarbazine patients, including neutropenia in 27.1% vs 15.3%. Peripheral sensory neuropathy of grade ≥ 2 occurred in 8.6% vs 0%. Adverse events led to discontinuation of treatment in 7.1% vs 5.6%.
The investigators concluded: “In patients with previously treated [liposarcoma], eribulin was associated with significantly superior [overall survival] and [progression-free survival] compared with dacarbazine. Eribulin represents an important treatment option for patients with [liposarcoma], a sarcoma subtype for which limited effective systemic treatments are available. Further studies are justified to explore the role of eribulin in earlier lines of therapy as well as in combination with other agents.”
The study was supported by Eisai.
George D. Demetri, MD, Sarcoma and Bone Cancer Treatment Center, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, is the corresponding author of the Journal of Clinical Oncology article.
The content in this post has not been reviewed by the American Society of Clinical Oncology, Inc. (ASCO®) and does not necessarily reflect the ideas and opinions of ASCO®.