Use of first-line chemotherapy for advanced pancreatic cancer: FOLFIRINOX versus gemcitabine.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e16536-e16536 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aimee Ginsburg Arlen ◽  
Thomas H. Cartwright ◽  
Lalan S. Wilfong ◽  
J. Russell Hoverman ◽  
Greg C Nelson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Community Setting ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
The United States ◽  
Age At Diagnosis ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Combination Regimen ◽  
First Line

e16536 Background: Pancreatic cancer (PC) is the fourth leading cause of death in the United States. It is estimated that 43,920 patients will be diagnosed in 2012 and 37,390 will die (Siegel, CA Cancer J Clin, 2012). Gemcitabine has long been the standard of care chemotherapy. Recent advances in treatment options have led to the utilization of a combination regimen (oxaliplatin, irinotecan, leucovorin, fluorouracil [FOLFIRINOX]) in patients with good Karnofsky performance status (PS). This regimen was compared to single-agent gemcitabine, presented at ASCO 2010 and recently published (Conroy, NEJM, 2011). This retrospective analysis was conducted to evaluate characteristics and overall survival (OS) of patients receiving FOLFIRINOX and gemcitabine-based treatments in a large outpatient community setting. Methods: Patients with advanced PC treated within The US Oncology Network and entered into the iKnowMed (iKM) database between June 2010 and November 2011 were included. Patterns of treatment were characterized by the median age at diagnosis, sex, PS, and first-line metastatic chemotherapy prescribed. The primary endpoints of the analysis were OS and uptake of FOLFIRINOX within the network. Results: Of the 717 patients identified within the iKM database, 13% received FOLFIRINOX and 87% gemcitabine-based therapy. Increased utilization of FOLFIRINOX for patients with good PS began in June 2010. For all patients (54% male), the median age at diagnosis was 67 years and the majority of patients (89%) had a PS of 70% or greater. The OS was significantly longer for FOLFIRINOX (8.4 months) versus gemcitabine (6.4 months) (p=0.036). OS was also significantly longer for PS of 70% or greater given FOLFIRINOX (9.0 months) versus gemcitabine (6.7 months) (p=0.022). After controlling for PS, the use of gemcitabine led to a shorter OS (HR 1.4; 95% CI: 1.02-2.01). Conclusions: Utilization of FOLFIRINOX has rapidly been adopted in patients with good PS after the publication of phase III trials. Our data in a community setting supports a survival advantage for FOLFIRINOX. Although the magnitude of benefit may be smaller in the community setting, we agree that should FOLFIRINOX become a standard of care for good PS patients.

Updated use of first-line chemotherapy for advanced pancreatic cancer: FOLFIRINOX versus gemcitabine.

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 6607-6607
Author(s):  
Thomas H. Cartwright ◽  
Aimee Ginsburg Arlen ◽  
Lalan S. Wilfong ◽  
Robyn K. Harrell ◽  
J. Russell Hoverman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Community Setting ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
The United States ◽  
Age At Diagnosis ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Combination Regimen ◽  
First Line ◽  
Asco 2012

6607 Background: Pancreatic cancer (PC) is the fourth leading cause of death in the United States. It is estimated that 45,220 patients will be diagnosed in 2013 and 38,460 will die (Siegel, CA Cancer J Clin 2013). Gemcitabine has long been the standard of care chemotherapy. Recent advances in treatment created a combination regimen (oxaliplatin, irinotecan, leucovorin, fluorouracil [FOLFIRINOX]) for patients with good Karnofsky performance status (PS) (Conroy, NEJM 2011). This retrospective analysis was conducted as an update to results reported at ASCO 2012 (Ginsburg Arlen, JCO 2012) to evaluate characteristics and overall survival (OS) of patients receiving FOLFIRINOX and gemcitabine-based treatments in a large outpatient community setting. This is the largest study describing FOLFIRINOX patients to date. Methods: Patients with advanced PC treated within The US Oncology Network entered into the iKnowMed (iKM) database between June 2010 and November 2012 were included. Patterns of treatment were characterized by the median age at diagnosis, sex, PS, and first-line metastatic chemotherapy prescribed. The primary endpoints of the analysis were OS and uptake of FOLFIRINOX within the network. Results: Compared to ASCO 2012 results, 1,000 additional patients were identified in iKM. Of the 1,714 total patients, 24% received FOLFIRINOX (up from 13% in 2012) and 76% gemcitabine-based therapy (87% in 2012). Increased utilization of FOLFIRINOX for patients with good PS began in June 2010. For all patients (55% male), the median age at diagnosis was 67 years and the majority (85%) had a PS of 70% or greater. The OS was significantly longer for FOLFIRINOX (9.6 mos) versus gemcitabine (6.3 mos) (p<0.0001). This held true for PS of 70% or greater patient given FOLFIRINOX (9.6 mos) versus gemcitabine (7 mos) (p<0.0001). Conclusions: Utilization of FOLFIRINOX has continued to expand after the publication of phase III trials. Our data in a community setting supports a survival advantage for FOLFIRINOX. Although the magnitude of benefit may be smaller in the community, we agree that FOLFIRINOX should become a standard of care for good PS patients.

Randomized Phase III Trial of Gemcitabine Plus Cisplatin Compared With Single-Agent Gemcitabine As First-Line Treatment of Patients With Advanced Pancreatic Cancer: The GIP-1 Study

2010 ◽  
Vol 28 (10) ◽  
pp. 1645-1651 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giuseppe Colucci ◽  
Roberto Labianca ◽  
Francesco Di Costanzo ◽  
Vittorio Gebbia ◽  
Giacomo Cartenì ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Hematologic Toxicity ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Phase Iii Trial ◽  
First Line Treatment

PurposeSingle-agent gemcitabine became standard first-line treatment for advanced pancreatic cancer after demonstration of superiority compared with fluorouracil. The Gruppo Italiano Pancreas 1 randomized phase III trial aimed to compare gemcitabine plus cisplatin versus gemcitabine alone (ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT00813696).Patients and MethodsPatients with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer, age 18 to 75 years, and Karnofsky performance status (KPS) ≥ 50, were randomly assigned to receive gemcitabine (arm A) or gemcitabine plus cisplatin (arm B). Arm A: gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m2weekly for 7 weeks, and, after a 1-week rest, on days 1, 8, and 15 every 4 weeks. Arm B: cisplatin 25 mg/m2added weekly to gemcitabine, except cycle 1 day 22. Primary end point was overall survival. To have 8% power of detecting a 0.74 hazard ratio (HR) of death, with bilateral α .05, 355 events were needed and 400 patients planned.ResultsFour hundred patients were enrolled (arm A: 199; arm B: 201). Median age was 63, 59% were male, 84% had stage IV, and 83% had KPS ≥ 80. Median overall survival was 8.3 months versus 7.2 months in arm A and B, respectively (HR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.89 to 1.35; P = .38). Median progression-free survival was 3.9 months versus 3.8 months in arm A and B, respectively (HR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.80 to 1.19; P = .80). The objective response rate was 10.1% in A and 12.9% in B (P = .37). Clinical benefit was experienced by 23.0% in A and 15.1% in B (P = .057). Combination therapy produced more hematologic toxicity, without relevant differences in nonhematologic toxicity.ConclusionThe addition of weekly cisplatin to gemcitabine failed to demonstrate any improvement as first-line treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer.

Gemcitabine Plus Capecitabine Compared With Gemcitabine Alone in Advanced Pancreatic Cancer: A Randomized, Multicenter, Phase III Trial of the Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research and the Central European Cooperative Oncology Group

2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (16) ◽  
pp. 2212-2217 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Herrmann ◽  
György Bodoky ◽  
Thomas Ruhstaller ◽  
Bengt Glimelius ◽  
Emilio Bajetta ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Karnofsky Performance Score ◽  
Phase Iii Trial ◽  
Good Performance Status ◽  
Grade 3

PurposeThis phase III trial compared the efficacy and safety of gemcitabine (Gem) plus capecitabine (GemCap) versus single-agent Gem in advanced/metastatic pancreatic cancer.Patients and MethodsPatients were randomly assigned to receive GemCap (oral capecitabine 650 mg/m2twice daily on days 1 to 14 plus Gem 1,000 mg/m2by 30-minute infusion on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks) or Gem (1,000 mg/m2by 30-minute infusion weekly for 7 weeks, followed by a 1-week break, and then weekly for 3 weeks every 4 weeks). Patients were stratified according to center, Karnofsky performance score (KPS), presence of pain, and disease extent.ResultsA total of 319 patients were enrolled between June 2001 and June 2004. Median overall survival (OS) time, the primary end point, was 8.4 and 7.2 months in the GemCap and Gem arms, respectively (P = .234). Post hoc analysis in patients with good KPS (score of 90 to 100) showed a significant prolongation of median OS time in the GemCap arm compared with the Gem arm (10.1 v 7.4 months, respectively; P = .014). The overall frequency of grade 3 or 4 adverse events was similar in each arm. Neutropenia was the most frequent grade 3 or 4 adverse event in both arms.ConclusionGemCap failed to improve OS at a statistically significant level compared with standard Gem treatment. The safety of GemCap and Gem was similar. In the subgroup of patients with good performance status, median OS was improved significantly. GemCap is a practical regimen that may be considered as an alternative to single-agent Gem for the treatment of advanced/metastatic pancreatic cancer patients with a good performance status.

Phase III Trial of Gemcitabine Plus Tipifarnib Compared With Gemcitabine Plus Placebo in Advanced Pancreatic Cancer

2004 ◽  
Vol 22 (8) ◽  
pp. 1430-1438 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. Van Cutsem ◽  
H. van de Velde ◽  
P. Karasek ◽  
H. Oettle ◽  
W.L. Vervenne ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Survival Rates ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Free Survival

Purpose To determine whether addition of the farnesyltransferase inhibitor tipifarnib (Zarnestra, R115777; Johnson and Johnson Pharmaceutical Research and Development, Beerse, Belgium) to standard gemcitabine therapy improves overall survival in advanced pancreatic cancer. Patients and Methods This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study compared gemcitabine + tipifarnib versus gemcitabine + placebo in patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma previously untreated with systemic therapy. Tipifarnib was given at 200 mg bid orally continuously; gemcitabine was given at 1,000 mg/m2 intravenously weekly × 7 for 8 weeks, then weekly × 3 every 4 weeks. The primary end point was overall survival; secondary end points included 6-month and 1-year survival rates, progression-free survival, response rate, safety, and quality of life. Results Six hundred eighty-eight patients were enrolled. Baseline characteristics were well balanced between the two treatment arms. No statistically significant differences in survival parameters were observed. The median overall survival for the experimental arm was 193 v 182 days for the control arm (P = .75); 6-month and 1-year survival rates were 53% and 27% v 49% and 24% for the control arm, respectively; median progression-free survival was 112 v 109 days for the control arm. Ten drug-related deaths were reported for the experimental arm and seven for the control arm. Neutropenia and thrombocytopenia grade ≥ 3 were observed in 40% and 15% in the experimental arm versus 30% and 12% in the control arm. Incidences of nonhematologic adverse events were similar in two groups. Conclusion The combination of gemcitabine and tipifarnib has an acceptable toxicity profile but does not prolong overall survival in advanced pancreatic cancer compared with single-agent gemcitabine.

Second-Line Oxaliplatin, Folinic Acid, and Fluorouracil Versus Folinic Acid and Fluorouracil Alone for Gemcitabine-Refractory Pancreatic Cancer: Outcomes From the CONKO-003 Trial

2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (23) ◽  
pp. 2423-2429 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helmut Oettle ◽  
Hanno Riess ◽  
Jens M. Stieler ◽  
Gerhard Heil ◽  
Ingo Schwaner ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Folinic Acid ◽  
Karnofsky Performance Status ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Gemcitabine Refractory

Purpose To assess the efficacy of a second-line regimen of oxaliplatin and folinic acid–modulated fluorouracil in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer who have experienced progression while receiving gemcitabine monotherapy. Patients and Methods A randomized, open-label, phase III study was conducted in 16 institutions throughout Germany. Recruitment ran from January 2004 until May 2007, and the last follow-up concluded in December 2012. Overall, 168 patients age 18 years or older who experienced disease progression during first-line gemcitabine therapy were randomly assigned to folinic acid and fluorouracil (FF) or oxaliplatin and FF (OFF). Patients were stratified according to the presence of metastases, duration of first-line therapy, and Karnofsky performance status. Results Median follow-up was 54.1 months, and 160 patients were eligible for the primary analysis. The median overall survival in the OFF group (5.9 months; 95% CI, 4.1 to 7.4) versus the FF group (3.3 months; 95% CI, 2.7 to 4.0) was significantly improved (hazard ratio [HR], 0.66; 95% CI, 0.48 to 0.91; log-rank P = .010). Time to progression with OFF (2.9 months; 95% CI, 2.4 to 3.2) versus FF (2.0 months; 95% CI, 1.6 to 2.3) was significantly extended also (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.50 to 0.94; log-rank P = .019). Rates of adverse events were similar between treatment arms, with the exception of grades 1 to 2 neurotoxicity, which were reported in 29 patients (38.2%) and six patients (7.1%) in the OFF and FF groups, respectively (P < .001). Conclusion Second-line OFF significantly extended the duration of overall survival when compared with FF alone in patients with advanced gemcitabine-refractory pancreatic cancer.

Gemcitabine-based polychemotherapy for advanced pancreatic cancer (APC): Is it ready for prime time? A pooled analysis of 3,682 patients (pts) enrolled in 12 phase III trials

2006 ◽  
Vol 24 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4118-4118 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Milella ◽  
P. Carlini ◽  
A. Gelibter ◽  
E. Ruggeri ◽  
A. Ceribelli ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Random Effect ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Random Effect Model ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Pooled Analysis ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Phase Iii Trials ◽  
Combination Regimens

4118 Background: Since the introduction of gemcitabine (G), attempts have been made to develop G-based combination regimens to improve the dismal outcome of APC pts. Results of randomized trials, however, have been conflicting and single-agent G presently remains the standard of care for such pts. Methods: All prospective phase III trials comparing single-agent G with G-based polychemotherapy regimens (poly-G) were considered eligible. A pooled analysis was performed and event-based relative risk ratios (RR) with 95% CI were derived through both a fixed- and a random-effect model approach, exploring OS as the primary outcome and PFS and ORR as secondary outcomes. Heterogeneity between different trials was also taken into account. Results: Twelve trials involving 3682 pts were identified. The analysis was conducted considering three different subgroups: 1) overall population (3682 patients, 12 trials), 2) platinum-containing poly-G (PG) vs G (768 pts, 5 trials), and 3) fluoropyrimidine-containing poly-G (FG) vs G (1640 pts, 4 trials). As shown in the table, no significant differences in the primary outcome (OS) were observed in any of the three groups analyzed. Conversely, a significant advantage for poly-G was evident with regard to both PFS and ORR in the overall population as well as in the PG vs G subgroup, although with some heterogeneity. A heterogeneous non-significant trend towards a better PFS and ORR outcome was also observed in the FG vs G subgroup. Conclusions: Single-agent G remains the treatment of choice in APC pts. However, the addition of platinum compounds to G appears to significantly improve PFS and ORR, possibly justifying the use of platinum-based poly-G in younger and fit patients. [Table: see text] No significant financial relationships to disclose.

A randomized second line trial in patients with gemcitabine refractory advanced pancreatic cancer - CONKO 003

2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4517-4517 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. Riess ◽  
U. Pelzer ◽  
J. Stieler ◽  
I. Schwaner ◽  
G. Heil ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Side Effects ◽  
Disease Progression ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
The Impact

4517 Objective: For nearly ten years gemcitabine (G) was standard first line therapy for patients (pts) with advanced pancreatic cancer (APC). There is no consensus about second line therapy after disease progression while receiving G, but 5-FU-based regimens are considered. Results about randomized second line studies in APC are very rare. Our phase II study (ASCO 2002) showed activity of the OFF (oxaliplatin/folinic Acid (FA)/5-fluorouracil (FU) [24h] ) regimen in 23 pts. To examine the impact and the side effects of oxaliplatin we initiated a multicenter phase III study to compare OFF and FF in pts with G refractory APC. Methods: Pts with CT/ MRT confirmed failure with G in first line therapy, Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) >60%, controlled pain, adequate hematological, renal and liver functions were eligible. Pts were stratified according to duration of first line therapy, KPS and tumor stage. We randomized pts to outpatient treatment with FF (FU 2g/m2 (24h)/ FA 200 mg/m2 (30min) on d1, d8, d15 and d22) or OFF (FF+Oxaliplatin 85mg/m2, d8, d22). In both arms the next cycle started on day 43. Pts were followed with regular staging every 3 months or at any signs of disease progression. Results: Until now we randomized 161 of 165 (planned) pts between 02/2004 and 01/2007. So we expect to present first results (side effects, progression free survival, overall survival) at the meeting. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Treatment of Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer

2005 ◽  
Vol 3 (5) ◽  
pp. 627-636 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew H. Ko ◽  
Margaret A. Tempero
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
The United States ◽  
Cytotoxic Agents ◽  
Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Fixed Dose ◽  
Fixed Dose Rate ◽  
Advanced Stages ◽  
Fixed Dose Rate Infusion

Pancreatic adenocarcinoma represents the fourth-leading cause of cancer-related mortality in the United States. The vast majority of patients are diagnosed at advanced stages of the disease when surgery is no longer an option. For these patients, systemic therapy remains the mainstay of care. Although single-agent gemcitabine has remained the standard of care since its approval in 1997, improvements in patient outcomes may potentially be realized by (1) applying pharmacokinetic principles to optimize drug delivery, such as the administration of gemcitabine at a “fixed-dose rate” infusion; (2) combining gemcitabine with other cytotoxic agents for which evidence of synergy exists, such as platinum compounds; and (3) integrating novel targeted agents such as bevacizumab, erlotinib, and cetuximab into treatment paradigms, based on an increasing understanding of the molecular pathways that govern pancreatic tumor growth and maintenance. This article provides the evidence to support each of these approaches and highlights future directions in the management of metastatic pancreatic cancer.

scholarly journals Optimizing Treatment for Head and Neck Cancers: Recurrent/Metastatic Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma

2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (7.5) ◽  
pp. 982-984
Author(s):  
Robert I. Haddad
Keyword(s):  
Head And Neck ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Routine Practice ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Positive Score ◽  
Combined Positive Score ◽  
Line Setting

Immunotherapy has changed the game in the treatment of head and neck cancer (HNC). Practice-changing results from the phase III KEYNOTE-048 trial led to the approval of pembrolizumab immunotherapy alone or in combination with chemotherapy for the treatment of recurrent/metastatic HNC in the first-line setting. Testing for combined positive score (CPS) is now part of routine practice, because patients with CPS ≥1 can be started on single-agent immunotherapy in the first-line. Pembrolizumab replaces the “old” standard of care established by the EXTREME study, as trials looking at targets besides immunotherapy have proved “disappointing.” Additionally, nivolumab and pembrolizumab are both approved for use in the second-line.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document