You will be provided with the titles and abstracts of a collection of medical RCT reports studying a clinical question -- for instance, the efficacy of an intervention on some medical outcome. Please write a few sentences synthesizing the findings of these reports, which could serve as a conclusion section for a systematic review article. Your response should not include any other text. The RCT reports are below.



Title 1:
Randomized comparison of doxorubicin and vindesine to doxorubicin for patients with metastatic soft-tissue sarcomas.
Abstract 1:
Two treatment regimens for metastatic soft-tissue sarcomas were compared in a randomized trial in the cooperative group setting. Histopathologic diagnosis was affirmed by pathology reference panel review in 72% of the 347 patients. In 21% of patients, the reference panel affirmed the diagnosis of soft-tissue sarcoma but disagreed as to type; 7% of patients were ineligible based upon cell type. Of 298 patients evaluable, measurable tumor regression (partial or complete response) occurred in 17% of patients to doxorubicin (70 mg/m2 intravenously) and 18% of patients to doxorubicin (70 mg/m2 intravenously) and vindesine (3 mg/m2 intravenously), each given every 3 weeks. No difference existed in complete response (4% for doxorubicin, 6% for doxorubicin and vindesine) or median survival (9.4 months for doxorubicin, 9.9 months for doxorubicin and vindesine). Overall, 60% of those patients on doxorubicin and vindesine and 46% on doxorubicin experienced a severe or worse toxicity of treatment (P = 0.01). With greater toxicity and lack of any gains in efficacy, the results do not support use of the combination of doxorubicin and vindesine for metastatic soft-tissue sarcomas.


Title 2:
A comparison of adriamycin versus vincristine and adriamycin, and cyclophosphamide versus vincristine, actinomycin-D, and cyclophosphamide for advanced sarcoma.
Abstract 2:
This randomized study, conducted by the Eastern cooperative Oncology Group, compared Adriamycin (doxorubicin) (70 mg/m2) versus vincristine (1.4 mg/m2) and Adriamycin (50 mg/m2); and cyclophosphamide (750 mg/m2) versus vincristine (1.4 mg/m2), actinomycin-D (0.4 mg/m2), and cyclophosphamide (750 mg/m2) for treatment of metastatic mesenchymal malignancies. The respective response rate seen in 200 evaluable patients to the treatments were, 27, 19, and 11%. The response rate to Adriamycin was significant better than the response to vincristine, actinomycin-D, and cyclophosphamide (P = 0.03, two-sided). The respective median survivals on the three treatments were 37, 34, and 41 weeks and were not significantly different. Moderate or severe vomiting occurred in 60% of patients receiving vincristine-cyclophosphamide-adriamycin, a greater frequency than in Adriamycin alone (P = .09 two-sided) Severe or life-threatening hematologic toxicity (leukocytes less than 2000, platelets less than 50,000) occurred in 30% of patients receiving the Adriamycin combination, a markedly increased frequency when compared to the other two regimens (P equals 0.07, P = 0.02, two-sided). This trial establishes that Adriamycin has a better response rate than the combination of vincristine-actinomycin-D-cyclophosphamide in advanced sarcomas. The combination of vincristine, Adriamycin, and cyclophosphamide increased toxicity and did not add to the therapeutic effect achieved with Adriamycin alone.


Title 3:
A randomized study of adriamycin with and without dimethyl triazenoimidazole carboxamide in advanced uterine sarcomas.
Abstract 3:
Various drug combinations including Adriamycin have been tested in soft tissue sarcomas, but optimal treatment remains unclear. We have evaluated Adriamycin with and without dimethyl-triazeno-imidazole-carboxamide (DTIC) in the treatment of Stage III or IV and recurrent sarcomas of the uterus. Two hundred and forty cases of these rare tumors were evaluable. Of 146 evaluable patients with measurable disease, 13/80 (16.3%) of Adriamycin-treated patients and 16/66 (24.2%) of patients receiving the combination showed an objective response (P greater than 0.05). Lung metastases responded more frequently (P equal to 0.04) to combination therapy, but there was no survival advantage. For patients with nonmeasurable disease the progression-free interval was similar (10.0 months for Adriamycin and 8.0 months for the combination). Leiomyosarcomas had a significantly longer survival than other cell types (12.1 versus 6.0 months, P less than 0.001) but there was no advantage for either regimen. There was a suggestion that heterologous mixed mesodermal sarcomas were more responsive to the combination (27.3 versus 8.7%). The addition of DTIC produced significantly more hematologic and gastrointestinal toxicity. Other Adriamycin combinations should be evaluated in uterine sarcomas.


Title 4:
Doxorubicin versus CYVADIC versus doxorubicin plus ifosfamide in first-line treatment of advanced soft tissue sarcomas: a randomized study of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Soft Tissue and Bone Sarcoma Group.
Abstract 4:
The aim of this trial was to compare the activity and toxicity of single-agent doxorubicin with that of two multidrug regimens in the treatment of patients with adult advanced soft tissue sarcomas.
                This was a prospective randomized phase III trial performed by 35 cancer centers within the Soft Tissue and Bone Sarcoma Group of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC). Six hundred sixty-three eligible patients were randomly allocated to receive either doxorubicin 75 mg/m2 (arm A), cyclophosphamide, vincristine, doxorubicin, and dacarbazine (CYVADIC) (arm B), or ifosfamide 5 g/m2 plus doxorubicin 50 mg/m2 (arm C).
                The overall response rate was 24% (95% confidence interval, 20.7% to 27.3%) among eligible patients and 26% among assessable patients. No statistically significant difference was detected among the three study arms in terms of response rate (arm A, 23.3%; arm B, 28.4%; and arm C, 28.1%), remission duration (median, 46 weeks on arm A, 48 weeks on arm B, and 44 weeks on arm C), or overall survival (median, 52 weeks on arm A, 51 weeks on arm B, and 55 weeks on arm C). The degree of myelosuppression was significantly greater for the combination of ifosfamide and doxorubicin than for the other two regimens. Cardiotoxicity was also more frequent in this arm, but other toxicities were similar.
                In advanced soft tissue sarcomas of adults, single-agent doxorubicin is still the standard chemotherapy against which more intensive or new drug treatments should be compared. Combination chemotherapy cannot be recommended outside a controlled clinical trial with the exclusion of some subsets of sarcoma patients for whom significant tumor volume reduction may be an important end point of a chemotherapy regimen.


Title 5:
Combination chemotherapy with adriamycin and streptozotocin. I. Clinical results in patients with advanced sarcoma.
Abstract 5:
In a prospectively randomized study, 17 evaluable patients treated with adriamycin alone, 60 mg/m2 intravenously every 3 wk, were compared with 14 patients treated with adriamycin in the same dose and schedule plus streptozotocin. 500 mg/m2/day intravenously for 5 days every 3 wk. All patients had advanced sarcomas, but none had previously received either adriamycin or streptozotocin. Objective responses were seen in 9 patients on the single drug arm (4 with more than 50% tumor shrinkage and 5 with stabilization of disease), and in 8 patients given the combination drug arm (2 with more than 50% tumor shrinkage and 6 with stabilization of disease). Duration of response and survival from treatment for both treatment groups were similar. Transient hepatic dysfunction, renal function abnormalities, and nausea with vomiting were additive in the combination drug arm, the last two limiting therapy most. Leukopenia, thrombocytopenia, and mucositis appeared to be synergistically increased in patients receiving both adriamycin and streptozotocin. Patients with abnormal pretreatment renal function were able to tolerate the combination therapy without undue incidence of severity of renal toxicity. Patients who developed transient streptozotocin-related renal dysfunction were able to tolerate further doses of streptozotocin after their renal parameters normalized. Adriamycin in combination with streptozotocin did not offer any therapeutic advantage over adriamycin alone.


Title 6:
Randomized comparison of three adriamycin regimens for metastatic soft tissue sarcomas.
Abstract 6:
This study addressed two major questions regarding therapeutic use of Adriamycin ([Adr] Adria Laboratories, Columbus, OH) in adult soft tissue sarcomas: the influence of dosing schedule and the value of adding imidazole carboxamide (DTIC) to Adr. Patients with objectively measurable metastatic soft tissue sarcomas were randomized to Adr 70 mg/m2 intravenously (IV) day 1 and every 3 weeks (94 patients); Adr 20 mg/m2 IV day 1, 2, and 3, and 15 mg/m2 IV day 8 and weekly thereafter (89 patients); and Adr 60 mg/m2 IV day 1 and DTIC 250 mg/m2 days 1 to 5, repeated every 3 weeks (92 patients). The regimens using Adr as a single agent resulted in an equivalent response frequency (18% and 16%) and survival (median, 8.0 and 8.4 months). DTIC significantly increased (P less than .02) the overall response frequency of Adr to 30%. However, DTIC did not influence survival (median, 8.0 months) or increase the number of complete responses. The toxicities of the two single-agent regimens differed: Adr weekly resulted in more stomatitis (P = .09) and less hematologic toxicity (P less than .05). DTIC resulted in substantially increased toxicity, primarily gastrointestinal (P less than .002); overall, 98% of patients receiving Adr-DTIC experienced moderate or worse toxicity. To decrease the potential for error in interpretation of treatment results, histopathological confirmation of diagnosis was undertaken by a panel of reference pathologists; pathology slides were submitted on 97% of entered patients. The on-study clinical diagnosis was affirmed in 199 of 316 patients (63%) with a final review. In 23% of patients, the panel agreed with the diagnosis of soft tissue sarcoma, but not with the type. In 14%, the panel concluded that a diagnosis of mesenchymal malignancy could not be affirmed. Final treatment results were based on the 275 pathologically confirmed, eligible patients. The most common histological subtype entered was leiomyosarcoma (99 patients). The response to Adr-DTIC of this subtype was higher (44%) than that of any other subtype. However, this difference alone was not responsible for the overall superiority of the combination. This confirmed that the combination of DTIC plus Adr adds to the response rate of Adr alone in soft tissue sarcomas. Whether the increased response frequency, without an impact on survival, is worth the significantly greater toxicity remains a subjective judgement that must be made within the context of the individual patient.


Title 7:
Randomized comparison of doxorubicin alone versus ifosfamide plus doxorubicin or mitomycin, doxorubicin, and cisplatin against advanced soft tissue sarcomas.
Abstract 7:
This three-armed phase III study in adults with advanced soft tissue sarcomas was planned as a comparison of objective regression rates, toxicity, and survival of patients receiving doxorubicin alone, ifosfamide plus doxorubicin, and mitomycin plus doxorubicin plus cisplatin.
                Between December 1987 and July 1990, 279 patients with histologically confirmed sarcomas were enrolled to receive treatment A (doxorubicin 80 mg/m2), treatment B (ifosfamide 7.5 g/m2 plus doxorubicin 60 mg/m2), or treatment C (mitomycin 8 mg/m2 plus doxorubicin 40 mg/m2 plus cisplatin 60 mg/m2).
                Of 262 assessable patients, 74 (29%) achieved objective tumor regression. Objective regression occurred in 20% of the 90 patients who received doxorubicin alone (complete remission [CR] rate, 2%), in 34% of the 88 who received ifosfamide plus doxorubicin (CR rate, 3%), and in 32% of the 84 who received mitomycin plus doxorubicin plus cisplatin (CR rate, 7%). With grade 3 or greater myelosuppression in 53% of group A, 80% of group B, and 55% of group C, regimen B was significantly more myelosuppressive than either regimen A or C (P = .01) with two, three, and one treatment-related deaths, respectively. Synovial sarcomas were responsive to ifosfamide plus doxorubicin, especially among patients younger than 40 years of age.
                Ifosfamide plus doxorubicin produced a significantly higher regression rate (P = .03) than did doxorubicin alone; however, this was achieved at a level of myelosuppression significantly more intense than that produced by the single agent or by the three-drug combination. Mitomycin, doxorubicin, and cisplatin also appeared to be more active than the single agent; however, at a myelosuppression level similar to that of doxorubicin alone, this trend (P = .07) did not attain the usual level for significance. No significant survival differences were observed.
Compared to single-agent doxorubicin, the combination chemotherapy regimens evaluated, given in conventional doses, produced only marginal increases in response rates, at the expense of increased toxic effects and with no improvements in overall survival.