PURPOSE: The relative value of gemcitabine-based combination chemotherapy therapy and prolonged infusions of gemcitabine in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer remains controversial. We explored the efficacy and toxicity of gemcitabine administered at a fixed dose rate or in combination with cisplatin, docetaxel, or irinotecan in a multi-institutional, randomized, phase II study. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer were randomly assigned to one of the following four regimens: gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8, and 15 with cisplatin 50 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 15 (arm A); gemcitabine 1,500 mg/m(2) at a rate of 10 mg/m(2)/min on days 1, 8, and 15 (arm B); gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) with docetaxel 40 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 (arm C); or gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) with irinotecan 100 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 (arm D). Patients were observed for response, toxicity, and survival. Results Two hundred fifty-nine patients were enrolled onto the study, of whom 245 were eligible and received treatment. Anticipated rates of myelosuppression, fatigue, and expected regimen-specific toxicities were observed. The overall tumor response rates were 12% to 14%, and the median overall survival times were 6.4 to 7.1 months among the four regimens. CONCLUSION:Gemcitabine/cisplatin, fixed dose rate gemcitabine, gemcitabine/docetaxel, and gemcitabine/irinotecan have similar antitumor activity in metastatic pancreatic cancer. In light of recent negative randomized studies directly comparing several of these regimens with standard gemcitabine, none of these approaches can be recommended for routine use in patients with this disease.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: The relative value of gemcitabine-based combination chemotherapy therapy and prolonged infusions of gemcitabine in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer remains controversial. We explored the efficacy and toxicity of gemcitabine administered at a fixed dose rate or in combination with cisplatin, docetaxel, or irinotecan in a multi-institutional, randomized, phase II study. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer were randomly assigned to one of the following four regimens: gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8, and 15 with cisplatin 50 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 15 (arm A); gemcitabine 1,500 mg/m(2) at a rate of 10 mg/m(2)/min on days 1, 8, and 15 (arm B); gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) with docetaxel 40 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 (arm C); or gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) with irinotecan 100 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 (arm D). Patients were observed for response, toxicity, and survival. Results Two hundred fifty-nine patients were enrolled onto the study, of whom 245 were eligible and received treatment. Anticipated rates of myelosuppression, fatigue, and expected regimen-specific toxicities were observed. The overall tumor response rates were 12% to 14%, and the median overall survival times were 6.4 to 7.1 months among the four regimens. CONCLUSION:Gemcitabine/cisplatin, fixed dose rate gemcitabine, gemcitabine/docetaxel, and gemcitabine/irinotecan have similar antitumor activity in metastatic pancreatic cancer. In light of recent negative randomized studies directly comparing several of these regimens with standard gemcitabine, none of these approaches can be recommended for routine use in patients with this disease.
Authors: H A Burris; M J Moore; J Andersen; M R Green; M L Rothenberg; M R Modiano; M C Cripps; R K Portenoy; A M Storniolo; P Tarassoff; R Nelson; F A Dorr; C D Stephens; D D Von Hoff Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1997-06 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: N Androulakis; C Kourousis; M A Dimopoulos; G Samelis; S Kakolyris; N Tsavaris; K Genatas; G Aravantinos; C Papadimitriou; S Karabekios; G P Stathopoulos; V Georgoulias Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1999-06 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: V Heinemann; H Wilke; H G Mergenthaler; M Clemens; H König; H J Illiger; M Arning; A Schalhorn; K Possinger; U Fink Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2000-11 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Caio Max S Rocha Lima; Diane Savarese; Howard Bruckner; Arkadiusz Dudek; John Eckardt; John Hainsworth; Furhan Yunus; Eric Lester; William Miller; Wayne Saville; Gary L Elfring; Paula K Locker; Linda D Compton; Langdon L Miller; Mark R Green Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2002-03-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Margaret Tempero; William Plunkett; Veronique Ruiz Van Haperen; John Hainsworth; Howard Hochster; Renato Lenzi; James Abbruzzese Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2003-07-28 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Caio M Rocha Lima; Mark R Green; Robert Rotche; Wilson H Miller; G Mark Jeffrey; Laura A Cisar; Adele Morganti; Nicoletta Orlando; Gabriela Gruia; Langdon L Miller Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2004-09-15 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: D J Wagener; H E Verdonk; L Y Dirix; G Catimel; P Siegenthaler; M Buitenhuis; A Mathieu-Boué; J Verweij Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 1995-02 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Margaret A Tempero; J Pablo Arnoletti; Stephen Behrman; Edgar Ben-Josef; Al B Benson; Jordan D Berlin; John L Cameron; Ephraim S Casper; Steven J Cohen; Michelle Duff; Joshua D I Ellenhorn; William G Hawkins; John P Hoffman; Boris W Kuvshinoff; Mokenge P Malafa; Peter Muscarella; Eric K Nakakura; Aaron R Sasson; Sarah P Thayer; Douglas S Tyler; Robert S Warren; Samuel Whiting; Christopher Willett; Robert A Wolff Journal: J Natl Compr Canc Netw Date: 2010-09 Impact factor: 11.908
Authors: Ekaterina Petrova; Felix Rückert; Sebastian Zach; YinFeng Shen; Jürgen Weitz; Robert Grützmann; Uwe A Wittel; Frank Makowiec; Ulrich T Hopt; Peter Bronsert; Florian Kühn; Bettina M Rau; Roman E Izrailov; Igor E Khatkov; Hryhoriy Lapshyn; Louisa Bolm; Dirk Bausch; Tobias Keck; Ulrich F Wellner; Gabriel Seifert Journal: Langenbecks Arch Surg Date: 2017-06-13 Impact factor: 3.445
Authors: Vikram Deshpande; Ioannis T Konstantinidis; Carlos Fernandez-Del Castillo; Aram F Hezel; Kevin M Haigis; David T Ting; Nabeel Bardeesy; Lipika Goyal; Andrew X Zhu; Andrew L Warshaw; Keith D Lillemoe; Cristina R Ferrone Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2016-03-08 Impact factor: 3.452