ABSTRACT
Background & objectives: FOLFIRINOX and gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (GN) are the most commonly used regimens in advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas (PDACs). As there is limited data on comparison of these two regimens, the present study was aimed to compare survivals and tolerance for both regimens through a match-pair analysis. Methods: The data of 350 patients with metastatic and locally advanced PDAC, treated between January 2013 and December 2019, were retrieved. A 1:1 matching, using age and performance status, without replacement was performed by using nearest neighbour matching method. Results: A total of 260 patients (130 modified FOLFIRINOX and 130 GN) were matched. The median overall survival (OS) was 12.98 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 7.257-8.776 months] in modifications of FOLFIRINOX (mFOLFIRINOX) cohort and 12.06 months (95% CI 6.690-8.88 months) in GN group (P=0.080). The incidence of grade 3 and 4 infections, diarrhoea, oral mucositis, and fatigue was higher with mFOLFIRINOX. Patients who received second line therapy had improved OS as compared to those who did not (14.06 vs. 9.07 months, P<0.001). Interpretation & conclusions: GN and mFOLFIRINOX appear to have similar survival outcomes in an unselected match paired patient population with advanced PDAC. A markedly increased incidence of non-myelosuppressive grade 3 and grade 4 side-effects and lack of survival improvements suggest a need for nuanced use of the mFOLFIRINOX regimen. Administration of second-line chemotherapy improves OS in patients with advanced PDAC.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND The Covid-19 pandemic and subsequent lockdown in India caused disruptions in cancer treatment due to the restriction on movement of patients. We aimed to maintain continuity in cancer treatment during the lockdown through teleconsultations. We tried to reach out to our patients using telephonic consultations by establishing a Teleconsult Centre facility run by a team of doctors and patient navigators. METHODS We telephonically contacted all patients who had outpatient appointments from 23 March to 30 April 2020 at our centre through the Teleconsult Centre to understand their current circumstances, feasibility of follow-up, local resources and offered best possible alternatives to continue cancer treatment, if required. RESULTS Of the 2686 patients scheduled for follow-up during this period, we could contact 1783 patients in 9 working days. Through teleconsultations, we could defer follow-ups of 1034 patients (57.99%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 55.6%–60.3%), thus reducing the need for patients to travel to the hospital. Change in systemic therapy was made in 75 patients (4.2%, 95% CI 3.3%–5.2%) as per the requirements and available resources. Symptoms suggestive of disease progression were picked up in 12 patients (0.67%, 95% CI 0.35%–1.17%), who were advised to meet local physicians. CONCLUSION Our study suggests that the majority of patients on follow-up can be managed with teleconsultation in times of crisis. Teleconsultation has the potential of being one of the standard methods of patient follow-up even during periods of normalcy.