Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2024
SWOG S1815: A Phase III Randomized Trial of Gemcitabine, Cisplatin, and Nab-Paclitaxel Versus Gemcitabine and Cisplatin in Newly Diagnosed, Advanced Biliary Tract Cancers.
СтатьяКлиническое исследование III фазыРандомизированное исследованиеМногоцентровое исследованиеСравнительное исследованиеПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Shroff Rachna T, King Gentry, Colby Sarah, Scott Aaron J, Borad Mitesh J, Goff Laura, Matin Khalid, Mahipal Amit, Kalyan Aparna, Javle Milind M, El Dika Imane, Tan Benjamin, Cheema Puneet, Patel Anuj, Iyer Renuka, Kelley R Katie, Thumar Jaykumar, El-Khoueiry Anthony, Guthrie Katherine A, Chiorean E Gabriela, Hochster Howard, Philip Philip A
Аннотация
PURPOSE: SWOG S1815 was a randomized, open label phase III trial, evaluating gemcitabine, nab-paclitaxel, and cisplatin (GAP) versus gemcitabine and cisplatin (GC) in patients with newly diagnosed advanced biliary tract cancers (BTCs).
METHODS: Patients with newly diagnosed locally advanced unresectable or metastatic BTC, including intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) and extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ECC) and gallbladder carcinoma (GBC), were randomly assigned 2:1 to either GAP (gemcitabine 800 mg/m2, cisplatin 25 mg/m2, and nab-paclitaxel 100 mg/m2 intravenously once per day on days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle) or GC (gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m2 and cisplatin 25 mg/m2 intravenously once per day on days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle).
RESULTS: Among 452 randomly assigned participants, 441 were eligible and analyzable, 67% with ICC, 16% with GBC, and 17% with ECC. There was no significant difference in overall survival (OS) between GAP versus GC. Median OS with GAP was 14.0 months (95% CI, 12.4 to 16.1) and 13.6 months with GC (95% CI, 9.7 to 16.6); hazard ratio (HR), 0.91 (95% CI, 0.72 to 1.14); P = .41. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was similar between groups with median PFS for GAP being 7.5 months (95% CI, 6.4 to 8.5) versus 6.3 months for GC (95% CI, 4.4 to 8.2); HR, 0.89 (95% CI, 0.71 to 1.12); P = .32. In exploratory subset analyses, the OS and PFS benefits of GAP versus GC treatment were greater in locally advanced disease compared with metastatic disease, although not statistically significant (interaction P = .14 for OS and P = .17 for PFS). Moreover, GAP versus GC showed greater improvement in PFS among participants with GBC than those with ICC or ECC (interaction P = .01), but not OS (interaction P = .28).
CONCLUSION: The addition of a taxane in the GAP regimen to the standard gemcitabine-cisplatin regimen did not improve OS in newly diagnosed BTC. More toxicity was encountered with GAP versus GC.
METHODS: Patients with newly diagnosed locally advanced unresectable or metastatic BTC, including intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) and extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ECC) and gallbladder carcinoma (GBC), were randomly assigned 2:1 to either GAP (gemcitabine 800 mg/m2, cisplatin 25 mg/m2, and nab-paclitaxel 100 mg/m2 intravenously once per day on days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle) or GC (gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m2 and cisplatin 25 mg/m2 intravenously once per day on days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle).
RESULTS: Among 452 randomly assigned participants, 441 were eligible and analyzable, 67% with ICC, 16% with GBC, and 17% with ECC. There was no significant difference in overall survival (OS) between GAP versus GC. Median OS with GAP was 14.0 months (95% CI, 12.4 to 16.1) and 13.6 months with GC (95% CI, 9.7 to 16.6); hazard ratio (HR), 0.91 (95% CI, 0.72 to 1.14); P = .41. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was similar between groups with median PFS for GAP being 7.5 months (95% CI, 6.4 to 8.5) versus 6.3 months for GC (95% CI, 4.4 to 8.2); HR, 0.89 (95% CI, 0.71 to 1.12); P = .32. In exploratory subset analyses, the OS and PFS benefits of GAP versus GC treatment were greater in locally advanced disease compared with metastatic disease, although not statistically significant (interaction P = .14 for OS and P = .17 for PFS). Moreover, GAP versus GC showed greater improvement in PFS among participants with GBC than those with ICC or ECC (interaction P = .01), but not OS (interaction P = .28).
CONCLUSION: The addition of a taxane in the GAP regimen to the standard gemcitabine-cisplatin regimen did not improve OS in newly diagnosed BTC. More toxicity was encountered with GAP versus GC.