Treatment Patterns, Toxicity, and Outcomes of Older Adults With Advanced Pancreatic Cancer Receiving First-line Palliative Chemotherapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Advanced pancreatic cancer (APC) disproportionately impacts older adults. Randomized trials demonstrate improved overall survival (OS) with combination chemotherapy including 5-fluorouracil, irinotecan, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (FOLFIRINOX) or nab-paclitaxel and gemcitabine compared with gemcitabine alone, but with increased toxicity. Older adults are at increased risk of side effects from chemotherapy. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and toxicity of chemotherapy in older adults with APC. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with APC from 2011 to 2016 were identified using the Manitoba Cancer Registry. Patient and treatment characteristics, toxicity, and outcomes of patients 65 years of age and above treated with palliative chemotherapy were compared by treatment regimen. OS was assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method. A Cox regression was used to identify independent predictors of OS. RESULTS: A total of 87 patients aged 65 years and above received palliative chemotherapy: 52 (59.7%) FOLFIRINOX, 21 (24.1%) nab-paclitaxel and gemcitabine, and 14 (16.1%) gemcitabine, with a median age of 69 (65 to 84), 75 (65 to 88), and 73 (67 to 82), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status difference in hematologic toxicity between regimens (P=0.807). An increase in nonhematologic toxicity was seen with FOLFIRINOX (P<0.001), specifically neuropathy (P=0.008), fatigue (P<0.001), and nausea/vomiting (P=0.008). FOLFIRINOX was associated with improved radiologic response (P=0.05) and OS (P=0.035). PS, baseline carbohydrate antigen 19-9 level, and chemotherapy regimen were independent predictors of survival. CONCLUSIONS: FOLFIRINOX is associated with improved response and OS in older adults with APC. FOLFIRINOX has a manageable safety profile in this population and should be considered in fit older adults with APC.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".