Eligibility of metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (MPA) patients for first-line palliative intent nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine (NG) versus FOLFIRINOX (FIO).
Bibliographic record
Abstract
259 Background: The ACCORD 11 and the MPACT trials recently showed superiority of FIO and NG over gemcitabine alone, respectively. However, both trials had strict inclusion criteria. The aim of this study was to determine the proportion of patients (pts) with MPA who would be potentially eligible for first-line palliative intent chemotherapy with FIO and NG in routine clinical practice. Methods: 473 consecutive pts who presented with MPA and initiated palliative chemotherapy with gemcitabine from 2000 to 2011 at the BC Cancer Agency were identified using the provincial pharmacy database. Clinicopathological variables and treatment outcomes were retrospectively collected and compared among groups. Eligibility criteria for each regimen were in accordance with the criteria as described in the respective pivotal phase III trials. Results: In total, median age was 66 years (range 34–89) and 258 (55%) were men. Only 24.7% of the pts would be eligible for FIO as compared to 45.2% for NG. The main reasons for ineligibility for FIO were ECOG performance status (PS) ≥ 2 (56.5%), age > 76 years (19.0%), and bilirubin > 1.5 times the upper limit of the normal range (ULN) (18.6%). The main reasons for ineligibility for NG were bilirubin > ULN (24.5%), ECOG PS ≥ 3 (14.6%), and cardiac dysfunction (13.8%). Median overall survival (OS) for the entire cohort treated with gemcitabine was 5.8 months (95% CI 5.4-6.2). On univariate analyses, eligible pts for FIO had longer median OS than ineligible pts (8.6 vs 4.7 months, p<0.001). Eligible pts for NG also had longer median OS than those deemed ineligible (6.7 vs 4.9 months, p=0.008). After accounting for ECOG PS in the multivariate model, eligibility for either FIO or NG no longered predicted for better OS. Conclusions: In ourpopulation-based analysis, almost twice as many pts would be eligible for NG when compared to FIO, mostly due to ECOG PS. The longer OS observed in the FIO-eligible population likely reflects the exclusion of ECOG PS 2 pts.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".