Posters dealing with nab-paclitaxel
Suayib Yalcin, et al.
Quality of life study in patients with unresectable locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer treated with gemcitabine in combination with nab-paclitaxel versus gemcitabine alone: ax-panc-sy001: A phase II randomized study.
Conclusions: As compared with gemcitabine, gemcitabine plus nabpaclitaxel was associated with an overall and progressive free survival advantage, with increased response rate, without increasing toxicity and deterioration of quality of life. Gemcitabine and nabpaclitaxel combination regimen with this form is a preferable option for the treatment of patients with advanced pancreatic cancer Clinical trial information: EudraCT: 2013-004180-32.
J Clin Oncol 36, 2018 (suppl 4S; abstr 346)
Volker Kunzmann, et al.
Secondary resectability in locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) after nab-paclitaxel/gemcitabine- versus FOLFIRINOX-based induction chemotherapy: Interim results of a randomized phase II AIO trial (NEOLAP).
Conclusions: nPG- and FOLFIRINOX-based induction chemotherapy approach revealed both effective and feasible in pts with LAPC supporting completion of patient recruitment in this trial. Interim results suggest promising secondary resection rates after multi-agent chemotherapy, especially when secondary resectability is assessed by surgical exploration. After 4 months of induction chemotherapy both regimens exhibit a similar high disease control rate (DCR) of about 90%. Futility analysis for secondary resectability revealed promising surgical conversion rates in both arms, especially when resectability was assessed by exploratory laparatomie (as defined by protocol) and not by radiographic assessment alone.
Clinical trial information: NCT02125136.
J Clin Oncol 36, 2018 (suppl 4S; abstr 348)
Elisa Giommoni, et al.
The ORR was 31% for both schedules, with a CBR of 69% and 71% respecively.
At a median follow up of 11.4 months for ARM a and 14.5 for ARM B, 1-year survival is 41% and 50%.
For Nab-FOLFIRI: PFS and mOS were 6 months (95% CI 4.7-8.1) and 13.2 months (95% CI 8.4-16.2)
For Nab-FOLFOX: PFS and mOS were 5.6 months (95% CI 4.2-8.4) and 10.5 months (95% CI 7.5-12.9)
Nab-FOLFIRI and Nab–FOLFOX demonstrated a similar activity to FOLFIRINOX, with better safety profile in terms of neutropenia, fatigue and neuropathy. These results could justify a future phase III evaluation. Clinical trial information: NCT02109341
J Clin Oncol 36, 2018 (suppl 4S; abstr 351)
Inhwang Hwang, et al.
Efficacy outcomes of AG were comparable to those of FOLFIRINOX based on the patient population in daily practice setting.
Significantly better OS with AG than with FOLFIRINOX may be contributed by the impact of subsequent second-line treatment.
Patients with old age and peritoneal metastasis seemed to have more PFS benefit with AG than with FOLFIRINOX.
Liver metastasis and elevated baseline CA 19-9 were significant prognostic factors for PFS.
Both AG and FOLFIRINOX are feasible and active as first-line treatment for patients with mPC. In daily practice setting, AG showed comparable efficacy outcomes with FOLFIRINOX.
J Clin Oncol 36, 2018 (suppl 4S; abstr 354)
Erkut Hasan Borazanci, et al.
A phase II pilot trial of nivolumab (N) + albumin bound paclitaxel (AP) + paricalcitol (P) + cisplatin (C) + gemcitabine (G) (NAPPCG) in patients with previously untreated metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC).
Conclusions: Although a small study, the high response rate is encouraging. This regimen is being expanded to 25 patients with plans to include exploratory inflammatory biomarkers and microbiome studies to correlate with response. Quality of life (QOL) analysis is underway. Clinical trial information: NCT02754726.
J Clin Oncol 36, 2018 (suppl 4S; abstr 358)
Anne Laure Pointet, et al.
Conclusions: This study suggests a clinical benefit and a manageable toxicity profile of 2L fluoropyrimidine-based regimens after N+G failure in patients with MPA, in particularly combined with irinotecan in FOLFIRI or FOLFIRI.3 regimes.
J Clin Oncol 36, 2018 (suppl 4S; abstr 370)
Sunnie S. Kim, et al.
Conclusions: In a nationwide sample of mPC patients, real-world survival outcomes were similar between patients receiving 1L nab-P+G or FFX. both overall and among patients who went on to receive active 2L treatments. In addition, nab-P+G was associated with significantly lower rates of common AEs compared with FFX.
J Clin Oncol 36, 2018 (suppl 4S; abstr 376)
Yusuke Hashimoto, et al.
Conclusions: GnP showed promising results of response and overall survival in uLAPC patients. Conversion to resection in carefully selected uLAPC currently suggests an early surgical benefit, but longer follow-up and more cases will be required to assess the potential long-term benefit of conversion therapy.
J Clin Oncol 36, 2018 (suppl 4S; abstr 407)
Fernando Franco Franco, et al.
Conclusions: Originally reported OS is not only reproduced but improved in the real world despite a less strict inclusion of pts. 25% of patients remain alive 30 months after diagnosis. Superiority could not be demonstrated for any of the schemes. The availability of both regimens seems to dilute the potential differences and it is not so important the election of the 1st line. Both NLR and Ca 19.9 level predicted risk of death during the 1st line impairing the possibility of being treated in 2nd line.
J Clin Oncol 36, 2018 (suppl 4S; abstr 440)