首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
检索        


<Emphasis Type="Italic">nab</Emphasis>-Paclitaxel Plus Gemcitabine Versus Gemcitabine in Patients with Metastatic Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: Canadian Subgroup Analysis of the Phase 3 MPACT Trial
Authors:Mustapha Tehfe  Scot Dowden  Hagen Kennecke  Robert El-Maraghi  Bernard Lesperance  Felix Couture  Richard Letourneau  Helen Liu  Alfredo Romano
Institution:1.Centre hospitalier de l’université de Montréal (CHUM),Montreal,Canada;2.Tom Baker Cancer Centre,Calgary,Canada;3.British Columbia Cancer Agency,Vancouver,Canada;4.Royal Victoria Regional Health Centre,Barrie,Canada;5.H?pital du Sacré-Coeur de Montreal,Montreal,Canada;6.Centre hospitalier universitaire de Québec (CHUQ), H?tel-Dieu de Quebec, CHUM,Montreal,Canada;7.Celgene Corporation,Summit,USA
Abstract:

Introduction

The phase III MPACT trial in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer (MPC) demonstrated superior efficacy of nab-paclitaxel (nab-P) plus gemcitabine (Gem) compared with Gem monotherapy, including the primary endpoint of overall survival (OS; median 8.7 vs. 6.6 months; hazard ratio HR] 0.72; P < 0.001). A significant treatment difference favoring nab-P + Gem over Gem was observed for OS in patients treated in North America. The majority of patients were from the US (88%) with only 12% from Canada. Healthcare systems and treatment patterns are different between the 2 countries, and there is limited published information on outcomes of Canadian patients treated with first-line nab-P + Gem. This analysis evaluated efficacy and safety outcomes in Canadian patients in the MPACT trial.

Methods

Treatment-naive patients with MPC (N = 861) received either nab-P 125 mg/m2 + Gem 1000 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, and 15 every 4 weeks or Gem 1000 mg/m2 weekly for the first 7 of 8 weeks (cycle 1) and then on days 1, 8, and 15 every 4 weeks (cycle ≥2).

Results

The MPACT trial enrolled 63 patients in Canada. Baseline characteristics were well balanced and comparable with those of the intent-to-treat population. Both OS (median 11.9 vs. 7.1 months; HR 0.76; P = 0.373) and progression-free survival (median 7.2 vs. 5.2 months; HR 0.65; P = 0.224) were numerically longer and overall response rate (27% vs. 17%; P = 0.312) was numerically higher with nab-P + Gem vs. Gem. The most common grade ≥3 adverse events with nab-P + Gem vs. Gem were neutropenia (22% vs. 10%), fatigue (34% vs. 33%), and neuropathy (25% vs. 0%).

Conclusion

This subanalysis confirmed that nab-P + Gem is an efficacious treatment option and has a manageable safety profile in patients with MPC treated in Canada.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT00844649.

Funding

Celgene Corporation, Summit, NJ, USA.
Keywords:
本文献已被 SpringerLink 等数据库收录!
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号