Safety and efficacy of trabectedin when administered in the inpatient versus outpatient setting: Clinical considerations for outpatient administration of trabectedin.

backgroundThe results of the randomized, phase 3 ET743-SAR-3007 trial demonstrated that trabectedin had a significantly longer progression-free survival (PFS) compared with dacarbazine in patients with advanced leiomyosarcoma/liposarcoma after the failure of prior chemotherapy. Patients randomized to trabectedin received a 24-hour intravenous infusion either in an inpatient or outpatient setting. Herein, the authors reported the safety, efficacy, and patient-reported outcomes based on first infusion site of care.

methodsPatients were randomized 2:1 to trabectedin (at a dose of 1.5 mg/m

resultsOf the 378 patients who were treated with trabectedin, 100 (27%) and 277 (73%), respectively, first received trabectedin in the inpatient and outpatient setting. No differences were observed with regard to PFS or OS based on site of care. The median PFS was 4.1 months versus 4.2 months (hazard ratio, 0.90; P = .49) for inpatients versus outpatients, respectively, and the median OS was 14.3 months versus 13.7 months (hazard ratio, 0.89; P = .40), respectively. Grade 3/4 adverse events (classified according to the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events [version 4.0]) were reported in 87 inpatients (87%) compared with 219 outpatients (79%); grade 3/4 serious adverse events were reported in 43 inpatients (43%) and 92 outpatients (33%). Extravasation occurred in 0 inpatients and 5 outpatients (2%), whereas the incidence of catheter-related complications was similar between groups (16% vs 15%).

conclusionsAlthough the majority of patients who were randomized to trabectedin received outpatient therapy, the outcomes of the current study suggested equivalent safety and efficacy in either setting.