Oops, you're using an old version of your browser so some of the features on this page may not be displaying properly.

MINIMAL Requirements: Google Chrome 24+Mozilla Firefox 20+Internet Explorer 11Opera 15–18Apple Safari 7SeaMonkey 2.15-2.23

Efficacy of neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX for borderline resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma

Date

08 Oct 2016

Session

Poster Display

Presenters

Jihoon Kang

Citation

Annals of Oncology (2016) 27 (6): 207-242. 10.1093/annonc/mdw371

Authors

J. Kang1, K. Kim1, C. Yoo1, J. Lee1, B. Ryoo1, H. Chang1, S.S. Lee2, D.H. Park2, T.J. Song2, D.W. Seo2, S.K. Lee2, M. Kim2, D.W. Hwang3, K.B. Song3, J.H. Lee3, S.C. Kim3

Author affiliations

  • 1 Department Of Oncology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, 05505 - Seoul/KR
  • 2 Department Of Gastroenterology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, 05505 - Seoul/KR
  • 3 Department Of Surgery, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, 05505 - Seoul/KR
More

Resources

Abstract 1437

Background

Neoadjuvant treatment strategy has been investigated for patients (pts) with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC). Although FOLFIRINOX has been more widely used based on its success in patients with metastatic disease, there is lack of data based on the prospective randomized trial in this setting. Therefore, we performed retrospective analysis comparing the efficacy of FOLFIRINOX and gemcitabine-based regimen.

Methods

Between February 2013 and December 2014, a total of 18 patients with histologically confirmed BRPC according to the NCCN resectability criteria were treated with FOLFIRINOX. For the comparative analysis, data of all patients with BRPC (n = 18) in our previous phase 2 study of neoadjuvant gemcitabine plus capecitabine (GEM-CAP) were extracted and included in the current analysis (Lee et al., Surgery 2012;152:851-62).

Results

In pts treated with FOLFIRINOX, median age was 54 year old (range, 29-73), and 9 patients (50%) were male. There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics between FOLFIRINOX and GEM-CAP groups, except the number of chemotherapy cycles (median 6 vs 3, respectively, p = 0.02). Surgical resection was performed in 12 pts (67%) with FOLFIRINOX and 11 pts (61%) with GEM-CAP (p = 1.00). R0 resection rates were 50% (n = 9) in each group. Progression-free survival (PFS) was significantly higher in the FOLFIRINOX group compared to GEM-CAP group (median 16.8 months [95% CI, 9.4-24.2] vs 6.5 months [1.6-11.3]; p = 0.044) and there was a trend toward improved overall survival (OS) in the FOLFIRINOX group (median 21.2 months [95% CI, 15.0-27.3] vs 13.6 months [11.8-15.4]; p = 0.17). In the FOLFIRINOX and GEM-CAP groups, 1-year PFS rates were 62% (95% CI, 35%-88%) and 22% (95% CI, 3%-41%), respectively, and 2-year OS rates were 45% (95% CI, 20%-70%) and 28% (95% CI, 7%-49%), respectively. The trends for the improved OS in the FOLFIRINOX group were observed regardless of surgical resection.

Conclusions

FOLFIRINOX might be associated with improved efficacy outcomes compared with GEM-CAP regimen in patients with BRPC. Further validations are necessary in the randomized trials.

Clinical trial identification

Legal entity responsible for the study

Asan Medical Center

Funding

Asan Medical Center

Disclosure

All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Resources from the same session

This site uses cookies. Some of these cookies are essential, while others help us improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used.

For more detailed information on the cookies we use, please check our Privacy Policy.

Customise settings