Phase IB/II trial evaluates efficacy and safety of doxorubicin plus durvalumab in advanced soft tissue sarcoma, suggesting potential benefits for specific patients.
Purpose: This open-label, phase IB/II study evaluated the efficacy and safety of standard-of-care doxorubicin combined with durvalumab (a programmed death 1 ligand [PD-L1] immune checkpoint inhibitor) in patients with advanced anthracycline-naïve soft tissue sarcoma (STS) and to identify patients who would most likely benefit from this combination treatment. Methods: This trial (NCT03802071) included patients with metastatic and/or recurrent STS not previously treated with anthracycline or a PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor. Phase IB assessed the safety and tolerability of doxorubicin (level 1 [75 mg/m2]; level –1 [60 mg/m2]), in combination with durvalumab 1500 mg once every 3 weeks until documented disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Phase II evaluated treatment efficacy, with the primary endpoint being the objective response rate (ORR). Results: As no dose-limiting toxicities were observed during the phase IB trial (n=3), the recommended phase II dose was 75 mg/m2 of doxorubicin. Of 41 evaluable patients, 1 (2.4%) achieved a complete response and 12 (29.3%) achieved a confirmed partial response, yielding an ORR of 31.7%. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 7.6 months and median overall survival was 23.8 months. The most common treatment-related grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (n=23, 53.4%), thrombocytopenia (n=6, 13.9%), and anemia (n=5, 11.6%). In prespecified exploratory correlative analyses, absence of RTK-RAS pathway genetic alterations (hazard ratio [HR], 6.446; 95% CI, 1.934-21.486; p=0.002) and high PD-1 expression (HR, 0.214; 95% CI, 0.071-0.649; p=0.006) were identified as independent predictors of longer PFS. Conclusions: Doxorubicin plus durvalumab combination therapy exhibited promising efficacy in advanced STS, with acceptable toxicity profile.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yun et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: