Second-Line Fluoropyrimidine-Based Chemotherapy in Advanced Biliary Tract Cancer: A Meta-Analysis Based on Individual Patient-Level Data of Randomized Trials.

IF 4.1 2区 医学 Q2 ONCOLOGY Cancer Research and Treatment Pub Date : 2024-10-17 DOI:10.4143/crt.2024.652
Jaewon Hyung, Minsu Kang, Ilhwan Kim, Kyu-Pyo Kim, Baek-Yeol Ryoo, Jaekyung Cheon, Hyewon Ryu, Ji Sung Lee, Ji-Won Kim, In Sil Choi, Jin Hyun Park, Ghassan K Abou-Alfa, Jin Won Kim, Changhoon Yoo
{"title":"Second-Line Fluoropyrimidine-Based Chemotherapy in Advanced Biliary Tract Cancer: A Meta-Analysis Based on Individual Patient-Level Data of Randomized Trials.","authors":"Jaewon Hyung, Minsu Kang, Ilhwan Kim, Kyu-Pyo Kim, Baek-Yeol Ryoo, Jaekyung Cheon, Hyewon Ryu, Ji Sung Lee, Ji-Won Kim, In Sil Choi, Jin Hyun Park, Ghassan K Abou-Alfa, Jin Won Kim, Changhoon Yoo","doi":"10.4143/crt.2024.652","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>While fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy regimens are recommended second-line treatment for patients with advanced biliary tract cancer (BTC), there have been no studies comparing different regimens head-to-head.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>We performed individual patient-level meta-analysis based on data from the intention-to-treat population of the phase 2b NIFTY trial (liposomal irinotecan [nal-IRI] plus fluorouracil and leucovorin [5-FU/LV] vs. 5-FU/LV; NCT03542508) and the phase 2 FIReFOX trial (modified oxaliplatin plus 5-FU/LV [mFOLFOX] vs. modified irinotecan plus 5-FU/LV [mFOLFIRI]; NCT03464968). Pairwise log-rank tests and multivariable analysis using Cox proportional hazards modeling with shared frailty to account for the trial's effect were used to compare overall survival (OS) between regimens.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 277 patients were included. The nal-IRI plus 5-FU/LV group (n=88) showed significantly better OS compared to the mFOLFOX group (n=49, pairwise log-rank, p=0.02), and mFOLFIRI group (n=50, p =0.03). Multivariable analysis showed consistent trends in OS with adjusted hazard ratios of 1.39 (mFOLFOX vs nal-IRI plus 5-FU/LV, 95% CI 0.93-2.07, p=0.11) and 1.36 (mFOLFIRI vs nal-IRI plus 5-FU/LV, 95% CI 0.92-2.03, p=0.13), respectively. Compared to the 5-FU/LV group, the mFOLFOX group and the mFOLFIRI group did not show differences in terms of OS (pairwise log-rank p=0.83 and p=0.58, respectively). The nal-IRI plus 5-FU/LV group experienced more frequent diarrhea, while the mFOLFOX group experienced peripheral neuropathy.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Nal-IRI plus 5-FU/LV showed favorable survival outcomes compared to mFOLFOX, mFOLFIRI, or 5-FU/LV. The safety profiles of these regimens should be considered along with efficacy.</p>","PeriodicalId":49094,"journal":{"name":"Cancer Research and Treatment","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cancer Research and Treatment","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4143/crt.2024.652","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: While fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy regimens are recommended second-line treatment for patients with advanced biliary tract cancer (BTC), there have been no studies comparing different regimens head-to-head.

Materials and methods: We performed individual patient-level meta-analysis based on data from the intention-to-treat population of the phase 2b NIFTY trial (liposomal irinotecan [nal-IRI] plus fluorouracil and leucovorin [5-FU/LV] vs. 5-FU/LV; NCT03542508) and the phase 2 FIReFOX trial (modified oxaliplatin plus 5-FU/LV [mFOLFOX] vs. modified irinotecan plus 5-FU/LV [mFOLFIRI]; NCT03464968). Pairwise log-rank tests and multivariable analysis using Cox proportional hazards modeling with shared frailty to account for the trial's effect were used to compare overall survival (OS) between regimens.

Results: A total of 277 patients were included. The nal-IRI plus 5-FU/LV group (n=88) showed significantly better OS compared to the mFOLFOX group (n=49, pairwise log-rank, p=0.02), and mFOLFIRI group (n=50, p =0.03). Multivariable analysis showed consistent trends in OS with adjusted hazard ratios of 1.39 (mFOLFOX vs nal-IRI plus 5-FU/LV, 95% CI 0.93-2.07, p=0.11) and 1.36 (mFOLFIRI vs nal-IRI plus 5-FU/LV, 95% CI 0.92-2.03, p=0.13), respectively. Compared to the 5-FU/LV group, the mFOLFOX group and the mFOLFIRI group did not show differences in terms of OS (pairwise log-rank p=0.83 and p=0.58, respectively). The nal-IRI plus 5-FU/LV group experienced more frequent diarrhea, while the mFOLFOX group experienced peripheral neuropathy.

Conclusion: Nal-IRI plus 5-FU/LV showed favorable survival outcomes compared to mFOLFOX, mFOLFIRI, or 5-FU/LV. The safety profiles of these regimens should be considered along with efficacy.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
晚期胆管癌的二线氟嘧啶类化疗:基于随机试验患者个体水平数据的 Meta 分析。
目的:虽然基于氟嘧啶的化疗方案被推荐用于晚期胆道癌(BTC)患者的二线治疗,但目前还没有对不同方案进行头对头比较的研究:我们根据 2b 期 NIFTY 试验(脂质体伊立替康 [nal-IRI] 加氟尿嘧啶和亮菌甲素 [5-FU/LV] vs. 氟尿嘧啶和亮菌甲素 [5-FU/LV]; NCT)意向治疗人群的数据进行了单个患者层面的荟萃分析。5-FU/LV;NCT03542508)和 2 期 FIReFOX 试验(改良奥沙利铂加 5-FU/LV [mFOLFOX] 与改良伊立替康加 5-FU/LV [mFOLFIRI];NCT03464968)。采用配对对数秩检验和多变量分析,使用Cox比例危险模型和共享虚弱来考虑试验效应,以比较不同方案的总生存率(OS):共纳入277名患者。与mFOLFOX组(49人,配对log-rank,P=0.02)和mFOLFIRI组(50人,P=0.03)相比,nal-IRI加5-FU/LV组(88人)的OS明显更好。多变量分析显示,OS趋势一致,调整后危险比分别为1.39(mFOLFOX vs nal-IRI plus 5-FU/LV,95% CI 0.93-2.07,p=0.11)和1.36(mFOLFIRI vs nal-IRI plus 5-FU/LV,95% CI 0.92-2.03,p=0.13)。与5-FU/LV组相比,mFOLFOX组和mFOLFIRI组在OS方面没有差异(配对对数秩分别为p=0.83和p=0.58)。nal-IRI加5-FU/LV组出现更频繁的腹泻,而mFOLFOX组出现周围神经病变:结论:与mFOLFOX、mFOLFIRI或5-FU/LV相比,Nal-IRI加5-FU/LV的生存率较高。在考虑疗效的同时,还应考虑这些方案的安全性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.00
自引率
2.20%
发文量
126
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Cancer Research and Treatment is a peer-reviewed open access publication of the Korean Cancer Association. It is published quarterly, one volume per year. Abbreviated title is Cancer Res Treat. It accepts manuscripts relevant to experimental and clinical cancer research. Subjects include carcinogenesis, tumor biology, molecular oncology, cancer genetics, tumor immunology, epidemiology, predictive markers and cancer prevention, pathology, cancer diagnosis, screening and therapies including chemotherapy, surgery, radiation therapy, immunotherapy, gene therapy, multimodality treatment and palliative care.
期刊最新文献
The Era of Antibody Drug Conjugates in Lung Cancer: Trick or Threat? Evaluating the Effects of Mindfulness-Based Self-Help via an OTT Platform on Breast Cancer Patients Undergoing Radiotherapy: A Prospective Non-Randomized Controlled Trial. Estimation of Population Attributable Fraction by Hormone and Reproductive Factors on Female Cancer in the Republic of Korea, 2015 to 2030. Machine Learning-Based Prognostic Gene Signature for Early Triple Negative Breast Cancer. Association of Pro-inflammatory Cytokines with Gastric Cancer Risk: A Case-Cohort Study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1