Cargando…
Real-world comparative effectiveness of nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine versus FOLFIRINOX in advanced pancreatic cancer: a systematic review
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 f...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
SAGE Publications
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6535755/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31205510 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1758835919850367 |
_version_ | 1783421623759536128 |
---|---|
author | Chiorean, Elena Gabriela Cheung, Winson Y. Giordano, Guido Kim, George Al-Batran, Salah-Eddin |
author_facet | Chiorean, Elena Gabriela Cheung, Winson Y. Giordano, Guido Kim, George Al-Batran, Salah-Eddin |
author_sort | Chiorean, Elena Gabriela |
collection | PubMed |
description | 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. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6535755 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | SAGE Publications |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-65357552019-06-14 Real-world comparative effectiveness of nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine versus FOLFIRINOX in advanced pancreatic cancer: a systematic review Chiorean, Elena Gabriela Cheung, Winson Y. Giordano, Guido Kim, George Al-Batran, Salah-Eddin Ther Adv Med Oncol Systematic Review 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. SAGE Publications 2019-05-19 /pmc/articles/PMC6535755/ /pubmed/31205510 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1758835919850367 Text en © The Author(s), 2019 http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage). |
spellingShingle | Systematic Review Chiorean, Elena Gabriela Cheung, Winson Y. Giordano, Guido Kim, George Al-Batran, Salah-Eddin Real-world comparative effectiveness of nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine versus FOLFIRINOX in advanced pancreatic cancer: a systematic review |
title | Real-world comparative effectiveness of nab-paclitaxel plus
gemcitabine versus FOLFIRINOX in advanced pancreatic cancer: a
systematic review |
title_full | Real-world comparative effectiveness of nab-paclitaxel plus
gemcitabine versus FOLFIRINOX in advanced pancreatic cancer: a
systematic review |
title_fullStr | Real-world comparative effectiveness of nab-paclitaxel plus
gemcitabine versus FOLFIRINOX in advanced pancreatic cancer: a
systematic review |
title_full_unstemmed | Real-world comparative effectiveness of nab-paclitaxel plus
gemcitabine versus FOLFIRINOX in advanced pancreatic cancer: a
systematic review |
title_short | Real-world comparative effectiveness of nab-paclitaxel plus
gemcitabine versus FOLFIRINOX in advanced pancreatic cancer: a
systematic review |
title_sort | real-world comparative effectiveness of nab-paclitaxel plus
gemcitabine versus folfirinox in advanced pancreatic cancer: a
systematic review |
topic | Systematic Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6535755/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31205510 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1758835919850367 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT chioreanelenagabriela realworldcomparativeeffectivenessofnabpaclitaxelplusgemcitabineversusfolfirinoxinadvancedpancreaticcancerasystematicreview AT cheungwinsony realworldcomparativeeffectivenessofnabpaclitaxelplusgemcitabineversusfolfirinoxinadvancedpancreaticcancerasystematicreview AT giordanoguido realworldcomparativeeffectivenessofnabpaclitaxelplusgemcitabineversusfolfirinoxinadvancedpancreaticcancerasystematicreview AT kimgeorge realworldcomparativeeffectivenessofnabpaclitaxelplusgemcitabineversusfolfirinoxinadvancedpancreaticcancerasystematicreview AT albatransalaheddin realworldcomparativeeffectivenessofnabpaclitaxelplusgemcitabineversusfolfirinoxinadvancedpancreaticcancerasystematicreview |