Trial reportAdvances in therapy2016
nab-Paclitaxel Plus Gemcitabine Versus Gemcitabine in Patients with Metastatic Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: Canadian Subgroup Analysis of the Phase 3 MPACT Trial.
Trial report in Advances in therapy, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 9 papers.
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.
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.
A Randomized Phase III Study of Weekly ABI-007 Plus Gemcitabine Versus Gemcitabine Alone in Patients With Metastatic Adenocarcinoma of the Pancreas
MPACT Extension Study: Multicenter, Survival Data Collection in Subjects Previously Enrolled in Protocol CA046
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Results from the prospective German TPK clinical cohort study: Treatment algorithms and survival of 1,174 patients with locally advanced, inoperable, or metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.International journal of cancer · 2019Trial
- Research progress of plant-derived chemical compounds for overcoming pancreatic cancer drug resistance.World journal of gastroenterology · 2026Review
- Pancreatic adenocarcinoma: Beyond first line, where are we?World journal of gastroenterology · 2021Review
- A narrative review of Safety management of 1 L platinum-based chemotherapy and maintenance olaparib in BRCA mutated advanced pancreatic cancer.Translational cancer research · 2021Review
- Article
- A Model of a Zebrafish Avatar for Co-Clinical Trials.Cancers · 2020Article
- Weekly albumin-bound paclitaxel/cisplatin versus gemcitabine/cisplatin as first-line therapy for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: A phase II open-label clinical study.Chinese journal of cancer research = Chung-kuo yen cheng yen chiu · 2019Article
- A Real-World Comparison of FOLFIRINOX, Gemcitabine Plus nab-Paclitaxel, and Gemcitabine in Advanced Pancreatic Cancers.Journal of gastrointestinal cancer · 2019Article
- Dilemma of first line regimens in metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma.World journal of gastroenterology · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
9 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe phase III MPACT trial in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer (MPC) demonstrated superior efficacy of nab-paclitaxel (nab-P) plus gemcitabine (Gem) compared with Gem monotherapy, including the primary endpoint of overall survival (OS; median 8.7 vs. 6.6 months; hazard ratio [HR] 0.72; P < 0.001). A significant treatment difference favoring nab-P + Gem over Gem was observed for OS in patients treated in North America. The majority of patients were from the US (88%) with only 12% from Canada. Healthcare systems and treatment patterns are different between the 2 countries, and there is limited published information on outcomes of Canadian patients treated with first-line nab-P + Gem. This analysis evaluated efficacy and safety outcomes in Canadian patients in the MPACT trial.
methodsTreatment-naive patients with MPC (N = 861) received either nab-P 125 mg/m(2) + Gem 1000 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8, and 15 every 4 weeks or Gem 1000 mg/m(2) weekly for the first 7 of 8 weeks (cycle 1) and then on days 1, 8, and 15 every 4 weeks (cycle ≥2).
resultsThe MPACT trial enrolled 63 patients in Canada. Baseline characteristics were well balanced and comparable with those of the intent-to-treat population. Both OS (median 11.9 vs. 7.1 months; HR 0.76; P = 0.373) and progression-free survival (median 7.2 vs. 5.2 months; HR 0.65; P = 0.224) were numerically longer and overall response rate (27% vs. 17%; P = 0.312) was numerically higher with nab-P + Gem vs. Gem. The most common grade ≥3 adverse events with nab-P + Gem vs. Gem were neutropenia (22% vs. 10%), fatigue (34% vs. 33%), and neuropathy (25% vs. 0%).
conclusionThis subanalysis confirmed that nab-P + Gem is an efficacious treatment option and has a manageable safety profile in patients with MPC treated in Canada.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT00844649.
fundingCelgene Corporation, Summit, NJ, USA.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.