Quality of life study of patients with unresectable locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma treated with gemcitabine+nab-paclitaxel versus gemcitabine alone: AX-PANC-SY001, a randomized phase-2 study

PubMed: 322285122-s2.0-85082792669Background: Combination of gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel has superior clinical efficacy than gemcitabine alone. Nevertheless, health-related quality of life. (QoL) associated with this combination therapy when administered at first-line in advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma is unknown. Methods: A total of 125 patients were randomized to combination therapy (1000 mg/m2 gemcitabine + 125 mg/m2 nab-paclitaxel) and single-agent gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2) arms to take treatment weekly for 7 of 8 weeks, and following 3 of 4 weeks, until progression or severe toxicity. Primary endpoints were three-months of definitive deterioration free percent of patients, and QoL. Results: Overall QoL analyses showed that 34 and 58.3% of cases in gemcitabine and gemcitabine+nab-P arms had no deterioration in 3rd month QoL scores (p = 0.018). These proportions were 27.3 and 36.6% in 6th month assessments, respectively (p = 0.357). Median overall survivals in combination and single-agent arms were 9.92 months and 5.95 months, respectively (HR: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.42-0.86, p = 0.038). Median progression free survivals in these treatment arms were 6.28 and 3.22 months, respectively (HR: 0.58, 95% CI: 0.39-0.87, p = 0.008). Median time-to-deterioration were 5.36 vs 3.68 months, and objective response rates were 37.1% vs 23.7% (p = 0.009), respectively in combination and single-agent arms. Conclusions: Combination therapy with gemcitabine + nab-paclitaxel had better overall and progression-free survival than gemcitabine alone. Also, combination therapy showed increased response rate without toxicity or deteriorated QoL. Combination treatment with gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel may provide significant benefit for advanced pancreatic cancer. Trial registration: This study has been registered in ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT03807999 on January 8, 2019 (retrospectively registered). © 2020 The Author(s)

Comparison of gemcitabine monotherapy with gemcitabine and cisplatin combination in metastatic pancreatic cancer: A retrospective analysis

Purpose: Gemcitabine is among the standard first-line agents for the treatment of metastatic pancreatic cancer. However, as the median survival with gemcitabine monotherapy is 6 months, different combinations are being studied for better, prolonged survival. In this multicenter study, we aimed to compare the results of gemcitabine monotherapy with those of gemcitabine and cisplatin combination therapy as first-line treatments for metastatic pancreatic cancer. Methods: Data of 664 patients diagnosed with metastatic pancreatic cancer between January 2007 and December 2016 from seven oncology centers in Turkey were retrospectively evaluated, and 319 patients with gemcitabine alone (n=138) or gemcitabine and cisplatin combination (n=181) as first-line treatment were included. Results: The median patient age was 62 years (range 42-79), being 60 years (42-75) in the gemcitabine/cisplatin arm and 67 years (52-79) in gemcitabine alone arm. no complete response was observed in either arm, whereas partial response rates were 30.1% in gemcitabine/cisplatin arm and 15.3% in gemcitabine alone arm (p=0.001). median overall survival was 8 months (95% CI:7.7–10.2) and was significantly longer in the gemcitabine/cisplatin arm than in the gemcitabine alone arm (10 vs. 6 months, p=0.004). Conclusion: The cemcitabine and cisplatin combination therapy as first-line treatment of metastatic pancreatic cancer yields significantly prolonged survival over gemcitabine monotherapy. In patients with favorable performance conditions, the combination therapy should be preferred. © 2018 Zerbinis Publications. All Rights Reserved

Outcome of 561 non-metastatic triple negative breast cancer patients: Multi-center experience from Turkey

Purpose: Triple-negative breast cancers account for 15% of breast carcinomas and, when present as early-stage disease, they are associated with higher rates of recurrence and early distant metastasis risk when compared to hormone receptor positive and human epidermal growth factor receptor (HER-2) positive breast cancers. In this study we aimed to explore the basic clinicopathological characteristics, prognostic factors and recurrence patterns of non-metastatic triple negative breast cancer patients. Methods: In this study 561 non-metastatic triple-negative breast cancer female patients admitted to 8 different cancer centers in Turkey between 2000 and 2010 were retrospectively evaluated through their medical records, to identify the basic clinico-pathological characteristics, prognostic factors and recurrence patterns. Results: The ratio of triple-negative breast cancer was 12%. The median age of patients was 48 years, of whom 311 (55.4%) were premenopausal. The majority had early-stage breast cancer at the time of diagnosis (16.8% stage I, 48.1% stage II, 35.1 % stage III) and the most commonly identified variant was invasive ductal carcinoma (84.1%). Grade II and III tumors were 27.1 and 48.5%, respectively. Adjuvant chemotherapy was administered to 90.5% of women and adjuvant radiotherapy to 41.2%. Median patient follow up was 28 months (range 3-290). During the follow up period 134 (23.8%) patients developed metastatic disease. In most of these cases, metastatic sites were bone, soft tissue, and lung. Factors affecting disease free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were age (both p<0.001), lymph node involvement (both p<0.001), lymphovascular invasion (LVI) (p<0.001 and p=0.004, respectively), tumor stage (both p<0.001), adjuvant administration of anthracycline-based chemotherapy (both <0.001) and type of surgery (not significant for DFS but p=0.05 for OS). Three-year DFS and OS were 72.0 and 93.0%, respectively. Conclusion: Age, lymph node involvement, LVI, stage, and adjuvant chemotherapy were determined as prognostic factors for DFS and OS. The most common recurrence sites were bone, soft tissue and the lung. Further prospective randomised trials are needed to confirm the prognostic and predictive factors identified in this study