» Articles » PMID: 33714591

Gemcitabine Plus Nab-paclitaxel Versus FOLFIRINOX for Unresected Pancreatic Cancer: Comparative Effectiveness and Evaluation of Tumor Growth in Veterans

Overview
Journal Semin Oncol
Specialty Oncology
Date 2021 Mar 14
PMID 33714591
Citations 3
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Purpose: Advanced, unresectable pancreatic cancer is often treated with either gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (Gem/NabP) or FOLFIRINOX, although these regimens have never been compared in a head-to-head trial. In this study, we compared these two regimens using Veterans Administration (VA) data and evaluated the use of a novel tumor growth formula to predict outcomes.

Methods: We identified 670 Veterans from national VA data with unresected stage II-IV pancreatic adenocarcinoma diagnosed between 2003 and 2016 who were treated with either first-line Gem/NabP or FOLFIRINOX. We compared overall survival (OS) and adverse events by treatment using propensity scores (PS) to account for allocation bias. Using longitudinal CA19-9 biomarker information we then fit the data to a novel tumor growth equation, comparing growth with OS.

Results: We found no difference in PS-adjusted (hazard ratio [HR] 1.00; 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.84-1.20) or PS-matched (HR: 0.93; 95% CI: 0.76-1.13) OS between the two treatment groups. Tumor growth analysis revealed similar growth parameter values for Gem/NabP and FOLFIRINOX (P = .074 for difference).

Conclusions: Gem/NabP appeared noninferior to FOLFIRINOX for survival outcomes for advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma based on national VA data. Biomarker-based growth equations may be useful for monitoring treatment response and predicting prognosis for pancreatic cancer.

Citing Articles

Real-world clinical outcomes and economic burden of metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: a systematic review.

Cockrum P, Dennen S, Brown A, Briggs J, Paluri R Future Oncol. 2024; 21(2):241-260.

PMID: 39648649 PMC: 11792790. DOI: 10.1080/14796694.2024.2435253.


Folfirinox vs. Gemcitabine + Nab-Paclitaxel as the First-Line Treatment for Pancreatic Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Merza N, Farooqui S, Dar S, Varughese T, Awan R, Qureshi L World J Oncol. 2023; 14(5):325-339.

PMID: 37869244 PMC: 10588495. DOI: 10.14740/wjon1604.


Tumor Growth Rate Informs Treatment Efficacy in Metastatic Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: Application of a Growth and Regression Model to Pivotal Trial and Real-World Data.

Yeh C, Zhou M, Sigel K, Jameson G, White R, Safyan R Oncologist. 2022; 28(2):139-148.

PMID: 36367377 PMC: 9907043. DOI: 10.1093/oncolo/oyac217.


Validation of SFRP1 Promoter Hypermethylation in Plasma as a Prognostic Marker for Survival and Gemcitabine Effectiveness in Patients with Stage IV Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma.

Stubbe B, Henriksen S, Madsen P, Larsen A, Krarup H, Pedersen I Cancers (Basel). 2021; 13(22).

PMID: 34830873 PMC: 8616084. DOI: 10.3390/cancers13225717.

References
1.
Klabunde C, Keating N, Potosky A, Ambs A, He Y, Hornbrook M . A population-based assessment of specialty physician involvement in cancer clinical trials. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011; 103(5):384-97. PMC: 3107589. DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djq549. View

2.
Deyo R, Cherkin D, Ciol M . Adapting a clinical comorbidity index for use with ICD-9-CM administrative databases. J Clin Epidemiol. 1992; 45(6):613-9. DOI: 10.1016/0895-4356(92)90133-8. View

3.
McGinnis K, Brandt C, Skanderson M, Justice A, Shahrir S, Butt A . Validating smoking data from the Veteran's Affairs Health Factors dataset, an electronic data source. Nicotine Tob Res. 2011; 13(12):1233-9. PMC: 3223583. DOI: 10.1093/ntr/ntr206. View

4.
Shustov A, Coiffier B, Horwitz S, Sokol L, Pro B, Wolfson J . Romidepsin is effective and well tolerated in older patients with peripheral T-cell lymphoma: analysis of two phase II trials. Leuk Lymphoma. 2017; 58(10):2335-2341. DOI: 10.1080/10428194.2017.1295143. View

5.
Conroy T, Desseigne F, Ychou M, Bouche O, Guimbaud R, Becouarn Y . FOLFIRINOX versus gemcitabine for metastatic pancreatic cancer. N Engl J Med. 2011; 364(19):1817-25. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1011923. View