Comparison between FOLFIRINOX and gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel including sequential treatment for metastatic pancreatic cancer: a propensity score matching approach

30Citations
Citations of this article
37Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: FOLFIRINOX (FFX) and Gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (GnP) have been recommended as the first-line chemotherapy for metastatic pancreatic cancer (mPC). However, the evidence is lacking comparing not only two regimens, but also sequential treatment (FFX–GnP vs. GnP–FFX). Methods: Data of 528 patients (FFX, n = 371; GnP, n = 157) with mPC were collected retrospectively. Propensity score matching was conducted to alleviate imbalance of the two groups. Overall survival (OS), progression free survival (PFS), and toxicity of patients were analyzed. Results: In the whole population, OS (12.5 months vs. 10.3 months, P = 0.05) and PFS (7.1 months vs. 5.8 months, P = 0.02) were longer in the FFX group before matching and after matching (OS: 11.8 months vs. 10.3 months, P = 0.02; PFS: 7.2 months vs. 5.8 months, P < 0.01). For sequential treatment, OS and PFS showed no significant difference. Interruptions of chemotherapy due to toxicities were more frequent (6.8 vs. 29.3%, P < 0.001) in the GnP group, and cessation of chemotherapy showed a significant association with mortality (z = − 1.94, P = 0.03). Conclusions: FFX achieved a longer overall survival than GnP in mPC, but not in the comparison for sequential treatment. More frequent adverse events followed by treatment interruptions during GnP might lead to a poor survival outcome. Therefore, FFX would be a better first-line treatment option than GnP for mPC.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Chun, J. W., Lee, S. H., Kim, J. S., Park, N., Huh, G., Cho, I. R., … Kim, Y. T. (2021). Comparison between FOLFIRINOX and gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel including sequential treatment for metastatic pancreatic cancer: a propensity score matching approach. BMC Cancer, 21(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-021-08277-7

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free