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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mita, Naoki, Iwashita, Takuji, Uemura, Shinya, Yoshida, Kensaku, Iwasa, Yuhei, Ando, Nobuhiro, Iwata, Keisuke, Okuno, Mitsuru, Mukai, Tsuyoshi, Shimizu, Masahito
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