Journal of Clinical Oncology · 2005 · 954 citations · 24 references
MedicineOncologyPharmacologyChemotherapyGastrointestinal OncologyOncology PharmacotherapyCombination ChemotherapyMetastatic Cancer ManagementMetastatic Disease ManagementPancreatic CancerGemcitabine-based TherapyMetastatic Pancreatic CancerOxaliplatin-based TherapyPancreatic Cancer PharmacotherapyPhase Ii Investigation
PURPOSE: Gemcitabine (Gem) is the standard treatment for advanced pancreatic cancer. Given the promising phase II results obtained with the Gem-oxaliplatin (GemOx) combination, we conducted a phase III study comparing GemOx with Gem alone in advanced pancreatic cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with advanced pancreatic cancer were stratified according to center, performance status, and type of disease (locally advanced v metastatic) and randomly assigned to either GemOx (gemcitabine 1 g/m2 as a 100-minute infusion on day 1 and oxaliplatin 100 mg/m2 as a 2-hour infusion on day 2 every 2 weeks) or Gem (gemcitabine 1 g/m2 as a weekly 30-minute infusion). RESULTS: Three hundred twenty-six patients were enrolled; 313 were eligible, and 157 and 156 were allocated to the GemOx and Gem arms, respectively. GemOx was superior to Gem in terms of response rate (26.8% v 17.3%, respectively; P = .04), progression-free survival (5.8 v 3.7 months, respectively; P = .04), and clinical benefit (38.2% v 26.9%, respectively; P = .03). Median overall survival (OS) for GemOx and Gem was 9.0 and 7.1 months, respectively (P = .13). GemOx was well tolerated overall, although a higher incidence of National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria grade 3 and 4 toxicity per patient was observed for platelets (14.0% for GemOx v 3.2% for Gem), vomiting (8.9% for GemOx v 3.2% for Gem), and neurosensory symptoms (19.1% for GemOx v 0% for Gem). CONCLUSION: These results confirm the efficacy and safety of GemOx, but this study failed to demonstrate a statistically significant advantage in terms of OS compared with Gem. Because GemOx is the first combined treatment to be superior to Gem alone in terms of clinical benefit, this promising regimen deserves further development.
24
Howard A. Burris, Malcolm J. Moore, John Sahl Andersen et al. · Journal of Clinical Oncology · 1997 · 5.9K citations
Medicine, Oncology, Pharmacotherapy +16
Trends in the Aggressiveness of Cancer Care Near the End of Life
Craig C. Earle, Bridget A. Neville, Mary Beth Landrum et al. · Journal of Clinical Oncology · 2004 · 995 citations
Jordan Berlin, Paul J. Catalano, James P. Thomas et al. · Journal of Clinical Oncology · 2002 · 730 citations
Medicine, Oncology, Pharmacotherapy +12