Outcomes of second line treatment in patients with advanced and metastatic biliary cancers.

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 420-420
Author(s):  
Gustavo Figueiredo Marcondes Westin ◽  
Samer Alsidawi ◽  
Chandrikha Chandrasekharan ◽  
Andrew M. Briggler ◽  
Brendon Huffman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Proportional Hazards ◽  
Proportional Hazards Model ◽  
Cox Proportional Hazards ◽  
Cox Proportional Hazards Model ◽  
P Value ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Second Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy

420 Background: Advanced biliary cancers respond poorly to chemotherapy and have a dismal survival. Currently gemcitabine-cisplatin (GC) is the standard of care for patients with advanced disease. The efficacy of second line treatment options is not well-defined. We retrospectively evaluated outcomes of patients undergoing second line treatment for advanced biliary cancers at Mayo Clinic. Methods: After obtaining approval from the institutional board review (IRB), we identified 42 patients with advanced and metastatic biliary cancers that progressed after first line (GC) and received second line treatment from 2007-2014. All patients had adequate follow up data. JMP software was used for statistical analysis. Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank tests were used for survival analysis, and multivariate cox proportional hazards model was used to evaluate the prognostic effect of pertinent clinical variables. All tests were two sided and a P value of < 0.05 was considered significant. Results: The median age at diagnosis was 61.5 (range 26-87). The most common regimens used for second line settings were 5-FU-based (69%) followed by gemcitabine-based regimens (19%). The overall response rate (ORR) was 9.1%, while the disease control rate (DCR; stable disease and partial response) was 33%. The median overall survival (mOS) for the entire cohort from first line was 16.8 months (95% CI 12.7-21.7) and the progression-free survival (PFS) was 9.16 months (95% CI 7.3-14.7). From second line start the mOS was 10.4 months (95%; CI 7.3-23.7), and PFS was 2.8 months (95% CI 2.3-4.0). 73% of patients who received second line therapy were alive at 6 months and 50% at 12 months. 25 patients received third line treatment after progression. An univariate and multivariate analysis were performed including age, sex, stage at diagnosis, regimen used, CA19-9 and total body weight loss > 5%, but no significant prognostic factors were identified. Conclusions: Patients with biliary cancers who progress after first line treatment have poor prognosis, but may benefit from second line regimens. 5-FU based regimens were the most commonly used in the second line setting, and 73% of patients who received second line therapy were alive at 6 months.

Pembrolizumab (pembro) plus axitinib (axi) versus sunitinib as first-line therapy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC): Outcomes in the combined IMDC intermediate/poor risk and sarcomatoid subgroups of the phase 3 KEYNOTE-426 study.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4500-4500 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian I. Rini ◽  
Elizabeth R. Plimack ◽  
Viktor Stus ◽  
Rustem Gafanov ◽  
Robert Hawkins ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Proportional Hazards ◽  
Proportional Hazards Model ◽  
Risk Group ◽  
Risk Groups ◽  
Cox Proportional Hazards ◽  
Cox Proportional Hazards Model ◽  
First Line ◽  
Poor Risk ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy

4500 Background: In KEYNOTE-426, pembro + axi significantly improved OS (HR 0.53, P < .0001), PFS (HR 0.69, P = .0001), and ORR (59.3% vs 35.7%, P < .0001) vs sunitinib and had manageable toxicity as first-line therapy for mRCC (NCT02853331). The pembro + axi benefit was observed across all IMDC risk groups and regardless of PD-L1 expression. We present data for the combined intermediate/poor risk group and for patients (pts) with sarcomatoid features. Methods: 861 eligible pts with clear-cell mRCC, no prior systemic therapy for mRCC, and KPS ≥70 were randomized 1:1 to pembro 200 mg IV Q3W for a maximum of 35 cycles plus axi 5 mg orally BID (N = 432) or sunitinib 50 mg orally QD (4-wk on/2-wk off) (N = 429). Primary endpoints were OS and PFS (RECIST v1.1 by blinded, independent central review [BICR]). ORR (RECIST v1.1 by BICR) was the key secondary endpoint. The intermediate/poor risk group was prespecified; the sarcomatoid group was exploratory. HRs and their 95% CIs were calculated with a Cox proportional hazards model. None of the analyses were multiplicity-controlled. Results: 592 (68.8%) of all randomized pts were of IMDC intermediate/poor risk — 294 in the pembro + axi arm, 298 in the sunitinib arm. Pembro + axi improved OS (HR 0.52, 95% CI 0.37-0.74; 12-mo rate 87.3% vs 71.3%), PFS (HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.53-0.85; median 12.6 vs 8.2 mo), and ORR (55.8% [95% CI 49.9-61.5] vs 29.5% [24.4-35.1]) in pts with intermediate/poor risk; CR rates were 4.8% (95% CI 2.6-7.9) vs 0.7% (0.1-2.4). Of the 578 pts with known status, 105 (18.2%) had sarcomatoid features — 51 in the pembro + axi arm, 54 in the sunitinib arm. Pembro + axi improved OS (HR 0.58, 95% CI 0.21-1.59; 12-mo rate 83.4% vs 79.5%), PFS (HR 0.54, 95% CI 0.29-1.00; median not reached vs 8.4 mo), and ORR (58.8% [95% CI 44.2-72.4] vs 31.5% [19.5-45.6]) in pts with sarcomatoid features; CR rates were 11.8% (95% CI 4.4-23.9) vs 0% (0.0-6.6). Conclusions: Pembro + axi provides benefit in the combined population of pts with IMDC intermediate or poor risk and in pts whose tumors had sarcomatoid features. The observed benefits were consistent with those seen in the total population. Clinical trial information: NCT02853331.

Efficacy and Toxicity of Addition of Bevacizumab to Chemotherapy in Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (10) ◽  
pp. 718-724 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wen-Cong Ruan ◽  
Yue-Ping Che ◽  
Li Ding ◽  
Hai-Feng Li
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Adverse Event ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Second Line Therapy ◽  
Clinical Prognosis ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
Significant Difference

Background: Pre-treated patients with first-line treatment can be offered a second treatment with the aim of improving their poor clinical prognosis. The therapy of metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) patients who did not respond to first-line therapy has limited treatment options. Recently, many studies have paid much attention to the efficacy of bevacizumab as an adjuvant treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer. Objectives: We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of bevacizumab plus chemotherapy compared with bevacizumab-naive based chemotherapy as second-line treatment in people with metastatic CRC. Methods: Electronic databases were searched for eligible studies updated to March 2018. Randomized-controlled trials comparing addition of bevacizumab to chemotherapy without bevacizumab in MCRC patients were included, of which, the main interesting results were the efficacy and safety profiles of the addition of bevacizumab in patients with MCRC as second-line therapy. Result: Five trials were eligible in the meta-analysis. Patients who received the combined bevacizumab and chemotherapy treatment in MCRC as second-line therapy showed a longer overall survival (OS) (OR=0.80,95%CI=0.72-0.89, P<0.0001) and progression-free survival (PFS) (OR=0.69,95%CI=0.61-0.77, P<0.00001). In addition, there was no significant difference in objective response rate (ORR) (RR=1.36,95%CI=0.82-2.24, P=0.23) or severe adverse event (SAE) (RR=1.02,95%CI=0.88-1.19, P=0.78) between bevacizumab-based chemotherapy and bevacizumabnaive based chemotherapy. Conclusion: Our results suggest that the addition of bevacizumab to the chemotherapy therapy could be an efficient and safe treatment option for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer as second-line therapy and without increasing the risk of an adverse event.

scholarly journals A novel nomogram to predict the overall survival in esthesinoeroblastoma

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lijie Jiang ◽  
Tengjiao Lin ◽  
Yu Zhang ◽  
Wenxiang Gao ◽  
Jie Deng ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Proportional Hazards ◽  
Proportional Hazards Model ◽  
Validation Cohort ◽  
Risk Groups ◽  
Cox Proportional Hazards ◽  
Cox Proportional Hazards Model ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
P Value ◽  
Training Cohort

Abstract Background Increasing evidence indicates that the pathology and the modified Kadish system have some influence on the prognosis of esthesioneuroblastoma (ENB). However, an accurate system to combine pathology with a modified Kadish system has not been established. Methods This study aimed to set up and evaluate a model to predict overall survival (OS) accurately in ENB, including clinical characteristics, treatment and pathological variables. We screened the information of patients with ENB between January 1, 1976, and December 30, 2016 from the National Cancer Institute Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program as a training cohort. The validation cohort consisted of patients with ENB at Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center and The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University in the same period, and 87 patients were identified. The Pearson’s chi-squared test was used to assess significance of clinicopathological and demographic characteristics. We used the Cox proportional hazards model to examine univariate and multivariate analyses. The model coefficients were used to calculate the Hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Prognostic factors with a p- value < 0.05 in multivariate analysis were included in the nomogram. The concordance index (c-index) and calibration curve were used to evaluate the predictive power of the nomogram. Results The c-index of training cohort and validation cohort are 0.737 (95% CI, 0.709 to 0.765) and 0.791 (95% CI, 0.767 to 0.815) respectively. The calibration curves revealed a good agreement between the nomogram prediction and actual observation regarding the probability of 3-year and 5-year survival. We used a nomogram to calculate the 3-year and 5-year growth probability and stratified patients into three risk groups. Conclusions The nomogram provided the risk group information and identified mortality risk and can serve as a reference for designing a reasonable follow-up plan.

Characteristics, treatment patterns, and economic burden of patients with metastatic cervical cancer receiving systemic anticancer therapy.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (28_suppl) ◽  
pp. 51-51
Author(s):  
Xiaoyun Pan ◽  
Lincy S. Lal ◽  
John White ◽  
Seyed Hamidreza Mahmoudpour ◽  
Christian Valencia
Keyword(s):  
Cervical Cancer ◽  
Economic Burden ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Duration Of Treatment ◽  
Second Line Therapy ◽  
Treatment Regimens ◽  
Line Therapy

51 Background: In 2021, 14,480 patients are estimated to be diagnosed with cervical cancer in the US; 16% of patients are expected to have metastatic disease for whom the 5-year survival rate is 17.6% per SEER estimates. Patients with metastatic cervical cancer (mCC) are treated mainly with systemic therapy. This study aims to describe the clinical characteristics, demographics, treatment patterns, and economic burden of patients with mCC receiving systemic therapy. Methods: Eligible women had been diagnosed with cervical cancer, as evidenced by >2 outpatient or >1 inpatient claim in the Optum Research Database from January 2014 through January 2020. Patients were included if they had metastasis within 6 months before or after cervical cancer diagnosis, with evidence of systemic treatment on or after the latter of a claim date for cervical cancer disease or metastatic disease. The index date was the first-line treatment initiation date. Patients were required to have ≥6 months of pre-index continuous enrollment. The top 3 treatment regimens and median treatment duration by line of therapy were described. All-cause per-patient-per-month (PPPM) costs (2019 US dollars), including plan and patient paid amounts, were reported for full follow-up period from first-line and second-line therapy initiation. Results: The study sample consisted of 778 patients (mean age, 59 years; commercial, 58%; Medicare Advantage, 42%). The mean (median) follow-up period was 14 (9) months. Top baseline comorbidities were diseases of the urinary system (71%) and diseases of the female genital organs (70%), and the median Charlson comorbidity index was 7. In the first line, 80% of patients received platinum-based therapy and 23% received bevacizumab (bev). Of 778 patients, only 294 (38%) received second-line therapy, with 34% receiving bev. Top first-line treatment regimens were carboplatin + paclitaxel (27%), cisplatin (21%), and bev + carboplatin + paclitaxel (10%); the median (95% CI) duration of treatment was 3.4 (3.1-3.7) months. Top second-line treatment regimens were bev + carboplatin + paclitaxel (13%), carboplatin + paclitaxel (11%), and pembrolizumab (6%); the median duration of treatment was 3.8 (3.1-4.2) months. Mean all-cause total PPPM costs were $19,519 from first-line and $22,660 second-line therapy initiation (table). Conclusions: This study indicates that real-world mCC patients have short treatment durations and significant economic burden with first-line and second-line therapy. Novel therapies associated with greater clinical benefits in patients with mCC may provide economic benefit.[Table: see text]

Intravenous vinorelbine as first-line and second-line therapy in advanced breast cancer.

1995 ◽  
Vol 13 (11) ◽  
pp. 2722-2730 ◽  
Author(s):  
B L Weber ◽  
C Vogel ◽  
S Jones ◽  
H Harvey ◽  
L Hutchins ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Advanced Breast Cancer ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Advanced Breast ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Second Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy

PURPOSE We evaluated single-agent intravenous (IV) vinorelbine as first- and second-line treatment for advanced breast cancer (ABC) in patients who were not resistant to anthracyclines. Objective tumor response (TR) and toxicity were assessed. PATIENTS AND METHODS A total of 107 women were enrolled onto this multicenter, nonrandomized, open-label phase II study. Patients were stratified into first- and second-line treatment groups, based on prior treatment history. Vinorelbine was initially given at 30 mg/m2/wk, with dose modification for toxicity as indicated. Therapy was continued until disease progression or severe toxicity mandated withdrawal or until the patient asked to be removed from the study. RESULTS The objective response rate for all patients was 34% (95% confidence interval [CI], 25% to 44%): 35% (95% CI, 23% to 48%) for first-line patients and 32% (95% CI, 20% to 47%) for second-line patients. Nine first-line and three second-line patients obtained a complete response (CR). The median duration of objective response was 34 weeks in both groups. The overall survival durations of first- and second-line patients were 67 weeks and 62 weeks, respectively. Granulocytopenia was the predominant dose-limiting toxicity. Two patients died on study as a result of granulocytopenic sepsis. CONCLUSION Single-agent vinorelbine is an effective and well-tolerated agent for first- and second-line therapy of ABC. The results of this study confirm the findings of similar international trials and suggest vinorelbine should be considered a valid treatment option for patients with ABC and a potential component in future combination regimens for this disease.

Modified FOLFOX6 plus bevacizumab followed by FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab beyond first progression in advanced colorectal cancer: CCOG-0801 study.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 641-641
Author(s):  
Kiyoshi Ishigure ◽  
Goro Nakayama ◽  
Keisuke Uehara ◽  
Hiroyuki Yokoyama ◽  
Akiharu Ishiyama ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Bleeding Event ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Second Line Therapy ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
To Receive

641 Background: Bevacizumab provides survival benefit as the first-line and second-line therapies in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). A large observational study suggested use of bevacizumab beyond first progression (BBP) improved survival. This prompted us to conduct a multicenter phase II study of mFOLFOX6 plus bevacizumab followed by FOLFIRI plus bevacizimab in mCRC to further explore the strategy of BBP in Japanese patients. Methods: Previously untreated patients with assessable disease were treated with mFOLFOX6 plus bevacizumab until tumor progression, followed by FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab. The primary endpoint of the study was the second progression-free survival (2nd PFS), defined as duration from enrollment until progression after the second-line therapy. If the patient failed to receive the second-line treatment due to medical reasons or refusal, the PFS during the first-line therapy was used for analysis. Secondary endpoints were PFS, overall survival (OS), response rate (RR), disease control rate (DCR) and safety. Results: In the first-line therapy, 47 patients treated with mFOLFOX6 plus bevacizumab achieved RR of 61.7%, DCR of 89.4% and median PFS of 11.7 months. Thirty patients went on to receive the second-line therapy with FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab and achieved RR of 27.6%, DCR of 62.1%, and median PFS of 6.0 months. Median 2nd PFS was 16.2 months. Median survival time did not reach the median follow-up time of 27.4 months. Severe adverse events associated with bevacizumab during the first-line therapy were a venous thromboembolic event in one case (2%), a grade 2 bleeding event in one case (2%) and GI perforation in one case (2%). However, no critical events associated with bevacizumab were reported during the second-line therapy. Conclusions: The planned continuation of bevacizumab during the second line treatment is feasible in Japanese mCRC patients. A prospective randomized control study to confirm the efficacy has to be conducted in the future.

Sequential treatment of advanced or metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC): What is effective? Data from the German RCC registry.

2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 499-499
Author(s):  
Lothar Mueller ◽  
Peter J. Goebell ◽  
A. Lueck ◽  
Friedrich Overkamp ◽  
Michele Vogt ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Proportional Hazards ◽  
Proportional Hazards Model ◽  
Negative Impact ◽  
Positive Impact ◽  
Current Treatment ◽  
Cox Proportional Hazards ◽  
Cox Proportional Hazards Model ◽  
Sequential Treatment ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
Systemic Treatments

499 Background: In addition to Bevacizumab+Interferon, current treatment options of mRCC imply two major intracellular modes of action and thus classes of therapies: the four approved tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) Sunitinib, Sorafenib, Pazopanib, Axitinib and the two inhibitors of the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) Temsirolimus, Everolimus (EVE). With their availability efficacy of sequential treatment has become a central question of clinical research. While clinical trials recruit highly selected patients (pts) and usually focus on a single line of therapy, collected data of clinical registries may represent all patients and all sequential therapies. Methods: Starting in 12/2007 the registry aims to enrol a total of 1500 patients from more than 120 oncology and urology outpatient centres collecting data on all systemic treatments, outcome, patient and tumour characteristics. Here, the effectiveness of two 1st – 2nd-line sequential treatments, TKI–TKI vs TKI–EVE, was investigated with a multivariate cox proportional hazards model considering potential confounding variables (age, comorbidity, body mass index (BMI), duration of 1st-line therapy, Motzer’s score and type of sequential treatment). Results: At the time of analysis, 481 pts had received sequential 1st- and 2nd-line treatment between 2007 and 2012. In total, 70% of pts received 1st-line TKI-treatment. 46% of these pts received the sequential treatment TKI–TKI, 25% received TKI–EVE. In the multivariate analysis, high BMI (HR 0.946, 95% CI 0.9018-0.9923, p<.05) and a long duration of 1st-line-therapy (HR 0.9967, 95% CI 0.9956-0.9979, p<.001) had a significant positive impact on OS, whereas high risk Motzer`s score (HR 8.9992, 95% CI 2.4231-33.4228, p<.01) had a significant negative impact on OS. However, the type of sequential treatment had no impact on OS (HR 1.0658, 95% CI0.6463-1.7576, p=0.802). Conclusions: The RCC Registry provides an overview of the current treatment reality in routine medical practice. TKI are the most frequently applied 1st-line treatments, followed by TKI or mTOR inhibitors. Our data show no difference concerning the effectiveness of the sequential treatment TKI–TKI vs TKI–EVE.

Disparities in receipt of radiotherapy and survival by age, sex, and race among patients with nonmetastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the anus.

2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 721-721
Author(s):  
Doug Baughman ◽  
Krishna Bilas Ghimire ◽  
Binay Kumar Shah
Keyword(s):  
Proportional Hazards ◽  
Proportional Hazards Model ◽  
Survival Rates ◽  
Relative Survival ◽  
Population Based ◽  
Cox Proportional Hazards ◽  
Cox Proportional Hazards Model ◽  
P Value ◽  
Hazards Model ◽  
To Receive

721 Background: Combination chemoradiotherapy is the standard of care for treatment of non-metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the anus (SCCA). This population-based study evaluated disparities in receipt of radiotherapy (RT) and its effect on survival in patients with localized and regional SCCA in the United States. Methods: The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) 18 database was used to identify patients with localized and regional SCCA diagnosed between 1998 and 2008. We used univariate and multivariate logistic regression to model the relationships between receipt of RT and age, sex, marital status, stage, and race. Relative survival rates were calculated and compared using two sample z-tests. A Cox proportional hazards model was used to find adjusted hazard ratios (HR). Results: A total of 3,971 patients with localized or regional SCCA as the only primary malignancy were included in the study, of which 3,278 (82.6%) received RT. After adjusting for covariates, those 65 years and older (adjusted OR 0.82, p=0.029) were less likely to receive RT. Females were more likely to receive RT compared to males (adjusted OR 1.54, p<0.001). We found no difference in receipt of RT by race. Comparisons of 1- and 5-year relative survival rates showed lower survival for blacks (p-value <0.01 at 1-year and <0.0001 at 5-years), those 65 years and older, and males. A 1-year survival disparity was found for those not receiving RT (p-value <0.0001 at 1-year), but no difference was observed at 5-years. A Cox proportional hazards model adjusting for all covariates showed greater hazard for blacks (adjusted HR 1.36, p=0.001), those not receiving RT (adjusted HR 1.23, p=0.03), patients 65 years or older, and males. Conclusions: This population based study identified older patients as less likely to receive RT and females as more likely to receive RT. Survival analysis identified blacks, males, older patients, and those not receiving RT as having lower rates of survival.

Determinants of first-line treatment selection in advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC).

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 468-468
Author(s):  
Hui-Li Wong ◽  
Ying Wang ◽  
Yaling Yin ◽  
Hagen F. Kennecke ◽  
Winson Y. Cheung ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Treatment Selection ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Second Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
The Impact ◽  
First Line Treatment

468 Background: Chemotherapy options currently available for the first-line treatment of advanced PDAC include FOLFIRINOX (FX), gemcitabine with nab-paclitaxel (GP) and single agent gemcitabine (Gem). GP was introduced most recently and funded for clinical use in British Columbia (BC) in September 2014. In this retrospective analysis, we explore the impact of GP availability on first-line treatment selection and overall survival (OS) in advanced PDAC. Methods: The BC Cancer Agency provincial pharmacy database was used to identify patients (pts) who started FX, GP or Gem between January and August 2014 (pre-GP) or January and August 2015 (post-GP). Pts were eligible for inclusion if they received at least one cycle of first-line therapy for locally advanced or metastatic PDAC. Clinical data were extracted from electronic medical records. OS was defined as time from diagnosis of advanced PDAC to death and compared by treatment era, adjusting for age, ECOG, comorbidities, disease extent and baseline CA19-9. Results: 286 pts fulfilled eligibility criteria: 88 (31%) with locally advanced and 198 (69%) with metastatic disease. 131 and 155 pts were treated in the pre- and post-GP eras respectively. Prior to GP approval, 44% and 49% of pts received Gem and FX; this decreased to 21% and 33% after GP funding, with 46% of pts receiving GP in the latter period. Nine (7%) pts received GP in the pre-GP era, either through self-pay or addition of nab-paclitaxel after approval. There were no significant differences in pt characteristics across both eras. 46% of pts who received GP post approval had ECOG ≥ 2. The proportion of pts receiving second-line therapy was lower in the post-GP era (22% vs. 38%). Median OS in the post-GP era was 8.1 vs. 10.1 months in the pre-GP era; adjusted HR 1.28 (95% CI 0.96–1.71). Pts with ECOG ≥ 2 who received GP had a median OS of 6.5 months. Conclusions: After GP was funded, it became the preferred first-line regimen for advanced PDAC. Its more frequent use instead of FX did not appear to compromise overall survival even though a substantial proportion of pts were ECOG ≥ 2 and few pts received second-line therapy.

Clinical outcomes of pancreas cancer patients with peritoneal spread: Results from the chord consortium.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e19268-e19268
Author(s):  
Mehrnoosh Pauls ◽  
Abdulaziz AlJassim AlShareef ◽  
Winson Y. Cheung ◽  
Rachel Anne Goodwin ◽  
Brandon M. Meyers ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Proportional Hazards ◽  
Proportional Hazards Model ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Cox Proportional Hazards ◽  
Cox Proportional Hazards Model ◽  
First Line ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Line Chemotherapy

e19268 Background: Prior studies have demonstrated that clonal cells that give rise to pancreatic peritoneal metastases (PM) are geographically and genetically distinct from clonal cells, giving rise to lung and liver metastases. The objective of this study was to assess if there is a distinct difference in prognosis and therapeutic response among patients with pancreatic cancer with (PM compared to the lung/liver. Methods: Using a retrospective cohort design, medical records from adult patients diagnosed with metastatic adenocarcinoma of the pancreas at five Canadian academic cancer centers (2014 - 2019) were reviewed. Prognostic variables including age, Charlson comorbidity index, ECOG, cigarette smoking, nodal status, sites of metastases, and first line chemotherapy were collected. Cox proportional hazards model (MVA) was used to examine the association between peritoneal involvement and survival, adjusted for measured confounders. Analyses were completed using SAS, where alpha of 0.05 was defined as the level of significance. Results: A total of 1161 patients were included. Metastatic sites included peritoneum (n = 170, 14.6%), lung (n = 145, 12.5%) and liver (n = 563, 48.5%). Patients with PM received first-line FOLFIRINOX (FFX, n = 31), Gemcitabine + nab-paclitaxel (G/N, n = 20), Gemcitabine (G, n = 18), and no treatment (n = 97). In univariate analyses, worse ECOG PS was associated with PM (p = 0.002). The majority of patients died (89%), with a median overall survival (OS) of 3 vs 7 months for patients with PM and those without PM (p < 0.001), respectively. The median OS in patient whom receive first-line chemotherapy was 7 months in FFX group (95% CI 1.66-12.33), 6 months in G/N (95% CI 4.54-7.45) and 2 months in G group (95% CI 1.42-2.57). Patients had significantly better OS when treated with FFX or G/N compared to G alone (p = 0.002). Time to treatment failure was significantly shorter among patient treated with G alone compare to patients treated with FFX and G/N (P < 0.005). Conclusions: In the setting of combination chemotherapy for advanced pancreatic cancer, patients with PM continue to have a poor prognosis. This may be due to the impact of PM on PS and the inability to administer palliative chemotherapy. For eligible patients, FFX or G/N results in a higher OS than G monotherapy.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document