Mäder Anina Julia Ruth, Hussung Saskia, Siebenhüner Alexander, Fritsch Ralph
Department of Medical Oncology and Hematology, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Department of Medical Oncology and Hematology, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland,
Oncol Res Treat. 2025 May 10:1-9. doi: 10.1159/000546307.
Despite decades of extensive research, treatment options for pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PAC) patients kept limited, and prognosis remains dismal. For patients with metastatic PAC (mPAC), palliative combination chemotherapy remains the mainstay of treatment. Current treatment standards for mPAC have evolved from 2010 onwards with the introduction of combination chemotherapy protocols, the development of new chemotherapeutic agents, and the establishment of treatment sequences. Within our cohort, we analyzed the impact of different treatment options and sequences over time for mPAC patients in a Swiss academic center in the pre-molecular era between 2010 and 2018.
This retrospective analysis included 97 patients who received palliative chemotherapy for mPAC between 2010 and 2018 at our institution. Outcome parameters, including median overall survival (mOS) and median progression-free survival (mPFS), were analyzed in the context of chemotherapy regimens and the number of treatment lines received. For comparative analyses, patients were separated into two groups, advancing to stage IV (metastatic) between 2010 and 2012, and between 2013 and 2018, respectively. Univariate analyses were performed via the log-rank test.
For the entire cohort, mOS and first-line mPFS were 8.2 months (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 6.3-8.6 months) and 4.8 months (95% CI 3.4-5.8 months), respectively. When comparing between patients advancing to stage IV (metastatic) 2010-2012 and 2013-2018, the most frequent choice of systemic first-line therapy evolved from single-agent gemcitabine (GEM) toward the combination protocols FOLFIRINOX (FFX) and gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (GEM/nab-PTX). Moreover, the proportion of patients receiving further-line chemotherapies increased significantly between 2010-2012 and 2013-2018 (20 vs. 49% second-line treatment; p value [p] = 0.0035). Finally, a significant improvement in overall survival (OS) was observed for patients advancing to metastatic disease 2013-2018 compared to 2010-2012 (mOS 8.6 vs. 6.1 months; hazard ratio [HR] = 1.82; 95% CI 1.10-3.02, p = 0.0068). The use of combination regimens (FFX or GEM/nab-PTX) instead of GEM monotherapy as first-line systemic treatment was associated with a significantly improved OS (mOS 9.0 vs. 5.1 months; HR = 0.39; 95% CI 0.19-0.77, p = 0.0001) and first-line progression-free survival (PFS) (mPFS 5.0 vs. 4.7 months; HR = 0.57; 95% CI 0.32-1.03, p = 0.0213).
In summary, systemic treatment of mPAC intensified during the study period with the availability of new first-line combination chemotherapy options and more lines of therapy. In parallel, patient survival improved, suggesting a causal relationship between more effective chemotherapy and improved outcome. Combination chemotherapy is standard of care for mPAC, while the future impact of molecular profiling and precision oncology on real-world patient outcome remains to be determined.
尽管经过数十年广泛研究,胰腺腺癌(PAC)患者的治疗选择仍然有限,预后依然不佳。对于转移性PAC(mPAC)患者,姑息性联合化疗仍是主要治疗手段。mPAC的当前治疗标准自2010年起不断演变,出现了联合化疗方案、新型化疗药物的研发以及治疗顺序的确定。在我们的队列研究中,我们分析了2010年至2018年分子时代之前,瑞士一家学术中心不同治疗选择和顺序对mPAC患者的影响。
这项回顾性分析纳入了2010年至2018年在我们机构接受mPAC姑息化疗的97例患者。在化疗方案和接受治疗线数的背景下,分析了包括中位总生存期(mOS)和中位无进展生存期(mPFS)在内的结局参数。为进行比较分析,患者被分为两组,分别是在2010年至2012年以及2013年至2018年进展至IV期(转移性)的患者。通过对数秩检验进行单因素分析。
对于整个队列,mOS和一线mPFS分别为8.2个月(95%置信区间[95%CI]6.3 - 8.6个月)和4.8个月(95%CI 3.4 - 5.8个月)。比较2010 - 2012年和2013 - 2018年进展至IV期(转移性)的患者,一线全身治疗最常用的选择从单药吉西他滨(GEM)转向了联合方案FOLFIRINOX(FFX)和吉西他滨/纳米白蛋白结合型紫杉醇(GEM/nab - PTX)。此外,2010 - 2012年和2013 - 2018年期间接受二线及以上化疗的患者比例显著增加(二线治疗分别为20%和49%;p值[p]=0.0035)。最后,与2010 - 2012年相比,2013 - 2018年进展至转移性疾病的患者总生存期(OS)有显著改善(mOS 8.6个月对6.1个月;风险比[HR]=1.82;95%CI 1.10 - 3.02,p = 0.0068)。使用联合方案(FFX或GEM/nab - PTX)而非GEM单药作为一线全身治疗与显著改善的OS(mOS 9.0个月对5.1个月;HR = 0.39;95%CI 0.19 - 0.77,p = 0.0001)和一线无进展生存期(PFS)(mPFS 5.0个月对4.7个月;HR = 0.57;95%CI 0.32 - 1.03,p = 0.0213)相关。
总之,在研究期间,随着新的一线联合化疗方案的出现和更多治疗线数的增加,mPAC的全身治疗得到强化。与此同时,患者生存率提高,表明更有效的化疗与改善的结局之间存在因果关系。联合化疗是mPAC的标准治疗,而分子图谱分析和精准肿瘤学对真实世界患者结局的未来影响仍有待确定。