Cargando…
A real-world study of anlotinib combined with GS regimen as first-line treatment for advanced pancreatic cancer
BACKGROUND: Anlotinib may boost the efficacy of pancreatic cancer (PC) treatment if timely added to the GS regimen (Gemcitabine, Tegafur-gimeracil-oteracil potassium); however, no data has been published. This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of anlotinib in combination with the GS regimen(he...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9897321/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36742383 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fendo.2023.1110624 |
Sumario: | BACKGROUND: Anlotinib may boost the efficacy of pancreatic cancer (PC) treatment if timely added to the GS regimen (Gemcitabine, Tegafur-gimeracil-oteracil potassium); however, no data has been published. This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of anlotinib in combination with the GS regimen(hereafter referred to as the A+GS regimen) in the first-line treatment of patients with unresectable or metastatic PC. METHODS: Patients with unresectable or metastatic PC treated at Yueyang Central Hospital and Yueyang People’s Hospital between October 2018 and June 2022 were enrolled in this retrospective real-world investigation. Treatment efficacy was evaluated based on the overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), disease control rate (DCR), and objective response rate (ORR), while the treatment safety was assessed by the frequency of major adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: Seventy-one patients were included in this study, 41 in the GS group and 30 in the A+GS group. The A+GS group had a longer mPFS than the GS group (12.0 months (95% CI, 6.0–18.0) and 6.0 months (95% CI, 3.0–8.1)), respectively (P = 0.005). mOS was longer in the GS+A group) when compared with the GS group (17.0 months (95%CI, 14.0–20.0) and 10.0 months (95% CI, 7.5–12.5)), respectively (P = 0.018). The GS+A group had higher ORR (50.0% vs 26.8%, P = 0.045) and DCR (83.3% vs 58.5%, P = 0.026). Furthermore, there were no grade 4-5 AEs and no treatment-related deaths, and no discernible increase in AEs in the GS+A group when compared with the GS group. CONCLUSION: The A+GS regimen therapy holds great promise in managing treatment-naive advanced PC, except that future prospective studies with larger sample sizes and multiple centers are required to determine its efficacy and safety. |
---|