Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23474363›Full record

Trial reportThe Lancet. Oncology2013

Gemcitabine-based or capecitabine-based chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced pancreatic cancer (SCALOP): a multicentre, randomised, phase 2 trial.

Somnath Mukherjee, Christopher N Hurt, John Bridgewater, Stephen Falk, Sebastian Cummins, Harpreet Wasan, Tom Crosby, Catherine Jephcott, Rajarshi Roy, Ganesh Radhakrishna and 7 more

3 registry-linked trialsAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase IIComparative StudyMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in The Lancet. Oncology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 3 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 166 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
166citing papers in PubMed, 9 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT01032057 phase2completednot on this map

A Multi-Center Randomized Phase II Study of Induction Chemotherapy Followed by Gemcitabine or Capecitabine Based Chemoradiotherapy for Locally Advanced Non-Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer

TypeinterventionalSponsorLisette NixonRan2009 to 2013Enrolled114ConditionsPancreatic CancerArmscapecitabine, gemcitabine hydrochloride, quality-of-life assessment, 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy
NCT02745847 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2016, after this paper: background citation

The Safety and Efficacy of Re-irradiation With Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Relapsed Pancreatic Cancer

TypeinterventionalSponsorChanghai HospitalRan2016 to 2023Enrolled30ConditionsPancreatic CancerArmsRe-irradiation with SBRT
NCT04570943 phase2recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

Phase II Study to Assess the Interest of a Sequential Treatment With Gemcitabine/Nab-paclitaxel (GEMBRAX) and Then FOLFIRINOX Followed by Stereotactic Magnetic Resonance-guided Adaptive Radiotherapy in Patients With Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer

TypeinterventionalSponsorInstitut du Cancer de Montpellier - Val d'AurelleRan2021 to 2030Enrolled103ConditionsLocally Advanced Pancreatic AdenocarcinomaArmsGabrinox, MRI-GUIDED STEREOTACTIC RADIOTHERAPY
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

166 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Chemotherapy and radiotherapy for advanced pancreatic cancer.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. SEOM clinical guidelines for pancreatic and biliary tract cancer (2020).Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2021
    Guideline
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Chemotherapy and radiotherapy for advanced pancreatic cancer.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018
    Pooled it
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Correlation ofClinical oncology (Royal College of Radiologists (Great Britain)) · 2017
    Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

106 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

17 authors.

Somnath MukherjeeGray Institute for Radiation Oncology and Biology, University of Oxford, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Oxford, UK. somnath.mukherjee@oncology.ox.ac.uk
Christopher N Hurt
John Bridgewater
Stephen Falk
Sebastian Cummins
Harpreet Wasan
Tom Crosby
Catherine Jephcott
Rajarshi Roy
Ganesh Radhakrishna
Alec McDonald
Ruby Ray
George Joseph
John Staffurth
Ross A Abrams
Gareth Griffiths
Tim Maughan

Funding

Cancer Research UK 07/040Cancer Research UK 15954Department of Health
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn the UK, chemotherapy is the standard treatment for inoperable, locally advanced, non-metastatic pancreatic cancer. Chemoradiotherapy is also an acceptable treatment option, for which gemcitabine, fluorouracil, or capecitabine can be used as concurrent chemotherapy agents. We aimed to assess the activity, safety, and feasibility of both gemcitabine-based and capecitabine-based chemoradiotherapy after induction chemotherapy for patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer.

methodsIn this open-label, randomised, two-arm, phase 2 trial, patients aged 18 years or older with histologically proven, locally advanced pancreatic cancer (with a tumour diameter of 7 cm or less) were recruited from 28 UK centres between Dec 24, 2009 and Oct 25, 2011. After 12 weeks of induction gemcitabine and capecitabine chemotherapy (three cycles of gemcitabine [1000 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8, 15 of a 28-day cycle] and capecitabine [830 mg/m(2) twice daily on days 1-21 of a 28-day cycle]), patients with stable or responding disease, tumour diameter of 6 cm or less, and WHO performance status 0-1 were randomly assigned to receive a further cycle of gemcitabine and capecitabine chemotherapy followed by either gemcitabine (300 mg/m(2) once per week) or capecitabine (830 mg/m(2) twice daily, Monday to Friday only), both in combination with radiation (50·4 Gy in 28 fractions). Randomisation (1:1) was done via a central computerised system and used stratified minimisation. The primary endpoint was 9-month progression-free survival, analysed by intention to treat including only those patients with valid CT assessments. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, number 96169987.

findings114 patients were registered and 74 were randomly allocated (38 to the gemcitabine group and 36 to the capecitabine group). After 9 months, 22 of 35 assessable patients (62·9%, 80% CI 50·6-73·9) in the capecitabine group and 18 of 35 assessable patients (51·4%, 39·4-63·4) in the gemcitabine group had not progressed. Median overall survival was 15·2 months (95% CI 13·9-19·2) in the capecitabine group and 13·4 months (95% CI 11·0-15·7) in the gemcitabine group (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·39, 95% CI 0·18-0·81; p=0·012). 12-month overall survival was 79·2% (95% CI 61·1-89·5) in the capecitabine group and 64·2 (95% CI 46·4-77·5) in the gemcitabine group. Median progression-free survival was 12·0 months (95% CI 10·2-14·6) in the capecitabine group and 10·4 months (95% CI 8·9-12·5) in the gemcitabine group (adjusted HR 0·60, 95% CI 0·32-1·12; p=0·11). Eight patients in the capecitabine group had an objective response at 26 weeks, as did seven in the gemcitabine group. More patients in the gemcitabine group than in the capecitabine group had grade 3-4 haematological toxic effects (seven [18%] vs none, p=0·008) and non-haematological toxic effects (ten [26%] vs four [12%], p=0·12) during chemoradiation treatment; the most frequent events were leucopenia, neutropenia, and fatigue. Two patients in the capecitabine group progressed during the fourth cycle of induction chemotherapy. Of the 34 patients in the capecitabine group who received chemoradiotherapy, 25 (74%) received the full protocol dose of radiotherapy, compared with 26 (68%) of 38 patients in the gemcitabine group. Quality-of-life scores were not significantly different between the treatment groups.

interpretationOur results suggest that a capecitabine-based regimen might be preferable to a gemcitabine-based regimen in the context of consolidation chemoradiotherapy after a course of induction chemotherapy for locally advanced pancreatic cancer. However, these findings should be interpreted with caution because the difference in the primary endpoint was non-significant and the number of patients in the trial was small.

fundingCancer Research UK.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAntineoplastic AgentsCapecitabineDeoxycytidineDisease-Free SurvivalDrug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsFemaleFluorouracilGemcitabineHumansKaplan-Meier EstimateMaleMiddle AgedPancreatic NeoplasmsTreatment OutcomeAntineoplastic AgentsCapecitabineDeoxycytidineFluorouracilGemcitabine

Identifiers

PMID23474363
PMCPMC3620899

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.