Performance status dynamics during treatment with nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine versus gemcitabine alone for metastatic pancreatic cancer

E Gabriela Chiorean,1 Daniel Von Hoff,2 Yin Wan,3 Sandra Margunato-Debay,4 Marc Botteman,3 David Goldstein5 1Medical Oncology, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, 2Oncology, Translational Genomics Research Institute and HonorHealth, Phoenix, AZ, 3Pharmerit...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Chiorean EG, Von Hoff D, Wan Y, Margunato-Debay S, Botteman M, Goldstein D
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Dove Medical Press 2018-05-01
Series:Cancer Management and Research
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.dovepress.com/performance-status-dynamics-during-treatment-with-nab-paclitaxel-plus--peer-reviewed-article-CMAR
id doaj-511c1fa4594942c489afa2400fab5c57
record_format Article
spelling doaj-511c1fa4594942c489afa2400fab5c572020-11-25T00:51:46ZengDove Medical PressCancer Management and Research1179-13222018-05-01Volume 101389139638617Performance status dynamics during treatment with nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine versus gemcitabine alone for metastatic pancreatic cancerChiorean EGVon Hoff DWan YMargunato-Debay SBotteman MGoldstein DE Gabriela Chiorean,1 Daniel Von Hoff,2 Yin Wan,3 Sandra Margunato-Debay,4 Marc Botteman,3 David Goldstein5 1Medical Oncology, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, 2Oncology, Translational Genomics Research Institute and HonorHealth, Phoenix, AZ, 3Pharmerit International, Bethesda, MD, 4Celgene Corporation, Summit, NJ, USA; 5Department of Medical Oncology, Prince of Wales Hospital, Sydney, NSW, Australia Objectives: This analysis examined changes in Karnofsky performance status (KPS) as a surrogate for patient’s well-being during treatment with nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine vs gemcitabine alone as first-line therapy for metastatic pancreatic cancer (MPC) in the Phase III MPACT trial.Participants and methods: Descriptive analyses were performed for KPS at three time points (3 and 6 months after randomization and 1 month before disease progression) and for time to any KPS deterioration. Time to definitive KPS deterioration (≥10-point KPS decrease from baseline) was calculated using the Kaplan–Meier method. A larger decrease from baseline (≥20 points) was investigated as a sensitivity analysis. A Cox proportional hazards model analyzed the effect of baseline factors (including treatment) potentially associated with time to definitive deterioration.Results: The two treatment arms had generally comparable time to any KPS deterioration, similar KPS at 3 and 6 months after randomization and at 1 month before disease progression, and no significant difference in time to definitive deterioration. Baseline KPS, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, age, liver metastases, and region had a significant effect on time to definitive KPS deterioration, but treatment arm did not.Conclusion: The increased survival observed with nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine was not associated with adverse effects on performance status. Keywords: Karnofsky performance status, metastatic pancreatic cancer, chemotherapy, nab-paclitaxel, gemcitabinehttps://www.dovepress.com/performance-status-dynamics-during-treatment-with-nab-paclitaxel-plus--peer-reviewed-article-CMARKarnofsky performance statusmetastatic pancreatic cancerchemotherapynab-paclitaxelgemcitabine.
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Chiorean EG
Von Hoff D
Wan Y
Margunato-Debay S
Botteman M
Goldstein D
spellingShingle Chiorean EG
Von Hoff D
Wan Y
Margunato-Debay S
Botteman M
Goldstein D
Performance status dynamics during treatment with nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine versus gemcitabine alone for metastatic pancreatic cancer
Cancer Management and Research
Karnofsky performance status
metastatic pancreatic cancer
chemotherapy
nab-paclitaxel
gemcitabine.
author_facet Chiorean EG
Von Hoff D
Wan Y
Margunato-Debay S
Botteman M
Goldstein D
author_sort Chiorean EG
title Performance status dynamics during treatment with nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine versus gemcitabine alone for metastatic pancreatic cancer
title_short Performance status dynamics during treatment with nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine versus gemcitabine alone for metastatic pancreatic cancer
title_full Performance status dynamics during treatment with nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine versus gemcitabine alone for metastatic pancreatic cancer
title_fullStr Performance status dynamics during treatment with nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine versus gemcitabine alone for metastatic pancreatic cancer
title_full_unstemmed Performance status dynamics during treatment with nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine versus gemcitabine alone for metastatic pancreatic cancer
title_sort performance status dynamics during treatment with nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine versus gemcitabine alone for metastatic pancreatic cancer
publisher Dove Medical Press
series Cancer Management and Research
issn 1179-1322
publishDate 2018-05-01
description E Gabriela Chiorean,1 Daniel Von Hoff,2 Yin Wan,3 Sandra Margunato-Debay,4 Marc Botteman,3 David Goldstein5 1Medical Oncology, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, 2Oncology, Translational Genomics Research Institute and HonorHealth, Phoenix, AZ, 3Pharmerit International, Bethesda, MD, 4Celgene Corporation, Summit, NJ, USA; 5Department of Medical Oncology, Prince of Wales Hospital, Sydney, NSW, Australia Objectives: This analysis examined changes in Karnofsky performance status (KPS) as a surrogate for patient’s well-being during treatment with nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine vs gemcitabine alone as first-line therapy for metastatic pancreatic cancer (MPC) in the Phase III MPACT trial.Participants and methods: Descriptive analyses were performed for KPS at three time points (3 and 6 months after randomization and 1 month before disease progression) and for time to any KPS deterioration. Time to definitive KPS deterioration (≥10-point KPS decrease from baseline) was calculated using the Kaplan–Meier method. A larger decrease from baseline (≥20 points) was investigated as a sensitivity analysis. A Cox proportional hazards model analyzed the effect of baseline factors (including treatment) potentially associated with time to definitive deterioration.Results: The two treatment arms had generally comparable time to any KPS deterioration, similar KPS at 3 and 6 months after randomization and at 1 month before disease progression, and no significant difference in time to definitive deterioration. Baseline KPS, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, age, liver metastases, and region had a significant effect on time to definitive KPS deterioration, but treatment arm did not.Conclusion: The increased survival observed with nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine was not associated with adverse effects on performance status. Keywords: Karnofsky performance status, metastatic pancreatic cancer, chemotherapy, nab-paclitaxel, gemcitabine
topic Karnofsky performance status
metastatic pancreatic cancer
chemotherapy
nab-paclitaxel
gemcitabine.
url https://www.dovepress.com/performance-status-dynamics-during-treatment-with-nab-paclitaxel-plus--peer-reviewed-article-CMAR
work_keys_str_mv AT chioreaneg performancestatusdynamicsduringtreatmentwithnabpaclitaxelplusgemcitabineversusgemcitabinealoneformetastaticpancreaticcancer
AT vonhoffd performancestatusdynamicsduringtreatmentwithnabpaclitaxelplusgemcitabineversusgemcitabinealoneformetastaticpancreaticcancer
AT wany performancestatusdynamicsduringtreatmentwithnabpaclitaxelplusgemcitabineversusgemcitabinealoneformetastaticpancreaticcancer
AT margunatodebays performancestatusdynamicsduringtreatmentwithnabpaclitaxelplusgemcitabineversusgemcitabinealoneformetastaticpancreaticcancer
AT bottemanm performancestatusdynamicsduringtreatmentwithnabpaclitaxelplusgemcitabineversusgemcitabinealoneformetastaticpancreaticcancer
AT goldsteind performancestatusdynamicsduringtreatmentwithnabpaclitaxelplusgemcitabineversusgemcitabinealoneformetastaticpancreaticcancer
_version_ 1725243971339288576