Meta-analysis examining overall survival in patients with pancreatic cancer treated with second-line 5-fluorouracil and oxaliplatin-based therapy after failing first-line gemcitabine-containing therapy: effect of performance status and comparison with other regimens.
Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols
/ pharmacology
Deoxycytidine
/ analogs & derivatives
Drug Resistance, Neoplasm
Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions
/ diagnosis
Fluorouracil
/ pharmacology
Humans
Karnofsky Performance Status
Leucovorin
/ pharmacology
Organoplatinum Compounds
/ pharmacology
Oxaliplatin
/ pharmacology
Pancreatic Neoplasms
/ diagnosis
Prognosis
Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
Risk Factors
Survival Analysis
Treatment Outcome
Gemcitabine
FOLFOX
Meta-analysis
Metastatic
Pancreatic cancer
Performance status
Journal
BMC cancer
ISSN: 1471-2407
Titre abrégé: BMC Cancer
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100967800
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
08 Jul 2020
08 Jul 2020
Historique:
received:
20
02
2020
accepted:
25
06
2020
entrez:
10
7
2020
pubmed:
10
7
2020
medline:
30
1
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Pancreatic cancer has a poor prognosis and few choices of therapy. For patients with adequate performance status, FOLFIRINOX or gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel are preferred first-line treatment. 5-Fluorouracil (5-FU)-based therapy (e.g. FOLFIRI, OFF, or FOLFOX) are often used in patients who previously received gemcitabine-based regimens. A systematic review was conducted of the safety and efficacy of FOLFOX for metastatic pancreatic cancer following prior gemcitabine-based therapy. A Bayesian fixed-effect meta-analysis with adjustment of patient performance status (PS) was conducted to evaluate overall survival (OS) and compare outcomes with nanoliposomal irinotecan combination therapy. PubMed.gov , FDA.gov , ClinicalTrials.gov , congress abstracts, Cochrane.org library, and EMBASE database searches were conducted to identify randomized controlled trials of advanced/metastatic disease, prior gemcitabine-based therapy, and second-line treatment with 5-FU and oxaliplatin. The database search dates were January 1, 1990-June 30, 2019. Endpoints were OS and severe treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs). Trial-level PS scores were standardized by converting Karnofsky grade scores to Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) Grade, and overall study-weighted PS was calculated based on weighted average of all patients. Of 282 studies identified, 11 randomized controlled trials (N = 454) were included in the meta-analysis. Baseline weighted PS scores predicted OS in 10 of the 11 studies, and calculated PS scores of 1.0 were associated with a median OS of 6.3 months (95% posterior interval, 5.4-7.4). After adjusting for baseline PS, FOLFOX had a similar treatment effect profile (median OS, range 2.6-6.7 months) as 5-FU/leucovorin plus nanoliposomal irinotecan therapy (median OS, 6.1 months; 95% confidence interval 4.8-8.9). Neutropenia and fatigue were the most commonly reported Grade 3-4 TRAEs associated with FOLFOX. Baseline PS is a strong prognostic factor when interpreting the efficacy of 5-FU and oxaliplatin-based therapy of pancreatic cancer after progression on first-line gemcitabine-based regimens. When baseline PS is considered, FOLFOX has a similar treatment effect as 5-FU and nanoliposomal irinotecan therapy and a comparable safety profile. These findings suggest that 5-FU and oxaliplatin-based therapies remain an acceptable and alternative second-line treatment option for patients with pancreatic cancer and adequate PS (e.g. ECOG 0-1) following gemcitabine treatment.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Pancreatic cancer has a poor prognosis and few choices of therapy. For patients with adequate performance status, FOLFIRINOX or gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel are preferred first-line treatment. 5-Fluorouracil (5-FU)-based therapy (e.g. FOLFIRI, OFF, or FOLFOX) are often used in patients who previously received gemcitabine-based regimens. A systematic review was conducted of the safety and efficacy of FOLFOX for metastatic pancreatic cancer following prior gemcitabine-based therapy. A Bayesian fixed-effect meta-analysis with adjustment of patient performance status (PS) was conducted to evaluate overall survival (OS) and compare outcomes with nanoliposomal irinotecan combination therapy.
METHODS
METHODS
PubMed.gov , FDA.gov , ClinicalTrials.gov , congress abstracts, Cochrane.org library, and EMBASE database searches were conducted to identify randomized controlled trials of advanced/metastatic disease, prior gemcitabine-based therapy, and second-line treatment with 5-FU and oxaliplatin. The database search dates were January 1, 1990-June 30, 2019. Endpoints were OS and severe treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs). Trial-level PS scores were standardized by converting Karnofsky grade scores to Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) Grade, and overall study-weighted PS was calculated based on weighted average of all patients.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Of 282 studies identified, 11 randomized controlled trials (N = 454) were included in the meta-analysis. Baseline weighted PS scores predicted OS in 10 of the 11 studies, and calculated PS scores of 1.0 were associated with a median OS of 6.3 months (95% posterior interval, 5.4-7.4). After adjusting for baseline PS, FOLFOX had a similar treatment effect profile (median OS, range 2.6-6.7 months) as 5-FU/leucovorin plus nanoliposomal irinotecan therapy (median OS, 6.1 months; 95% confidence interval 4.8-8.9). Neutropenia and fatigue were the most commonly reported Grade 3-4 TRAEs associated with FOLFOX.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Baseline PS is a strong prognostic factor when interpreting the efficacy of 5-FU and oxaliplatin-based therapy of pancreatic cancer after progression on first-line gemcitabine-based regimens. When baseline PS is considered, FOLFOX has a similar treatment effect as 5-FU and nanoliposomal irinotecan therapy and a comparable safety profile. These findings suggest that 5-FU and oxaliplatin-based therapies remain an acceptable and alternative second-line treatment option for patients with pancreatic cancer and adequate PS (e.g. ECOG 0-1) following gemcitabine treatment.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32641104
doi: 10.1186/s12885-020-07110-x
pii: 10.1186/s12885-020-07110-x
pmc: PMC7346629
doi:
Substances chimiques
Organoplatinum Compounds
0
Oxaliplatin
04ZR38536J
Deoxycytidine
0W860991D6
Leucovorin
Q573I9DVLP
Fluorouracil
U3P01618RT
Gemcitabine
0
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Systematic Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
633Références
Am J Clin Oncol. 1982 Dec;5(6):649-55
pubmed: 7165009
World J Oncol. 2019 Feb;10(1):10-27
pubmed: 30834048
Ann Oncol. 2007 Jun;18 Suppl 6:vi124-7
pubmed: 17591805
N Engl J Med. 2019 Jul 25;381(4):317-327
pubmed: 31157963
Eur J Cancer. 2014 Dec;50(18):3116-24
pubmed: 25454414
J Clin Oncol. 2018 Aug 20;36(24):2545-2556
pubmed: 29791286
N Engl J Med. 2013 Oct 31;369(18):1691-703
pubmed: 24131140
J Clin Oncol. 2016 Nov 10;34(32):3914-3920
pubmed: 27621395
PLoS One. 2018 Dec 7;13(12):e0208557
pubmed: 30532127
JAMA Oncol. 2017 Apr 1;3(4):516-522
pubmed: 27978579
N Engl J Med. 2011 May 12;364(19):1817-25
pubmed: 21561347
Ann Surg Oncol. 2019 May;26(5):1503-1511
pubmed: 30652227
Lancet. 2016 Feb 6;387(10018):545-557
pubmed: 26615328
Therap Adv Gastroenterol. 2013 Jul;6(4):321-37
pubmed: 23814611
Exp Ther Med. 2012 Mar;3(3):423-432
pubmed: 22969906
J Clin Oncol. 2014 Aug 10;32(23):2423-9
pubmed: 24982456
J Gastrointest Cancer. 2013 Sep;44(3):313-7
pubmed: 23606201
Clin Cancer Res. 2018 Mar 15;24(6):1326-1336
pubmed: 29367431
Br J Cancer. 2009 Nov 17;101(10):1658-63
pubmed: 19826418
Eur J Cancer. 2011 Jul;47(11):1676-81
pubmed: 21565490
Onkologie. 2009 Mar;32(3):99-102
pubmed: 19295247
Hepatogastroenterology. 2012 Nov-Dec;59(120):2635-9
pubmed: 22534542
Int J Biol Markers. 2019 Dec;34(4):373-380
pubmed: 31608800
Invest New Drugs. 2005 Aug;23(4):369-75
pubmed: 16012797
World J Gastroenterol. 2014 Aug 21;20(31):10802-12
pubmed: 25152583
BMC Cancer. 2014 Jun 14;14:441
pubmed: 24929865
CA Cancer J Clin. 2018 Nov;68(6):394-424
pubmed: 30207593
Anticancer Res. 2012 Nov;32(11):5121-6
pubmed: 23155291
Int J Clin Oncol. 2013 Oct;18(5):839-46
pubmed: 22996141
Ann Gastroenterol Surg. 2018 Jun 22;2(4):274-281
pubmed: 30003190