Cargando…
Second-Line Gemcitabine Plus Nab-Paclitaxel for Patients with Unresectable Advanced Pancreatic Cancer after First-Line FOLFIRINOX Failure
FOLFIRINOX (FX) and gemcitabine (GEM) plus nab-paclitaxel (GnP) have been reported as effective regimens for unresectable advanced pancreatic cancer (APC). FX may be more effective but is also associated with more adverse events (AEs). Therefore, first-line treatment with FX followed by second-line...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6616879/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31146420 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm8060761 |
_version_ | 1783433562976944128 |
---|---|
author | Mita, Naoki Iwashita, Takuji Uemura, Shinya Yoshida, Kensaku Iwasa, Yuhei Ando, Nobuhiro Iwata, Keisuke Okuno, Mitsuru Mukai, Tsuyoshi Shimizu, Masahito |
author_facet | Mita, Naoki Iwashita, Takuji Uemura, Shinya Yoshida, Kensaku Iwasa, Yuhei Ando, Nobuhiro Iwata, Keisuke Okuno, Mitsuru Mukai, Tsuyoshi Shimizu, Masahito |
author_sort | Mita, Naoki |
collection | PubMed |
description | FOLFIRINOX (FX) and gemcitabine (GEM) plus nab-paclitaxel (GnP) have been reported as effective regimens for unresectable advanced pancreatic cancer (APC). FX may be more effective but is also associated with more adverse events (AEs). Therefore, first-line treatment with FX followed by second-line GnP may be appropriate. Aims: To assess the safety and efficacy of second-line GnP for patients with APC after first-line FX failure. Methods: This study was a multicenter prospective phase II study evaluating second-line GnP in patients with APC after failed first-line FX. The primary endpoint was response rate (RR), and the secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), progression free survival (PFS), and the frequency and degree of adverse events (AEs). Results: Thirty patients (14 male; median age, 64 years) were enrolled. The RR was 13.3%, with a median follow-up time of 9.3 months. The median OS and PFS were 7.6 and 3.8 months, respectively. From the beginning of first-line treatment, the median OS and PFS were 14.2 and 9.3 months, respectively. Grade 3 or 4 AEs were seen in 70% of patients. Conclusion: Second-line GnP after FX failure for patients with APC could be more effective than GEM alone. Further comparison studies are warranted. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6616879 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-66168792019-07-18 Second-Line Gemcitabine Plus Nab-Paclitaxel for Patients with Unresectable Advanced Pancreatic Cancer after First-Line FOLFIRINOX Failure Mita, Naoki Iwashita, Takuji Uemura, Shinya Yoshida, Kensaku Iwasa, Yuhei Ando, Nobuhiro Iwata, Keisuke Okuno, Mitsuru Mukai, Tsuyoshi Shimizu, Masahito J Clin Med Article FOLFIRINOX (FX) and gemcitabine (GEM) plus nab-paclitaxel (GnP) have been reported as effective regimens for unresectable advanced pancreatic cancer (APC). FX may be more effective but is also associated with more adverse events (AEs). Therefore, first-line treatment with FX followed by second-line GnP may be appropriate. Aims: To assess the safety and efficacy of second-line GnP for patients with APC after first-line FX failure. Methods: This study was a multicenter prospective phase II study evaluating second-line GnP in patients with APC after failed first-line FX. The primary endpoint was response rate (RR), and the secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), progression free survival (PFS), and the frequency and degree of adverse events (AEs). Results: Thirty patients (14 male; median age, 64 years) were enrolled. The RR was 13.3%, with a median follow-up time of 9.3 months. The median OS and PFS were 7.6 and 3.8 months, respectively. From the beginning of first-line treatment, the median OS and PFS were 14.2 and 9.3 months, respectively. Grade 3 or 4 AEs were seen in 70% of patients. Conclusion: Second-line GnP after FX failure for patients with APC could be more effective than GEM alone. Further comparison studies are warranted. MDPI 2019-05-29 /pmc/articles/PMC6616879/ /pubmed/31146420 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm8060761 Text en © 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Mita, Naoki Iwashita, Takuji Uemura, Shinya Yoshida, Kensaku Iwasa, Yuhei Ando, Nobuhiro Iwata, Keisuke Okuno, Mitsuru Mukai, Tsuyoshi Shimizu, Masahito Second-Line Gemcitabine Plus Nab-Paclitaxel for Patients with Unresectable Advanced Pancreatic Cancer after First-Line FOLFIRINOX Failure |
title | Second-Line Gemcitabine Plus Nab-Paclitaxel for Patients with Unresectable Advanced Pancreatic Cancer after First-Line FOLFIRINOX Failure |
title_full | Second-Line Gemcitabine Plus Nab-Paclitaxel for Patients with Unresectable Advanced Pancreatic Cancer after First-Line FOLFIRINOX Failure |
title_fullStr | Second-Line Gemcitabine Plus Nab-Paclitaxel for Patients with Unresectable Advanced Pancreatic Cancer after First-Line FOLFIRINOX Failure |
title_full_unstemmed | Second-Line Gemcitabine Plus Nab-Paclitaxel for Patients with Unresectable Advanced Pancreatic Cancer after First-Line FOLFIRINOX Failure |
title_short | Second-Line Gemcitabine Plus Nab-Paclitaxel for Patients with Unresectable Advanced Pancreatic Cancer after First-Line FOLFIRINOX Failure |
title_sort | second-line gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel for patients with unresectable advanced pancreatic cancer after first-line folfirinox failure |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6616879/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31146420 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm8060761 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT mitanaoki secondlinegemcitabineplusnabpaclitaxelforpatientswithunresectableadvancedpancreaticcancerafterfirstlinefolfirinoxfailure AT iwashitatakuji secondlinegemcitabineplusnabpaclitaxelforpatientswithunresectableadvancedpancreaticcancerafterfirstlinefolfirinoxfailure AT uemurashinya secondlinegemcitabineplusnabpaclitaxelforpatientswithunresectableadvancedpancreaticcancerafterfirstlinefolfirinoxfailure AT yoshidakensaku secondlinegemcitabineplusnabpaclitaxelforpatientswithunresectableadvancedpancreaticcancerafterfirstlinefolfirinoxfailure AT iwasayuhei secondlinegemcitabineplusnabpaclitaxelforpatientswithunresectableadvancedpancreaticcancerafterfirstlinefolfirinoxfailure AT andonobuhiro secondlinegemcitabineplusnabpaclitaxelforpatientswithunresectableadvancedpancreaticcancerafterfirstlinefolfirinoxfailure AT iwatakeisuke secondlinegemcitabineplusnabpaclitaxelforpatientswithunresectableadvancedpancreaticcancerafterfirstlinefolfirinoxfailure AT okunomitsuru secondlinegemcitabineplusnabpaclitaxelforpatientswithunresectableadvancedpancreaticcancerafterfirstlinefolfirinoxfailure AT mukaitsuyoshi secondlinegemcitabineplusnabpaclitaxelforpatientswithunresectableadvancedpancreaticcancerafterfirstlinefolfirinoxfailure AT shimizumasahito secondlinegemcitabineplusnabpaclitaxelforpatientswithunresectableadvancedpancreaticcancerafterfirstlinefolfirinoxfailure |