Meta-analysis of randomized phase II and phase III trials of gemcitabine with/without S-1 in Asian patients with advanced pancreatic cancer.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 311-311 ◽  
Author(s):  
Geoffrey Yuyat Ku ◽  
Benjamin Haaland ◽  
Tatsuya Ioka ◽  
Hiroyuki Isayama ◽  
Yousuke Nakai ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Group Performance ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Dihydropyrimidine Dehydrogenase ◽  
Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Asian Patients ◽  
Ecog Ps

311 Background: Advanced pancreatic cancer (PC) is a virulent disease, where gemcitabine is considered the standard-of-care. A recent phase III evaluation demonstrated superiority of FOLFIRINOX (bolus and infusional 5-fluorouracil (FU), irinotecan, oxaliplatin) in patients with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) of ≤1. Recently, three studies were presented in abstract form, comparing gemcitabine/S-1 (GS) to gemcitabine. S-1 is a mixture of tegafur (an oral 5-FU prodrug), a dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase inhibitor and an agent designed to reduce the gastrointestinal toxicity of 5-FU. All three trials demonstrated significant improvements in progression-free survival (PFS) while one study also showed a statistically significant improvement in overall survival (OS). Methods: We performed a meta-analysis of the three trials. Results: Seven hundred and seventy patients were randomized to receive GS vs. gemcitabine; 75% had metastatic disease and 65% had an ECOG PS of 0. GS was associated with superior RR (hazard ratio (HR) 0.348, p=3.06×10-7), PFS (HR 0.64, p=7.26×10-9) and OS (HR 0.79, p=2.47×10-2) compared to gemcitabine. Patients receiving GS were more likely to experience nausea, diarrhea, rash and stomatitis (mostly grade 1/2); neutropenic fever occurred in <2% of patients. One study demonstrated superior quality-of-life for GS. Conclusions: GS should be considered a first-line option for the treatment of advanced PC in Asian patients. This regimen should serve as the reference for future trials and comparison with FOLFIRINOX in patients with ECOG PS ≤1 is warranted.

scholarly journals Digital Detection of Sarcopenia in Pancreatic Cancer: Additional Utilization to Plan Patient Management

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mustafa Jalal ◽  
Jennifer A Campbell ◽  
Jonathan Wadsley ◽  
Andrew D Hopper
Keyword(s):  
Skeletal Muscle ◽  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Group Performance ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Skeletal Muscle Index ◽  
Ecog Ps ◽  
Cancer Network

Abstract Purpose: The presence of a sarcopenia adversely affects the prognosis of patients with pancreatic cancer. There is an emerging role for using computed tomography (CT) to calculate skeletal muscle index (SMI) and the presence of sarcopenia. The aim of this study was to assess if detecting ‘digital sarcopenia’ is feasible and can contribute to the management of patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC).Methods: Patients diagnosed with LAPC referred for endoscopic ultrasound guided biopsy (EUS-B) by our regional cancer network were identified. Age, body mass index (BMI), and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG-PS) was noted. CT images were analysed for SMI and the presence of sarcopenia. Decision outcomes on receiving chemotherapy or not were collected from the regional oncology database. Results: In total 51/204 (25%) patients with LAPC who underwent EUS-B were not given chemotherapy and received BSC only. The prevalence of sarcopenia (p=0.0003), age ≥ 75 years old (p=0.03) and ECOG-PS 2-3 (p=0.01) were significantly higher in the patents receiving BSC only. Logistic regression analysis demonstrated that SMI was the only independent associated factor identifying patients with LAPC who were treated with BSC only and not chemotherapy after adjusting for age and ECOG-PS. Conclusion: Our study has shown that digital skeletal muscle analysis at the time of a diagnostic CT for patients with pancreatic cancer is feasible and can detect sarcopenia and malnourished patients who are much less likely to take up chemotherapy. These patients could be triaged to oncology assessment prior to EUS-B to avoid unnecessary investigations.

scholarly journals Computed Tomographic Sarcopenia in Pancreatic Cancer: Further Utilization to Plan Patient Management

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mustafa Jalal ◽  
Jennifer A. Campbell ◽  
Jonathan Wadsley ◽  
Andrew D. Hopper
Keyword(s):  
Skeletal Muscle ◽  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Group Performance ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Skeletal Muscle Index ◽  
Computed Tomographic ◽  
Ecog Ps

Abstract Purpose The presence of a sarcopenia adversely affects the prognosis of patients with pancreatic cancer. There is an emerging role for using computed tomography (CT) to calculate skeletal muscle index (SMI) and the presence of sarcopenia. The aim of this study was to assess if detecting ‘computed tomographic sarcopenia’ is feasible and can contribute to the management of patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC). Methods Patients diagnosed with LAPC referred for endoscopic ultrasound-guided biopsy (EUS-B) by our regional cancer network were identified. Age, body mass index (BMI), and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG-PS) were noted. CT images were analysed for SMI and the presence of sarcopenia. Decision outcomes on receiving chemotherapy or not were collected from the regional oncology database. Results In total, 51/204 (25%) patients with LAPC who underwent EUS-B were not given chemotherapy and received best supportive care (BSC) only. The prevalence of sarcopenia (p = 0.0003), age ≥ 75 years old (p = 0.03), and ECOG-PS 2–3 (p = 0.01) were significantly higher in the patients receiving BSC only. Logistic regression analysis demonstrated that SMI was the only independent associated factor identifying patients with LAPC who were treated with BSC only and not chemotherapy after adjusting for age and ECOG-PS. Conclusion Our study has shown that computed tomographic skeletal muscle analysis at the time of a diagnostic CT for patients with pancreatic cancer is feasible and can detect sarcopenia and malnourished patients who are much less likely to take up chemotherapy. These patients could be triaged to oncology assessment prior to EUS-B to avoid unnecessary investigations.

scholarly journals Attenuated regimen of biweekly gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel in patients aged 65 years or older with advanced pancreatic cancer

2020 ◽  
Vol 13 ◽  
pp. 175628482097491
Author(s):  
Hasan Rehman ◽  
Jeffrey Chi ◽  
Nausheen Hakim ◽  
Shreya Prasad Goyal ◽  
Coral Olazagasti ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Group Performance ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Poor Performance ◽  
Poor Performance Status ◽  
Weekly Schedule ◽  
Dose Reductions

Background: Treatment with gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel confers a survival benefit over gemcitabine monotherapy in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer (APC). However, such treatment can be associated with significant toxicities especially in older patients and carries practical disadvantages related to a weekly schedule along with financial cost. We retrospectively analyzed patients >65 years of age with APC who received a modified biweekly regimen of gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel to evaluate efficacy and toxicity. Methods: Patients aged >65 years with chemo-naïve APC with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ⩽2 were studied. Patients were treated with a modified regimen of gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 and nab-paclitaxel 125 mg/m2 every 2 weeks on days 1 and 15 of a 28-day cycle. Patients were evaluated for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) with analyses performed using the Kaplan–Meier method. Adverse events were recorded on the day of chemotherapy. Cancer antigen 19.9 was measured in every cycle and restaging scans were performed every two cycles. Results: A total of 73 patients (median age: 73 years; range: 66–93) were treated with biweekly gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel as first-line treatment. The median OS and PFS were 9.1 months and 4.8 months, respectively. Around 66% of patients received growth-factor support based on American Society of Clinical Oncology guidelines and no patient developed neutropenic fever. The incidences of grade ⩾3 toxicity for neutropenia, anemia, thrombocytopenia, and neurotoxicity were 2%, 7%, 3%, and 5%, respectively. Dose reductions of gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel were required in 10% and 4% patients, respectively. Conclusion: In patients older than >65 years of age with APC, a modified regimen of biweekly gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel was found to be effective when compared with the historical control from the MPACT study. This regimen allowed for fewer dose reductions, reduced healthcare costs from additional appointments, travel-related cost, as well as a favorable side-effect profile while maintaining efficacy. Though retrospective in nature, this study underlines the need for further investigation, particularly in elderly patients with poor performance status, such as those with pancreatic cancer, and in order to combine with a third agent, such as a targeted treatment or immunotherapy.

LAPACT: An open-label, multicenter phase II trial of nab-paclitaxel (nab-P) plus gemcitabine (Gem) in patients (pts) with locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC).

2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS477-TPS477 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philip Agop Philip ◽  
Jill Lacy ◽  
Scot D. Dowden ◽  
Javier Sastre ◽  
Venu Gopal Bathini ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Group Performance ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
The United States ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Primary Tumors

TPS477 Background: In pts with LAPC, more effective systemic therapies may be associated with improved local control, delay of metastasis, and overall survival (OS). The phase III MPACT trial in pts with metastatic PC demonstrated longer OS (median, 8.7 vs 6.6 mos; HR, 0.72; P < 0.001) and an ≈ 3-fold greater shrinkage of primary tumors with nab-P + Gem vs Gem alone (−22.15% vs −7.02%), raising the possibility of improved local PC control with nab-P + Gem. LAPACT will assess the efficacy and safety of nab-P + Gem in LAPC. Methods: LAPACT will enroll treatment-naive pts (planned n ≈ 110) in the United States, Canada, and Europe with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≤ 1, confirmed unresectable LAPC, no distant metastases, and adequate organ function. Pts with mixed-origin tumors, any other malignancy within 5 years, peripheral neuropathy grade > 1, or clinically significant ascites are ineligible. Pts will receive nab-P 125 mg/m2 + Gem 1000 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, and 15 of each 28-day cycle. Pts without progressive disease (PD) or unacceptable toxicity after 6 cycles will receive investigator’s choice of surgery, chemoradiotherapy, or continued nab-P + Gem. If a major response is observed, surgery may occur prior to completing 6 cycles of nab-P + Gem. The primary endpoint is time to treatment failure (TTF; time from first therapy dose to discontinuation due to PD, start of a new non–protocol-defined anti-cancer therapy, or death). The study design allows for 80% power at a 1-sided α of 0.05 to detect a 30% increase over the 5.1-month median TTF observed for nab-P + Gem in the MPACT study. The secondary endpoints are disease control rate (DCR) after 6 cycles, overall response rate, progression-free survival, OS, safety, and quality of life. The exploratory endpoint is correlation of changes in circulating nucleic acids with PD and treatment response. An interim DCR analysis will occur after all pts have completed 6 cycles of nab-P + Gem, discontinued therapy due to PD, died, or started a new non–protocol-defined therapy before completing 6 cycles of therapy. Enrollment is ongoing (first pt enrolled in April 2015). Clinical trial information: NCT02301143.

Phase III Randomized Comparison of Gemcitabine Versus Gemcitabine Plus Capecitabine in Patients With Advanced Pancreatic Cancer

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (33) ◽  
pp. 5513-5518 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Cunningham ◽  
Ian Chau ◽  
Deborah D. Stocken ◽  
Juan W. Valle ◽  
David Smith ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Primary Outcome Measure ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Open Label

PurposeBoth gemcitabine (GEM) and fluoropyrimidines are valuable treatment for advanced pancreatic cancer. This open-label study was designed to compare the overall survival (OS) of patients randomly assigned to GEM alone or GEM plus capecitabine (GEM-CAP).Patients and MethodsPatients with previously untreated histologically or cytologically proven locally advanced or metastatic carcinoma of the pancreas with a performance status ≤ 2 were recruited. Patients were randomly assigned to GEM or GEM-CAP. The primary outcome measure was survival. Meta-analysis of published studies was also conducted.ResultsBetween May 2002 and January 2005, 533 patients were randomly assigned to GEM (n = 266) and GEM-CAP (n = 267) arms. GEM-CAP significantly improved objective response rate (19.1% v 12.4%; P = .034) and progression-free survival (hazard ratio [HR], 0.78; 95% CI, 0.66 to 0.93; P = .004) and was associated with a trend toward improved OS (HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.72 to 1.02; P = .08) compared with GEM alone. This trend for OS benefit for GEM-CAP was consistent across different prognostic subgroups according to baseline stratification factors (stage and performance status) and remained after adjusting for these stratification factors (P = .077). Moreover, the meta-analysis of two additional studies involving 935 patients showed a significant survival benefit in favor of GEM-CAP (HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.75 to 0.98; P = .02) with no intertrial heterogeneity.ConclusionOn the basis of our trial and the meta-analysis, GEM-CAP should be considered as one of the standard first-line options in locally advanced and metastatic pancreatic cancer.

A phase III trial of virulizin plus gemcitabine vs. gemcitabine alone in advanced pancreatic cancer: Results of subgroup analysis

2006 ◽  
Vol 24 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4116-4116 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. A. Wright ◽  
J. Osterlee ◽  
S. Fekete ◽  
Y. Lee ◽  
A. H. Young
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Cancer ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Ecog Ps ◽  
To Receive

4116 Background: Virulizin (V) is a novel antitumor immune modulator that improves survival in pancreatic cancer patients (pts) as monotherapy. A double-blind, multicenter, randomized, phase III study was conducted to evaluate the survival benefits and safety of V in combination with gemcitabine (G) in pts with advanced pancreatic cancer. Methods: Chemo-naive pts with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer with ECOG Performance Status (PS) of 0, 1 or 2 were enrolled. Pts were randomized to receive intramuscular injections of either V or placebo (P) 3 times weekly + G (1,000 mg/m2 weekly ×7 with 1 week rest, then weekly ×3 q4w). Randomization was stratified according to ECOG PS (0 or 1, and 2) and extent of disease (locally advanced and metastatic). Pts who showed no clinical benefit or were intolerant to G entered 2nd-line therapy (stage 3), in which pts continued to receive either V or P alone or with 5-FU, or best supportive care. The primary endpoint was survival, defined as time from baseline/treatment day 1 to time of death from any cause. Results: The intent to treat (ITT) population comprised 434 pts, of which 377 were efficacy evaluable (EE). Median overall survival for V + G was 6.3 months for the ITT population (6.8 months for EE pts) and 6 months for P + G for both ITT and EE pts. While differences in survival times were not statistically significant, exploratory analysis showed encouraging results in specific subgroups treated with V + G ( table ). Importantly, a significant difference was found in stage 3 pts who received V in a salvage setting compared to pts who received P. Conclusions: Pancreatic cancer pts with either low ECOG PS or metastatic cancer showed a survival benefit when treated with V + G, which was significant in pts who continued to receive V as a salvage therapy. Further studies in these targeted patient populations are being considered. [Table: see text] No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Modified FOLFIRINOX versus S-1 as second-line chemotherapy in patients with gemcitabine-failed metastatic pancreatic cancer: A randomized phase III trial (MPACA-3).

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4119-4119
Author(s):  
Se-Il Go ◽  
Sang-Cheol Lee ◽  
Woo Kyun Bae ◽  
Dae Young Zang ◽  
Hyun Woo Lee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Group Performance ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Phase Iii Trial

4119 Background: Modified FOLFIRINOX (mFOLFIRINOX) consisting of 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin has been assessed as second-line treatment of patients with advanced pancreatic cancer in retrospective and phase II studies. However, the result was not confirmed by randomized controlled trial. Methods: A randomized, open-label, phase III trial was conducted at 9 institutions in Korea. Patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (mPAC) and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1 who failed to first-line gemcitabine-based chemotherapy were randomly assigned to receive mFOLFIRINOX or S-1. The primary endpoint was overall survival. Results: A total of 80 patients were enrolled from March 2017 to December 2019. The accrual of patients was early terminated due to clear difference of efficacy in the interim analysis and expectation of poor recruitment due to conflicting adjuvant regimens. Objective response and disease control rates were 15.4% vs. 2.4% ( p= 0.041) and 66.7% vs. 36.6% ( p= 0.007) in the mFOLFIRINOX and S-1 arms, respectively. The median progression-free survival was 5.2 and 2.2 months in the mFOLFIRINOX and S-1 arms, respectively ( p= 0.002). The median overall survival was 9.2 and 4.9 months in the mFOLFIRINOX and S-1 arms, respectively ( p= 0.048). The adjusted hazard ratio of the mFOLFIRINOX arm to the S-1 arm for overall survival was 0.402 (95% confidence interval 0.223-0.725, p= 0.002). All grade 3-4 adverse events occurred in 56.5% and 17.1% in the mFOLFIRINOX and S-1 arms, respectively ( p< 0.001). However, only one patient in each arm prematurely discontinued treatment due to toxicity and there was no treatment-related mortality in both arms. Minimally important differences in the health-related quality of life were not observed in both arms. Conclusions: mFOLFIRINOX as second-line treatment in mPAC patients failed to gemcitabine-based chemotherapy demonstrated a survival benefit versus S-1 alone with acceptable toxicities. Clinical trial information: KCT0003534.

Regorafenib (REG) in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) progressing following sorafenib: An ongoing randomized, double-blind, phase III trial.

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS4163-TPS4163
Author(s):  
Ann-Lii Cheng ◽  
Richard S. Finn ◽  
Masatoshi Kudo ◽  
Josep M. Llovet ◽  
Shukui Qin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systemic Therapy ◽  
Group Performance ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Sorafenib Treatment ◽  
Phase Iii Trial ◽  
Ecog Ps

TPS4163 Background: Sorafenib is the accepted first-line systemic therapy for HCC, but no standard option is available for patients with tumor progression following sorafenib. An open-label phase II study suggested that REG, a multikinase inhibitor, had an acceptable safety profile and showed evidence of antitumor activity in patients with progressive HCC (Bolondi et al. Eur J Cancer 2011; 47 [Suppl 1]: abstract 6.576): disease control was achieved in 26/36 patients (72%) and median time to progression (TTP) was 4.3 months; median overall survival (OS) was 13.8 months. On the basis of these promising data, a phase III trial was designed. Methods: This randomized, double-blind, placebo (PBO)-controlled, multinational study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01774344) will assess the efficacy and tolerability of REG vs PBO in patients with HCC that has progressed following sorafenib treatment (target n=530). Inclusion criteria include Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage B or C disease, Child–Pugh A liver function, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) 0 or 1. Patients who discontinued sorafenib ≥8 weeks before study entry or who received other previous systemic therapy for HCC will be excluded. Patients will be randomized in a 2:1 ratio to receive REG 160 mg or matching PBO OD for weeks 1–3 of each 4-week cycle; all patients will also receive best supportive care. Treatment will continue until disease progression, death, intolerable toxicity, or patient/investigator decision to stop. Doses of study drug may be delayed or reduced to manage clinically significant drug-related toxicities. The primary endpoint is OS; secondary endpoints are TTP, progression-free survival, tumor response, and safety. Analysis will be according to randomized group, stratified by geographic region (Asia vs rest of world), ECOG PS (0 vs 1), alfa-fetoprotein level (<400 vs ≥400 ng/ml), extrahepatic disease (yes vs no), and macrovascular invasion (yes vs no). In addition, blood, plasma, and archival tissue will be assessed for pharmacokinetic and biomarker analyses, and health-related quality of life and health utility will be measured. Clinical trial information: NCT01774344.

scholarly journals Gemcitabine Plus Bevacizumab Compared With Gemcitabine Plus Placebo in Patients With Advanced Pancreatic Cancer: Phase III Trial of the Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB 80303)

2010 ◽  
Vol 28 (22) ◽  
pp. 3617-3622 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hedy Lee Kindler ◽  
Donna Niedzwiecki ◽  
Donna Hollis ◽  
Susan Sutherland ◽  
Deborah Schrag ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Phase Iii Trial ◽  
Group B ◽  
Leukemia Group

Purpose The combination of gemcitabine plus bevacizumab produced a 21% response rate and a median survival of 8.8 months in a multicenter phase II trial in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer. These encouraging data led Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB) to conduct a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized phase III trial of gemcitabine/bevacizumab versus gemcitabine/placebo in advanced pancreatic cancer patients. Patients and Methods Eligible patients had no prior therapy for advanced disease, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status 0 to 2, no tumor invasion of adjacent organs, and no increased bleeding risk. The primary end point was overall survival. Patients were stratified by performance status, extent of disease, and prior radiotherapy. Patients received gemcitabine at 1,000 mg/m2 over 30 minutes on days 1, 8, and 15 every 28 days and bevacizumab at 10 mg/kg or placebo on days 1 and 15 every 28 days. Results Between June 2004 and April 2006, 602 patients were enrolled onto the study and 535 were treated. Median overall survival was 5.8 months for gemcitabine/bevacizumab and 5.9 months for gemcitabine/placebo (P = .95). Median progression-free survival was 3.8 and 2.9 months, respectively (P = .07). Overall response rates were 13% and 10%, respectively. Patients with a performance status of 0, 1, and 2 survived a median of 7.9, 4.8, and 2.4 months, respectively. The only statistically significant differences in grades 3 and 4 toxicity occurred for hypertension (10% v 3%; P < .001) and proteinuria (5% v 1%; P = .002); venous thrombosis grade ≥ 3 was equivalent in both arms (14% and 15%, respectively). Conclusion The addition of bevacizumab to gemcitabine does not improve survival in advanced pancreatic cancer patients.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document