The influence of biliary drainage in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer receiving FOLFIRINOX.

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 378-378
Author(s):  
Makoto Ueno ◽  
Takeharu Yamanaka ◽  
Takashi Ogura ◽  
Atushi Yamaguchi ◽  
Nobumasa Mizuno ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Biliary Drainage ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Nationwide Survey ◽  
Distant Metastases ◽  
Pancreas Head ◽  
Untreated Tumor ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Bile Duct Stent

378 Background: FOLFIRINOX (FFX) is a standard of care for patients (pts) with advanced pancreatic cancer (APC). In the original FFX report by Conroy (NEJM, 2011), pts with a biliary drainage were limited and the occurrence of cholangitis was not reported. In practice, however, we experience that a certain fraction of APC pts needs a biliary drainage and some of them have an elevated risk of cholangitis or febrile neutropenia (FN) during the course of FFX. We evaluated the influence of biliary drainage on the efficacy and safety of FFX. Methods: We used individual data from nationwide survey of FFX (JASPAC06). The JASPAC06 was a prospective registry of pts with FFX treated in clinical practice and enrolled 399 pts between December 2013 and November 2014 from 27 centers in Japan. We evaluated the associations of OS and PFS, as well as the frequencies of cholangitis and FN, with the use of biliary drainage. We excluded resected cases because an operative method with choledochojejunostomy was unknown. Results: Of 399 pts in the JASPAC06, 319 were eligible for this analysis and 80 resected cases were excluded. The use of biliary drainage was seen in 28% of pts (mainly bile duct stent inserted); primary dose reduction (modified FFX), 67%; previously untreated tumor, 77%; distant metastases, 76%; pancreas head, 47%. The main results are shown in the table. In summary, cholangitis was more frequent in pts with biliary drainage. Grade 3 or higher FN as well as CRP elevation was observed more frequently in pts with biliary drainage. There was no difference in PFS (median PFS, 7.3 vs. 6.5 mo; logrank, p=0.24) and OS (median OS, 12.3 vs. 12.2 mo; p=0.86) between the two groups. Conclusions: Our observation that the frequency of FN and CRP elevation was significantly higher in pts with biliary drainage indicates a higher risk of infection during the FFX treatment by using biliary drainage.[Table: see text]

PANOVA: A phase II study of TTFields (150 kHz) concomitant with standard chemotherapy for front-line therapy of advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma—Updated efficacy results.

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e15790-e15790 ◽  
Author(s):  
Manuel Benavides ◽  
Carmen Guillen ◽  
Fernando Rivera ◽  
Javier Gallego ◽  
Jose A. Lopez-Martin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Metastatic Disease ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Skin Toxicity ◽  
Distant Metastases ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Prior Therapy ◽  
Grade 3

e15790 Background: TTFields are a non-invasive, regional antimitotic treatment modality, which has been approved for the treatment of glioblastoma by the FDA. TTFields predominantly act by disrupting the formation of the mitotic spindle during metaphase. TTFields were effective in multiple preclinical models of pancreatic cancer. PANOVA was the first trial testing TTFields in pancreatic cancer patients. Results from the first arm of the study, testing TTFields in combination with gemcitabine, have demonstrated superiority in efficacy compared to historical controls (Rivera F. et al, J Clin Oncol 34, 2016 (suppl 4S; abstr 269). Methods: Twenty advanced pancreatic cancer patients were enrolled in the second arm of PANOVA and treated with TTFields in combination with gemcitabine concomitant to nab-paclitaxel. All patients had unresectable tumors, an ECOG performance score of 0-1 and no prior therapy. The primary endpoint was the incidence and severity of adverse events. Results: The median age was 68.2 (range – 58-81) and most patients (65%) had an ECOG score of 1. Twelve patients (60%) had distant metastases. Ten patients (50%) had serious AEs during the study period. Eleven patients (55%) had treatment-related skin toxicity, of which 5 had grade 3 toxicity. No TTFields-related serious AEs were reported. The median PFS was 12.7 months (95% CI 5.4, NA): 9.3 months in patients with metastatic disease, and not reached in locally-advanced patients. PFS rate at 6 months was 65%: 50% in metastatic disease and 87.5% in locally advanced patients. Of the evaluable tumors, 40% had partial response and another 47% stable disease. The median OS was not reached, and the 1-year survival rate was 72% (62.5% in metastatic disease and 87.5% in locally advanced disease). Conclusions: TTFields concomitant to gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel are safe for advanced pancreatic cancer patients, with promising clinical outcome which doubled historical data. A phase III trial is planned, testing the efficacy of TTFields combined with gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel in locally-advanced pancreatic cancer patients. Clinical trial information: NCT01971281.

SCALOP: Results of a randomized phase II study of induction chemotherapy followed by gemcitabine (G) or capecitabine (Cap) based chemoradiation (CRT) in locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LANPC).

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. LBA146-LBA146 ◽  
Author(s):  
Somnath Mukherjee ◽  
Chris Hurt ◽  
Gareth Griffiths ◽  
John A. Bridgewater ◽  
Thomas Crosby ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Induction Chemotherapy ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Patient Characteristics ◽  
Tumor Diameter ◽  
Treatment Volume ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
The Uk

LBA146 Background: CRT with G or 5FU (F) is used to treat LAPC. No multicenter, randomized studies have compared G-CRT vs. F-CRT or the oral fluropyrimidine, Cap-CRT. In the UK, where chemotherapy is traditionally standard of care for LAPC, a trial was conducted to assess the safety, efficacy, and deliverability of G-CRT and Cap-CRT. Methods: Eligibility: histologically proven inoperable LAPC < 7 cm in diameter. Induction chemotherapy: 3 cycles of GEMCAP (G 1,000 mg/m2 days 1, 8, 15; Cap 830 mg/m2 days 1-21 q28 days). Patients with stable/responding disease, tumor diameter ≤ 6cm, and PS 0-1 were eligible for CRT randomisation where patients received a further cycle of GEMCAP followed by either Cap (830 mg/m2 bd weekdays only) or G (300 mg/m2 weekly) with radiation (50.4 Gy/28 fractions). Treatment volume = tumour plus enlarged nodes and margins of 2 cm sup-inf and 1.5 cm radially. Prospective RT quality assurance was mandated. Primary end-point was 9-month PFS (Fleming’s design). Funder: Cancer Research UK (CR UK 07/040). Results: Between July 2009 and October 2011, 114 patients from 28 UK centres were registered of whom 74 patients were randomised. Randomised patient characteristics: median age 64.6; 55.4% male; WHO PS (0:1) 41.9%:58.1%; median tumor diameter 4cm; site (head:body) 85.1%:14.9%. During CRT, more patients in the G arm experienced grade 3/4 haematological (18.4% vs 0%, p=0.007) and non-haematological (26.3% vs 11.1%, p=0.095) toxicity. Both C and G arms passed the primary endpoint with 9-month PFS of 62.9% (80% CIs: 50.6%-73.9%) and 51.4% (80% CIs: 39.4%-63.4%) respectively. OS was significantly superior in the Cap-CRT arm (median OS 15.2 vs 13.4 months, HR=0.50, log rank p=0.025). Conclusions: SCALOP is the largest RCT comparing radio-sensitizers in pancreatic cancer and demonstrates that both G-CRT and Cap-CRT can be delivered safely and effectively. Both regimens met the pre-specified PFS criteria. Compared to G-CRT, Cap-CRT demonstrated significantly better survival and toxicity and should form the template regimen for future trials investigating RT dose escalation and combination with novel radio-sensitizers. Clinical trial information: NCT01032057.

A Critical Overview of Systematic Reviews of Chemotherapy for Advanced and Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer using both AMSTAR2 and ROBIS as Quality Assessment Tools

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amit Dang ◽  
Surendar Chidirala ◽  
Prashanth Veeranki ◽  
BN Vallish
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Low Risk ◽  
Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Critical Overview

Background: We performed a critical overview of published systematic reviews (SRs) of chemotherapy for advanced and locally advanced pancreatic cancer, and evaluated their quality using AMSTAR2 and ROBIS tools. Materials and Methods: PubMed and Cochrane Central Library were searched for SRs on 13th June 2020. SRs with metaanalysis which included only randomized controlled trials and that had assessed chemotherapy as one of the treatment arms were included. The outcome measures, which were looked into, were progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and adverse events (AEs) of grade 3 or above. Two reviewers independently assessed all the SRs with both ROBIS and AMSTAR2. Results: Out of the 1,879 identified records, 26 SRs were included for the overview. Most SRs had concluded that gemcitabine-based combination regimes, prolonged OS and PFS, but increased the incidence of grade 3-4 toxicities, when compared to gemcitabine monotherapy, but survival benefits were not consistent when gemcitabine was combined with molecular targeted agents. As per ROBIS, 24/26 SRs had high risk of bias, with only 1/26 SR having low risk of bias. As per AMSTAR2, 25/26 SRs had critically low, and 1/26 SR had low, confidence in the results. The study which scored ‘low’ risk of bias in ROBIS scored ‘low confidence in results’ in AMSTAR2. The inter-rater reliability for scoring the overall confidence in the SRs with AMSTAR2 and the overall domain in ROBIS was substantial; ROBIS: kappa=0.785, SEM=0.207, p<0.001; AMSTAR2: kappa=0.649, SEM=0.323, p<0.001. Conclusion: Gemcitabine-based combination regimens can prolong OS and PFS but also worsen AEs when compared to gemcitabine monotherapy. The included SRs have an overall low methodological quality and high risk of bias as per AMSTAR2 and ROBIS respectively.

scholarly journals Irreversible Electroporation (IRE) in Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer: A Review of Current Clinical Outcomes, Mechanism of Action and Opportunities for Synergistic Therapy

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (8) ◽  
pp. 1609
Author(s):  
Zainab L. Rai ◽  
Roger Feakins ◽  
Laura J. Pallett ◽  
Derek Manas ◽  
Brian R. Davidson
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Mechanism Of Action ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Irreversible Electroporation ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Animal Data ◽  
Standard Of Care Treatment ◽  
Apoptosis And Necrosis

Locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) accounts for 30% of patients with pancreatic cancer. Irreversible electroporation (IRE) is a novel cancer treatment that may improve survival and quality of life in LAPC. This narrative review will provide a perspective on the clinical experience of pancreas IRE therapy, explore the evidence for the mode of action, assess treatment complications, and propose strategies for augmenting IRE response. A systematic search was performed using PubMed regarding the clinical use and safety profile of IRE on pancreatic cancer, post-IRE sequential histological changes, associated immune response, and synergistic therapies. Animal data demonstrate that IRE induces both apoptosis and necrosis followed by fibrosis. Major complications may result from IRE; procedure related mortality is up to 2%, with an average morbidity as high as 36%. Nevertheless, prospective and retrospective studies suggest that IRE treatment may increase median overall survival of LAPC to as much as 30 months and provide preliminary data justifying the well-designed trials currently underway, comparing IRE to the standard of care treatment. The mechanism of action of IRE remains unknown, and there is a lack of data on treatment variables and efficiency in humans. There is emerging data suggesting that IRE can be augmented with synergistic therapies such as immunotherapy.

Gemcitabine Plus Nab-Paclitaxel as Second-Line Chemotherapy following FOLFIRINOX in Patients with Unresectable Pancreatic Cancer: A Single-Institution, Retrospective Analysis

Chemotherapy ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Kotone Hayuka ◽  
Hiroyuki Okuyama ◽  
Akitsu Murakami ◽  
Yoshihiro Okita ◽  
Takamasa Nishiuchi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Unresectable Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Common Grade ◽  
Grade 3

<b><i>Introduction:</i></b> Patients with advanced pancreatic cancer have a poor prognosis. FOLFIRINOX (FFX) and gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (GnP) have been established as first-line treatment, but they have not been confirmed as second-line treatment after FFX. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of GnP as second-line therapy after FFX in patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> Twenty-five patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer were enrolled. The patients were treated with GnP after FFX between September 2015 and September 2019. Tumor response, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and incidence of adverse events were evaluated. <b><i>Results:</i></b> The response rate, disease control rate, median PFS, and median OS were 12%, 96%, 5.3 months, and 15.6 months, respectively. The common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were neutropenia (76%) and anemia (16%). <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> GnP after FOLFIRINOX is expected to be one of the second-line recommendations for patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer.

scholarly journals Real-world comparative effectiveness of nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine versus FOLFIRINOX in advanced pancreatic cancer: a systematic review

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
pp. 175883591985036 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elena Gabriela Chiorean ◽  
Winson Y. Cheung ◽  
Guido Giordano ◽  
George Kim ◽  
Salah-Eddin Al-Batran
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Real World ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Safety Data ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
First Line ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Grade 3

Background: No clinical trial has directly compared nab-paclitaxel/gemcitabine (nab-P/G) with FOLFIRINOX (fluorouracil/leucovorin/oxaliplatin/irinotecan) in metastatic or advanced pancreatic cancer (mPC or aPC). We conducted a systematic review of real-world studies comparing these regimens in the first-line setting. Methods: Embase and MEDLINE databases through 22 January 2019, and Gastrointestinal Cancers Symposium 2019 abstracts were searched for real-world, retrospective studies comparing first-line nab-P/G versus FOLFIRINOX in mPC or aPC that met specific parameters. Studies with radiotherapy were excluded. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale. Results: Of 818 records initially identified, 35 were duplicates and 749 did not meet the eligibility criteria, mostly because they were either not comparative ( n = 356) or not first line ( n = 245). The remaining 34 studies (21 mPC; 13 aPC) assessed >6915 patients who received nab-P/G or FOLFIRINOX. In the studies identified, the median overall survival (OS) reached 14.4 and 15.9 months with nab-P/G and FOLFIRINOX, respectively, and median progression-free survival reached 8.5 and 11.7 months, respectively. Safety data were reported in 14 studies (2205 patients), including 8 single-institutional studies. In most single-institutional studies that reported safety data, rates were higher with FOLFIRINOX versus nab-P/G for grade 3/4 neutropenia (five of six studies) and febrile neutropenia (all three studies), while rates of grade 3/4 peripheral neuropathy were higher with nab-P/G in four of seven studies. Conclusions: Although FOLFIRINOX was associated with slightly longer median OS in more studies, the differences, when available, were not statistically significant. Therefore, a randomized, controlled trial is warranted. Toxicity profile differences represent key considerations for treatment decisions.

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.

scholarly journals Advanced pancreatic cancer: The standard of care and new opportunities

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amrallah A. Mohammad
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Mortality Rate ◽  
Cancer Treatment ◽  
Molecular Analysis ◽  
Therapeutic Approach ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Standard Of Care

Presentation of pancreatic cancer is localized, locally advanced or metastatic. With the later represented the main bulk (more than 80%). Despite the significant innovation in molecular analysis and therapeutic approach in many types of cancer in the last two decades, still the outcome of advanced pancreatic cancer is disappointing and the mortality rate approximately unchanged. In this mandated review we intended to highlight the standard of care and emerging agents for advanced pancreatic cancer treatment.

Prognostic impact of chemoradiation-related lymphopenia in patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 439-439
Author(s):  
Daniel W Kim ◽  
Grace Lee ◽  
Colin D. Weekes ◽  
David P. Ryan ◽  
Aparna Raj Parikh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Cox Model ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Pancreatic Head ◽  
Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Ductal Adenocarcinoma ◽  
Prognostic Impact ◽  
Entire Cohort ◽  
Grade 3

439 Background: Chemoradiation (CRT) induced lymphopenia is common and associated with poorer survival in multiple solid malignancies. The objective of this study was to evaluate the prognostic impact of lymphopenia in patients with nonmetastatic, unresectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) treated by neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX (5-fluorouracil [5FU]/leucovorin/irinotecan/oxaliplatin) followed by CRT. We hypothesized that severe lymphopenia would correlate with worse survival. Methods: The inclusion criteria for this single-institution retrospective study were: 1) biopsy-proven diagnosis of unresectable PDAC, 2) absence of distant metastasis, 3) receipt of neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX followed by CRT, and 4) absolute lymphocyte count (ALC) available prior to and two months after initiating CRT. In general, CRT consisted of 5FU or capecitabine and RT with 58.8 Gy over 28 fractions. Lymphopenia was graded according to CTCAE v5.0. The primary variable of interest was lymphopenia at two months, dichotomized by ALC of < 0.5/μl (Grade 3 lymphopenia). The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Cox modeling and Kaplan-Meier methods were used to perform survival analyses. Results: A total of 138 patients were identified. Median follow-up for the entire cohort was 16 months. Median age was 65. Fifty-six percent were female, 86% were Caucasian, and 97% had ECOG ≤1. Median tumor size was 3.8 cm. Tumor location was pancreatic head in 63%, body in 22%, tail in 8%, and neck in 7%. Median baseline ALC for the entire cohort was 1.5 k/ul. Two months after initiating CRT, 106 (77%) had severe (Grade 3 or worse) lymphopenia. While there were no significant differences in baseline patient or disease characteristics, patients with severe lymphopenia received higher doses of RT with longer duration of treatment compared to those without severe lymphopenia. On multivariable Cox model, severe lymphopenia at two months was significantly associated with increased hazards of death (HR = 4.00 [95% CI 2.03-7.89], p < 0.001). Greater number of neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX cycles received prior to CRT was associated with lower hazards of death (HR = 0.84 [95% CI 0.77-0.92], p < 0.001). The 12-month OS was 73% vs. 90% in the cohort with vs. without severe lymphopenia, respectively (log-rank p < 0.001). Conclusions: Treatment-related lymphopenia is common and severe lymphopenia may be a prognostic marker of poorer survival in locally advanced pancreatic cancer. Closer observation in high-risk patients and minimization of RT dose and duration are potential approaches to mitigating CRT-related lymphopenia. Our findings also suggest an important role of the host immunity in pancreatic cancer outcomes, supporting the ongoing efforts of immunotherapy trials in pancreatic cancer.

scholarly journals Systematic review and meta-analysis of gemcitabine-based chemotherapy after FOLFIRINOX in advanced pancreatic cancer

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
pp. 175883592090540 ◽  
Author(s):  
Victor H. F. de Jesus ◽  
Marcos P. G. Camandaroba ◽  
Vinicius F. Calsavara ◽  
Rachel P. Riechelmann
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma

Background: There are no randomized data to guide treatment decisions for patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma following first-line FOLFIRINOX. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies using gemcitabine-based chemotherapy after FOLFIRINOX to assess treatment efficacy and toxicity. Methods: We included studies published between 2011 and 2018 that evaluated the efficacy and toxicity of gemcitabine-based chemotherapy after FOLFIRINOX in patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma. We searched PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science. Primary outcomes were objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), any grade 3/4 toxicity rate, and progression-free survival (PFS). We used the random-effects model to generate pooled estimates for proportions. Results: Sixteen studies met the eligibility criteria. Overall, ORR was 10.8%, DCR was 41.1%, and any grade 3/4 toxicity rate was 28.6%. In subgroup analyses, gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel was associated with superior ORR (14.4 versus 8.4%; p = 0.038) and DCR (53.5 versus 30.5%; p < 0.001) compared with single-agent gemcitabine. Median PFS ranged from 1.9 to 6.4 months and numerically favored gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel. Conclusions: Our study suggests gemcitabine-based chemotherapy likely outperforms best supportive care after FOLFIRINOX in advanced pancreatic cancer. Also, gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel seems to be more active than single-agent gemcitabine (CRD42018100421).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document