Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Comparative effectiveness and resource utilization of nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine vs FOLFIRINOX or gemcitabine for the first-line treatment of metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma in a US community setting.
Braiteh, Fadi; Patel, Manish B; Parisi, Monika; Ni, Quanhong; Park, Siyeon; Faria, Claudio.
Afiliación
  • Braiteh F; Comprehensive Cancer Centers of Nevada, University of Nevada School of Medicine, Las Vegas, NV.
  • Patel MB; Celgene Corporation, Summit, NJ.
  • Parisi M; Celgene Corporation, Summit, NJ.
  • Ni Q; Celgene Corporation, Summit, NJ.
  • Park S; Celgene Corporation, Summit, NJ.
  • Faria C; The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA.
Cancer Manag Res ; 9: 141-148, 2017.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28461766
INTRODUCTION: Despite a clinically relevant, statistically significant survival benefit with nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine and FOLFIRINOX vs single-agent gemcitabine for metastatic pancreatic cancer (mPC), little is known regarding their real-world effectiveness. We analyzed patients with mPC using a nationally representative electronic medical records database to address this unmet need. METHODS: This retrospective analysis of the Navigating Cancer database compared outcomes among patients who received first-line nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine, FOLFIRINOX, or gemcitabine for mPC. Effectiveness, safety, and supportive care use were examined. nab-Paclitaxel plus gemcitabine was the reference for statistical comparisons. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were similar except age (oldest patients were in the gemcitabine cohort followed by nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine, then FOLFIRINOX). Patients receiving nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine (n=122) demonstrated similar time to treatment discontinuation (TTD; median, 3.4 vs 3.8 months; P=0.947) and database persistence (DP; median, 8.6 vs 8.6 months; P=0.534) vs FOLFIRINOX (n=80); however, TTD (median, 3.4 vs 2.2 months; P<0.001) and DP (median, 8.6 vs 5.3 months; P=0.030) were significantly longer with nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine vs gemcitabine (n=46). There were more any-grade adverse events with FOLFIRINOX or gemcitabine vs nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine (95% or 89% vs 84%, respectively). CONCLUSION: This real-world analysis confirms the phase III MPACT trial findings and demonstrates that nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine has effectiveness similar to that of FOLFIRINOX but greater tolerability for treating mPC despite younger patients being in the FOLFIRINOX cohort. These findings support nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine as an appropriate first-line treatment option for patients with mPC.
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: Cancer Manag Res Año: 2017 Tipo del documento: Article Pais de publicación: Nueva Zelanda

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: Cancer Manag Res Año: 2017 Tipo del documento: Article Pais de publicación: Nueva Zelanda