MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4414108695 · doi:10.1200/jco-25-00436

PASS-01: Randomized Phase II Trial of Modified FOLFIRINOX Versus Gemcitabine/Nab-Paclitaxel and Molecular Correlatives for Previously Untreated Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer

2025· article· en· W4414108695 on OpenAlexaff
Jennifer J. Knox, Grainne M. O’Kane, Daniel A. King, Daniel A. Laheru, Amber N. Habowski, Kenneth H. Yu, Kimberly Perez, Andrew J. Aguirre, Zachary Coyne, Harry Harvey, Ronan Andrew McLaughlin, Raymond Jang, Robert C. Grant, Elena Elimova, Daniel J. Renouf, Sandra E. Fischer, Kai Duan, Stephanie Ramotar, Gun Ho Jang, Amy X. Zhang, Craig Devoe, Harshabad Singh, Michael J. Pishvaian, Fieke E. M. Froeling, Wasif M. Saif, Eileen M. O’Reilly, Erica S. Tsang, Brian M. Wolpin, Julie M. Wilson, Anna Dodd, Trevor J. Pugh, Xiang Y. Ye, Steven Gallinger, David A. Tuveson, Faiyaz Notta, Elizabeth M. Jaffee

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPancreatic and Hepatic Oncology Research
Canadian institutionsOntario Institute for Cancer ResearchPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
FundersNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsFOLFIRINOXPancreatic cancerMetastatic adenocarcinomaPancreatic ductal adenocarcinomaAdenocarcinomaPhases of clinical researchOverall survivalChemotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE To assess modified folinic acid/leucovorin, fluorouracil, irinotecan, oxaliplatin (FOLFIRINOX [mFFX]) versus gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (GnP) in de novo metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) and explore predictive biomarkers. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to mFFX or GnP with exclusion of germline pathogenic variants in BRCA1/2 or PALB2 . The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) between arms with 0.3 significance. The per-protocol (PP) population included patients who received one dose of chemotherapy. Pretreatment biopsies underwent whole-genome/transcriptome sequencing and patient-derived organoid (PDO) development, providing correlate recommendations at a molecular tumor board and outcomes assessed according to RNA signatures (basal-like v classical). RESULTS Of 160 patients randomly assigned (80 mFFX, 80 GnP), 140 patients were in the PP population (71 mFFX, 69 GnP), with median follow-up of 8.3 months. The median PFS was 4.0 months for mFFX versus 5.3 months for GnP (hazard ratio [HR], 1.37 [95% CI, 0.97 to 1.92]; P = .069) in intention-to-treat. Median overall survival (OS) was 8.5 months with mFFX and 9.7 months with GnP (HR, 1.57 [95% CI, 1.08 to 2.28]; P = .017). Genomic data were generated in 94%, transcriptomes in 74%, and PDOs in 50%. The median PFS for those with basal-like was 3.0 (mFFX) and 5.5 (GnP) months ( P = .17), and classical PDAC was 6.3 (mFFX) versus 5.4 (GnP) months ( P = .36). The median OS in basal-like was 7.5 (mFFX) and 8.9 (GnP) months ( P = .75) versus in classical OS was 9.7 (mFFX) and 13.9 (GnP) months ( P = .047). Overall, 75 (54%) of patients received second-line treatment, 33/75 (44%) correlate-guided. The median time on second-line treatment was only 2.1 months with a median OS of 5.4 months for a correlate-guided choice versus 4.4 months on a standard chemotherapy approach ( P = .45). CONCLUSION In the phase II Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma Signature Stratification for Treatment-01 (PASS-01) trial population, PFS was similar between GnP and mFFX; however, OS and safety trends favored GnP. The second-line setting appears inadequate to offer precision choices, given the short survival observed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.162
GPT teacher head0.539
Teacher spread0.376 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations22
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicPancreatic and Hepatic Oncology Research→French-language works237,207→