Comparison of different second line treatments for metastatic pancreatic cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.


Journal

BMC gastroenterology
ISSN: 1471-230X
Titre abrégé: BMC Gastroenterol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968547

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
19 Jun 2023
Historique:
received: 17 10 2022
accepted: 13 06 2023
medline: 21 6 2023
pubmed: 20 6 2023
entrez: 19 6 2023
Statut: epublish

Résumé

In metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (mPDAC), first line treatment options usually include combination regimens of folinic acid, 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), irinotecan, and oxaliplatin (FOLFIRINOX or mFOLFIRINOX) or gemcitabine based regimens such as in combination with albumin-bound paclitaxel (GEM + nab-PTX). After progression, multiple regimens including NALIRI + 5-FU and folinic acid, FOLFIRINOX, 5-FU-based oxaliplatin doublets (OFF, FOLFOX, or XELOX), or 5-FU-based monotherapy (FL, capecitabine, or S-1) are considered appropriate by major guidelines. This network meta-analysis (NMA) aimed to compare the efficacy of different treatment strategies tested as second-line regimens for patients with mPDAC after first-line gemcitabine-based systemic treatment. Randomized phase II and III clinical trials (RCTs) were included if they were published or presented in English. Trials of interest compared two active systemic treatments as second-line regimens until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. We performed a Bayesian NMA with published hazard ratios (HRs) and 95%confidence intervals (CIs) to evaluate the comparative effectiveness of different second-line therapies for mPDAC. The main outcomes of interest were overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS), secondary endpoints were grade 3-4 toxicities. We calculated the relative ranking of agents for each outcome as their surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA). A higher SUCRA score meant a higher ranking for efficacy outcomes. A NMA of 9 treatments was performed for OS (n = 2521 patients enrolled). Compared with 5-FU + folinic acid both irinotecan or NALIRI + fluoropyrimidines had a trend to better OS (HR = 0.76, 95%CI 0.21-2.75 and HR = 0.74, 95%CI 0.31-1.85). Fluoropyrimidines + folinic acid + oxaliplatin were no better than the combination without oxaliplatin. The analysis of treatment ranking showed that the combination of NALIRI + 5-FU + folinic acid was most likely to yield the highest OS results (SUCRA = 0.7). Furthermore, the NMA results indicated that with the highest SUCRA score (SUCRA = 0.91), NALIRI + 5-FU + folinic acid may be the optimal choice for improved PFS amongst all regimens studied. According to the NMA results, NALIRI + 5-FU, and folinic acid may represent the best second-line treatment for improved survival outcomes in mPDAC. Further evidence from prospective trials is needed to determine the best treatment option for this group of patients.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
In metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (mPDAC), first line treatment options usually include combination regimens of folinic acid, 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), irinotecan, and oxaliplatin (FOLFIRINOX or mFOLFIRINOX) or gemcitabine based regimens such as in combination with albumin-bound paclitaxel (GEM + nab-PTX). After progression, multiple regimens including NALIRI + 5-FU and folinic acid, FOLFIRINOX, 5-FU-based oxaliplatin doublets (OFF, FOLFOX, or XELOX), or 5-FU-based monotherapy (FL, capecitabine, or S-1) are considered appropriate by major guidelines. This network meta-analysis (NMA) aimed to compare the efficacy of different treatment strategies tested as second-line regimens for patients with mPDAC after first-line gemcitabine-based systemic treatment.
METHODS METHODS
Randomized phase II and III clinical trials (RCTs) were included if they were published or presented in English. Trials of interest compared two active systemic treatments as second-line regimens until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. We performed a Bayesian NMA with published hazard ratios (HRs) and 95%confidence intervals (CIs) to evaluate the comparative effectiveness of different second-line therapies for mPDAC. The main outcomes of interest were overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS), secondary endpoints were grade 3-4 toxicities. We calculated the relative ranking of agents for each outcome as their surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA). A higher SUCRA score meant a higher ranking for efficacy outcomes.
RESULTS RESULTS
A NMA of 9 treatments was performed for OS (n = 2521 patients enrolled). Compared with 5-FU + folinic acid both irinotecan or NALIRI + fluoropyrimidines had a trend to better OS (HR = 0.76, 95%CI 0.21-2.75 and HR = 0.74, 95%CI 0.31-1.85). Fluoropyrimidines + folinic acid + oxaliplatin were no better than the combination without oxaliplatin. The analysis of treatment ranking showed that the combination of NALIRI + 5-FU + folinic acid was most likely to yield the highest OS results (SUCRA = 0.7). Furthermore, the NMA results indicated that with the highest SUCRA score (SUCRA = 0.91), NALIRI + 5-FU + folinic acid may be the optimal choice for improved PFS amongst all regimens studied.
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
According to the NMA results, NALIRI + 5-FU, and folinic acid may represent the best second-line treatment for improved survival outcomes in mPDAC. Further evidence from prospective trials is needed to determine the best treatment option for this group of patients.

Identifiants

pubmed: 37337148
doi: 10.1186/s12876-023-02853-w
pii: 10.1186/s12876-023-02853-w
pmc: PMC10278314
doi:

Substances chimiques

Irinotecan 7673326042
Oxaliplatin 04ZR38536J
Leucovorin Q573I9DVLP
Fluorouracil U3P01618RT

Types de publication

Meta-Analysis Systematic Review Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

212

Informations de copyright

© 2023. The Author(s).

Références

Cancers (Basel). 2019 Apr 05;11(4):
pubmed: 30959763
ESMO Open. 2021 Apr;6(2):100049
pubmed: 33578192
Ther Adv Med Oncol. 2020 Sep 29;12:1758835920947970
pubmed: 33062062
J Clin Oncol. 2016 Nov 10;34(32):3914-3920
pubmed: 27621395
Ann Oncol. 2007 Jun;18 Suppl 6:vi124-7
pubmed: 17591805
J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2019 Mar 1;17(3):202-210
pubmed: 30865919
Br J Cancer. 2016 Oct 25;115(9):e13
pubmed: 27657342
Ann Intern Med. 2015 Jun 2;162(11):777-84
pubmed: 26030634
CA Cancer J Clin. 2021 Jan;71(1):7-33
pubmed: 33433946
J Clin Oncol. 2014 Aug 10;32(23):2423-9
pubmed: 24982456
J Clin Oncol. 2021 Apr 1;39(10):1108-1118
pubmed: 33555926
Cancer Manag Res. 2020 Oct 19;12:10271-10278
pubmed: 33116881
Pancreas. 2015 May;44(4):515-21
pubmed: 25872127
Br J Cancer. 2022 Jun;126(10):1394-1400
pubmed: 35094032
N Engl J Med. 2011 May 12;364(19):1817-25
pubmed: 21561347
Invest New Drugs. 2018 Aug;36(4):683-695
pubmed: 29508247
Eur J Cancer. 2019 Feb;108:78-87
pubmed: 30654298
Pancreas. 2022 Mar 1;51(3):278-281
pubmed: 35584386
N Engl J Med. 2013 Oct 31;369(18):1691-703
pubmed: 24131140
Clin Cancer Res. 2021 Dec 1;27(23):6314-6322
pubmed: 34580114

Auteurs

Fausto Petrelli (F)

Oncology Unit, ASST Bergamo ovest, Treviglio (BG), 24047, Italy.

Alessandro Parisi (A)

Clinica Oncologica e Centro Regionale di Genetica Oncologica, Università Politecnica delle Marche, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria delle Marche, Via Conca 71, Ancona, 60126, Italy. alexparis@hotmail.it.
Department of Life, Health and Environmental Sciences, University of L'Aquila, L'Aquila, 67100, Italy. alexparis@hotmail.it.

Gianluca Tomasello (G)

Oncology Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Ca' Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Milan, 20122, Italy.

Emanuele Mini (E)

General Surgery Unit, ASST Bergamo ovest, Treviglio (BG), 24047, Italy.

Marcella Arru (M)

General Surgery Unit, ASST Bergamo ovest, Treviglio (BG), 24047, Italy.

Alessandro Russo (A)

General Surgery Unit, ASST Bergamo ovest, Treviglio (BG), 24047, Italy.

Ornella Garrone (O)

Oncology Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Ca' Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Milan, 20122, Italy.

Shelize Khakoo (S)

Department of Medicine, The Royal Marsden Hospital, London, SW3 6JJ, UK.

Raffaele Ardito (R)

Oncological Day Hospital, IRCCS Centro di Riferimento Oncologico Della Basilicata (CROB), Via Padre Pio 1, Rionero in Vulture PZ, 85028, Italy.

Michele Ghidini (M)

Oncology Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Ca' Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Milan, 20122, Italy.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH