L Gutierrez-Sainz1, D Viñal2, J Villamayor2, D Martinez-Perez2, J A Garcia-Cuesta2, I Ghanem2, A Custodio2,3,4, J Feliu2,3,4. 1. Medical Oncology Department, Hospital Universitario La Paz, IdiPAZ, Paseo de la Castellana 261, 28046, Madrid, Spain. laura.gutierrezsainz@gmail.com. 2. Medical Oncology Department, Hospital Universitario La Paz, IdiPAZ, Paseo de la Castellana 261, 28046, Madrid, Spain. 3. Cátedra UAM-AMGEN, Madrid, Spain. 4. CIBERONC, Madrid, Spain.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Second-line (2L) treatments for advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) achieve a modest benefit at the expense of potential toxicity. In the absence of predictive factors of response, the identification of prognostic factors could help in the therapeutic decisions-making. The purpose of this study was to assess the prognostic factors associated with shorter survival in patients with advanced PDAC who received 2L treatment. METHODS: We conducted a single institution retrospective study, which included all patients with advanced PDAC who received 2L treatment between September 2006 and February 2020 at La Paz University Hospital, Madrid (Spain). Significant variables in the logistic regression model were used to create a prognostic score. RESULTS: We included 108 patients. The median overall survival (OS) was 5.10 months (95%CI 4.02-6.17). In the multivariate analysis, time to progression (TTP) shorter than 4 months after first-line treatment (OR 4.53 [95%CI 1.28-16.00] p = 0.01), neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) greater than 3 at the beginning of 2L (OR 9.07 [95%CI 1.82-45.16] p = 0.01) and CA-19.9 level higher than the upper limit of normal at the beginning of 2L (OR 7.83 [95%CI 1.30-49.97] p = 0.02) were independently associated with OS shorter than 3 months. The prognostic score classified patients into three prognostic groups (good, intermediate and poor) with significant differences in OS (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: TTP shorter than 4 months after first-line treatment, NLR greater than 3 and CA-19.9 level higher than the upper limit of normal at the beginning of 2L were associated with shorter overall survival. We developed a prognostic score that classifies patients with advanced PDAC into three prognostic groups after progression to the first-line. This score could help in the decision-making for 2L treatment.
BACKGROUND: Second-line (2L) treatments for advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) achieve a modest benefit at the expense of potential toxicity. In the absence of predictive factors of response, the identification of prognostic factors could help in the therapeutic decisions-making. The purpose of this study was to assess the prognostic factors associated with shorter survival in patients with advanced PDAC who received 2L treatment. METHODS: We conducted a single institution retrospective study, which included all patients with advanced PDAC who received 2L treatment between September 2006 and February 2020 at La Paz University Hospital, Madrid (Spain). Significant variables in the logistic regression model were used to create a prognostic score. RESULTS: We included 108 patients. The median overall survival (OS) was 5.10 months (95%CI 4.02-6.17). In the multivariate analysis, time to progression (TTP) shorter than 4 months after first-line treatment (OR 4.53 [95%CI 1.28-16.00] p = 0.01), neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) greater than 3 at the beginning of 2L (OR 9.07 [95%CI 1.82-45.16] p = 0.01) and CA-19.9 level higher than the upper limit of normal at the beginning of 2L (OR 7.83 [95%CI 1.30-49.97] p = 0.02) were independently associated with OS shorter than 3 months. The prognostic score classified patients into three prognostic groups (good, intermediate and poor) with significant differences in OS (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: TTP shorter than 4 months after first-line treatment, NLR greater than 3 and CA-19.9 level higher than the upper limit of normal at the beginning of 2L were associated with shorter overall survival. We developed a prognostic score that classifies patients with advanced PDAC into three prognostic groups after progression to the first-line. This score could help in the decision-making for 2L treatment.
Authors: Andrea Wang-Gillam; Chung-Pin Li; György Bodoky; Andrew Dean; Yan-Shen Shan; Gayle Jameson; Teresa Macarulla; Kyung-Hun Lee; David Cunningham; Jean F Blanc; Richard A Hubner; Chang-Fang Chiu; Gilberto Schwartsmann; Jens T Siveke; Fadi Braiteh; Victor Moyo; Bruce Belanger; Navreet Dhindsa; Eliel Bayever; Daniel D Von Hoff; Li-Tzong Chen Journal: Lancet Date: 2015-11-29 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: B Laquente; A Calsina-Berna; A Carmona-Bayonas; P Jiménez-Fonseca; I Peiró; A Carrato Journal: Clin Transl Oncol Date: 2017-06-13 Impact factor: 3.405
Authors: Helmut Oettle; Hanno Riess; Jens M Stieler; Gerhard Heil; Ingo Schwaner; Jörg Seraphin; Martin Görner; Matthias Mölle; Tim F Greten; Volker Lakner; Sven Bischoff; Marianne Sinn; Bernd Dörken; Uwe Pelzer Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2014-06-30 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Henry Q Xiong; Gauri R Varadhachary; Joan C Blais; Kenneth R Hess; James L Abbruzzese; Robert A Wolff Journal: Cancer Date: 2008-10-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: A Demols; M Peeters; M Polus; R Marechal; F Gay; E Monsaert; A Hendlisz; J L Van Laethem Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2006-02-27 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: C Yoo; J Y Hwang; J-E Kim; T W Kim; J S Lee; D H Park; S S Lee; D W Seo; S K Lee; M-H Kim; D J Han; S C Kim; J-L Lee Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2009-10-13 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Andrew McGuigan; Paul Kelly; Richard C Turkington; Claire Jones; Helen G Coleman; R Stephen McCain Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2018-11-21 Impact factor: 5.742