Cargando…
nab-Paclitaxel Plus Gemcitabine Versus Gemcitabine in Patients with Metastatic Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: Canadian Subgroup Analysis of the Phase 3 MPACT Trial
INTRODUCTION: The phase III MPACT trial in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer (MPC) demonstrated superior efficacy of nab-paclitaxel (nab-P) plus gemcitabine (Gem) compared with Gem monotherapy, including the primary endpoint of overall survival (OS; median 8.7 vs. 6.6 months; hazard ratio [...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Healthcare
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4882352/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27085323 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12325-016-0327-4 |
_version_ | 1782434101774516224 |
---|---|
author | Tehfe, Mustapha Dowden, Scot Kennecke, Hagen El-Maraghi, Robert Lesperance, Bernard Couture, Felix Letourneau, Richard Liu, Helen Romano, Alfredo |
author_facet | Tehfe, Mustapha Dowden, Scot Kennecke, Hagen El-Maraghi, Robert Lesperance, Bernard Couture, Felix Letourneau, Richard Liu, Helen Romano, Alfredo |
author_sort | Tehfe, Mustapha |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: The phase III MPACT trial in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer (MPC) demonstrated superior efficacy of nab-paclitaxel (nab-P) plus gemcitabine (Gem) compared with Gem monotherapy, including the primary endpoint of overall survival (OS; median 8.7 vs. 6.6 months; hazard ratio [HR] 0.72; P < 0.001). A significant treatment difference favoring nab-P + Gem over Gem was observed for OS in patients treated in North America. The majority of patients were from the US (88%) with only 12% from Canada. Healthcare systems and treatment patterns are different between the 2 countries, and there is limited published information on outcomes of Canadian patients treated with first-line nab-P + Gem. This analysis evaluated efficacy and safety outcomes in Canadian patients in the MPACT trial. METHODS: Treatment-naive patients with MPC (N = 861) received either nab-P 125 mg/m(2) + Gem 1000 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8, and 15 every 4 weeks or Gem 1000 mg/m(2) weekly for the first 7 of 8 weeks (cycle 1) and then on days 1, 8, and 15 every 4 weeks (cycle ≥2). RESULTS: The MPACT trial enrolled 63 patients in Canada. Baseline characteristics were well balanced and comparable with those of the intent-to-treat population. Both OS (median 11.9 vs. 7.1 months; HR 0.76; P = 0.373) and progression-free survival (median 7.2 vs. 5.2 months; HR 0.65; P = 0.224) were numerically longer and overall response rate (27% vs. 17%; P = 0.312) was numerically higher with nab-P + Gem vs. Gem. The most common grade ≥3 adverse events with nab-P + Gem vs. Gem were neutropenia (22% vs. 10%), fatigue (34% vs. 33%), and neuropathy (25% vs. 0%). CONCLUSION: This subanalysis confirmed that nab-P + Gem is an efficacious treatment option and has a manageable safety profile in patients with MPC treated in Canada. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT00844649. FUNDING: Celgene Corporation, Summit, NJ, USA. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s12325-016-0327-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4882352 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | Springer Healthcare |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-48823522016-06-21 nab-Paclitaxel Plus Gemcitabine Versus Gemcitabine in Patients with Metastatic Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: Canadian Subgroup Analysis of the Phase 3 MPACT Trial Tehfe, Mustapha Dowden, Scot Kennecke, Hagen El-Maraghi, Robert Lesperance, Bernard Couture, Felix Letourneau, Richard Liu, Helen Romano, Alfredo Adv Ther Original Research INTRODUCTION: The phase III MPACT trial in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer (MPC) demonstrated superior efficacy of nab-paclitaxel (nab-P) plus gemcitabine (Gem) compared with Gem monotherapy, including the primary endpoint of overall survival (OS; median 8.7 vs. 6.6 months; hazard ratio [HR] 0.72; P < 0.001). A significant treatment difference favoring nab-P + Gem over Gem was observed for OS in patients treated in North America. The majority of patients were from the US (88%) with only 12% from Canada. Healthcare systems and treatment patterns are different between the 2 countries, and there is limited published information on outcomes of Canadian patients treated with first-line nab-P + Gem. This analysis evaluated efficacy and safety outcomes in Canadian patients in the MPACT trial. METHODS: Treatment-naive patients with MPC (N = 861) received either nab-P 125 mg/m(2) + Gem 1000 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8, and 15 every 4 weeks or Gem 1000 mg/m(2) weekly for the first 7 of 8 weeks (cycle 1) and then on days 1, 8, and 15 every 4 weeks (cycle ≥2). RESULTS: The MPACT trial enrolled 63 patients in Canada. Baseline characteristics were well balanced and comparable with those of the intent-to-treat population. Both OS (median 11.9 vs. 7.1 months; HR 0.76; P = 0.373) and progression-free survival (median 7.2 vs. 5.2 months; HR 0.65; P = 0.224) were numerically longer and overall response rate (27% vs. 17%; P = 0.312) was numerically higher with nab-P + Gem vs. Gem. The most common grade ≥3 adverse events with nab-P + Gem vs. Gem were neutropenia (22% vs. 10%), fatigue (34% vs. 33%), and neuropathy (25% vs. 0%). CONCLUSION: This subanalysis confirmed that nab-P + Gem is an efficacious treatment option and has a manageable safety profile in patients with MPC treated in Canada. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT00844649. FUNDING: Celgene Corporation, Summit, NJ, USA. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s12325-016-0327-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer Healthcare 2016-04-16 2016 /pmc/articles/PMC4882352/ /pubmed/27085323 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12325-016-0327-4 Text en © The Author(s) 2016 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) ), which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. |
spellingShingle | Original Research Tehfe, Mustapha Dowden, Scot Kennecke, Hagen El-Maraghi, Robert Lesperance, Bernard Couture, Felix Letourneau, Richard Liu, Helen Romano, Alfredo nab-Paclitaxel Plus Gemcitabine Versus Gemcitabine in Patients with Metastatic Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: Canadian Subgroup Analysis of the Phase 3 MPACT Trial |
title | nab-Paclitaxel Plus Gemcitabine Versus Gemcitabine in Patients with Metastatic Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: Canadian Subgroup Analysis of the Phase 3 MPACT Trial |
title_full | nab-Paclitaxel Plus Gemcitabine Versus Gemcitabine in Patients with Metastatic Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: Canadian Subgroup Analysis of the Phase 3 MPACT Trial |
title_fullStr | nab-Paclitaxel Plus Gemcitabine Versus Gemcitabine in Patients with Metastatic Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: Canadian Subgroup Analysis of the Phase 3 MPACT Trial |
title_full_unstemmed | nab-Paclitaxel Plus Gemcitabine Versus Gemcitabine in Patients with Metastatic Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: Canadian Subgroup Analysis of the Phase 3 MPACT Trial |
title_short | nab-Paclitaxel Plus Gemcitabine Versus Gemcitabine in Patients with Metastatic Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: Canadian Subgroup Analysis of the Phase 3 MPACT Trial |
title_sort | nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine versus gemcitabine in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma: canadian subgroup analysis of the phase 3 mpact trial |
topic | Original Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4882352/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27085323 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12325-016-0327-4 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT tehfemustapha nabpaclitaxelplusgemcitabineversusgemcitabineinpatientswithmetastaticpancreaticadenocarcinomacanadiansubgroupanalysisofthephase3mpacttrial AT dowdenscot nabpaclitaxelplusgemcitabineversusgemcitabineinpatientswithmetastaticpancreaticadenocarcinomacanadiansubgroupanalysisofthephase3mpacttrial AT kenneckehagen nabpaclitaxelplusgemcitabineversusgemcitabineinpatientswithmetastaticpancreaticadenocarcinomacanadiansubgroupanalysisofthephase3mpacttrial AT elmaraghirobert nabpaclitaxelplusgemcitabineversusgemcitabineinpatientswithmetastaticpancreaticadenocarcinomacanadiansubgroupanalysisofthephase3mpacttrial AT lesperancebernard nabpaclitaxelplusgemcitabineversusgemcitabineinpatientswithmetastaticpancreaticadenocarcinomacanadiansubgroupanalysisofthephase3mpacttrial AT couturefelix nabpaclitaxelplusgemcitabineversusgemcitabineinpatientswithmetastaticpancreaticadenocarcinomacanadiansubgroupanalysisofthephase3mpacttrial AT letourneaurichard nabpaclitaxelplusgemcitabineversusgemcitabineinpatientswithmetastaticpancreaticadenocarcinomacanadiansubgroupanalysisofthephase3mpacttrial AT liuhelen nabpaclitaxelplusgemcitabineversusgemcitabineinpatientswithmetastaticpancreaticadenocarcinomacanadiansubgroupanalysisofthephase3mpacttrial AT romanoalfredo nabpaclitaxelplusgemcitabineversusgemcitabineinpatientswithmetastaticpancreaticadenocarcinomacanadiansubgroupanalysisofthephase3mpacttrial |