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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Chiorean, Elena Gabriela, Cheung, Winson Y., Giordano, Guido, Kim, George, Al-Batran, Salah-Eddin
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