Single-agent gemcitabine became standard first-line treatment for advanced pancreatic cancer after demonstration of superiority compared with fluorouracil. The Gruppo Italiano Pancreas 1 randomized phase III trial aimed to compare gemcitabine plus cisplatin versus gemcitabine alone (ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT00813696).Patients with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer, age 18 to 75 years, and Karnofsky performance status (KPS) > or = 50, were randomly assigned to receive gemcitabine (arm A) or gemcitabine plus cisplatin (arm B). Arm A: gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) weekly for 7 weeks, and, after a 1-week rest, on days 1, 8, and 15 every 4 weeks. Arm B: cisplatin 25 mg/m(2) added weekly to gemcitabine, except cycle 1 day 22. Primary end point was overall survival. To have 8\% power of detecting a 0.74 hazard ratio (HR) of death, with bilateral alpha .05, 355 events were needed and 400 patients planned.Four hundred patients were enrolled (arm A: 199; arm B: 201). Median age was 63, 59\% were male, 84\% had stage IV, and 83\% had KPS > or = 80. Median overall survival was 8.3 months versus 7.2 months in arm A and B, respectively (HR, 1.10; 95\% CI, 0.89 to 1.35; P = .38). Median progression-free survival was 3.9 months versus 3.8 months in arm A and B, respectively (HR, 0.97; 95\% CI, 0.80 to 1.19; P = .80). The objective response rate was 10.1\% in A and 12.9\% in B (P = .37). Clinical benefit was experienced by 23.0\% in A and 15.1\% in B (P = .057). Combination therapy produced more hematologic toxicity, without relevant differences in nonhematologic toxicity.The addition of weekly cisplatin to gemcitabine failed to demonstrate any improvement as first-line treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer.

Randomized phase III trial of gemcitabine plus cisplatin compared with single-agent gemcitabine as first-line treatment of patients with advanced pancreatic cancer: the GIP-1 study.

PEDERZOLI, Paolo;FALCONI, Massimo;
2010-01-01

Abstract

Single-agent gemcitabine became standard first-line treatment for advanced pancreatic cancer after demonstration of superiority compared with fluorouracil. The Gruppo Italiano Pancreas 1 randomized phase III trial aimed to compare gemcitabine plus cisplatin versus gemcitabine alone (ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT00813696).Patients with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer, age 18 to 75 years, and Karnofsky performance status (KPS) > or = 50, were randomly assigned to receive gemcitabine (arm A) or gemcitabine plus cisplatin (arm B). Arm A: gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) weekly for 7 weeks, and, after a 1-week rest, on days 1, 8, and 15 every 4 weeks. Arm B: cisplatin 25 mg/m(2) added weekly to gemcitabine, except cycle 1 day 22. Primary end point was overall survival. To have 8\% power of detecting a 0.74 hazard ratio (HR) of death, with bilateral alpha .05, 355 events were needed and 400 patients planned.Four hundred patients were enrolled (arm A: 199; arm B: 201). Median age was 63, 59\% were male, 84\% had stage IV, and 83\% had KPS > or = 80. Median overall survival was 8.3 months versus 7.2 months in arm A and B, respectively (HR, 1.10; 95\% CI, 0.89 to 1.35; P = .38). Median progression-free survival was 3.9 months versus 3.8 months in arm A and B, respectively (HR, 0.97; 95\% CI, 0.80 to 1.19; P = .80). The objective response rate was 10.1\% in A and 12.9\% in B (P = .37). Clinical benefit was experienced by 23.0\% in A and 15.1\% in B (P = .057). Combination therapy produced more hematologic toxicity, without relevant differences in nonhematologic toxicity.The addition of weekly cisplatin to gemcitabine failed to demonstrate any improvement as first-line treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer.
2010
Adult; Aged; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Cisplatin; Deoxycytidine; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Pancreatic Neoplasms
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11562/353301
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 98
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact