Trial reportJournal of cancer research and clinical oncology2021
Nab-paclitaxel plus S-1 versus nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine as first-line chemotherapy in patients with advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: a randomized study.
Trial report in Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03636308 (Phase II Trial Comparing Nab-paclitaxel Plus S-1 Versus Nab-paclitaxel Plus Gemcitabine in First-line Treatment of Patients With Advanced Pancreatic Cancer), which is not on this map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Phase II Trial Comparing Nab-paclitaxel Plus S-1 Versus Nab-paclitaxel Plus Gemcitabine in First-line Treatment of Patients With Advanced Pancreatic Cancer
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Chemotherapy and radiotherapy for advanced pancreatic cancer.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- First-line treatment with chemotherapy, surufatinib (an angio-immuno kinase inhibitor), and camrelizumab (an anti-PD-1 antibody) for locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: a phase Ib/II randomized study.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2025Trial
- Nab-paclitaxel plus S-1 followed by gemcitabine-oxaliplatin as first-line alternating sequential treatment of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.The oncologist · 2024Trial
- Nab-paclitaxel plus S-1 versus nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer: a multicenter, randomized, phase II study.The oncologist · 2024Trial
- Efficacy and safety of paclitaxel combined with oxaliplatin in the treatment of advanced primary hepatocellular carcinoma.American journal of cancer research · 2025Article
- A phase 1 study of biweekly nab-paclitaxel/oxaliplatin/S-1/LV for advanced upper gastrointestinal cancers: TCOG T1216 study.The oncologist · 2024Article
- Efficacy of nab‑paclitaxel vs. Gemcitabine in combination with S‑1 for advanced pancreatic cancer: A multicenter phase II randomized trial.Oncology letters · 2024Article
- Prognostic value of peripheral blood fibrinogen-to-albumin ratio and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio in patients with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer.American journal of translational research · 2024Article
- Efficacy and safety of gemcitabine plus S-1Cancer biology & medicine · 2023Article
- Treatment optimization of locally advanced and metastatic pancreatic cancer (Review).International journal of oncology · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo investigate the efficacy and safety of nab-paclitaxel plus S-1 (nab-P/S) versus nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine (nab-P/G) as first-line chemotherapy in patients with advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC).
methodsTreatment-naïve patients with advanced PDAC were equally randomized to receive nab-P/S or nab-P/G. The primary endpoint was the objective response rate (ORR). The secondary endpoints were ORR of the primary lesion, disease control rate, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and safety. The trial was registered at https://clinicaltrials.gov as NCT03636308.
resultsA total of 110 patients were planned for enrollment, but the trial was prematurely closed because no better ORR was observed with nab-P/S among the first 40 patients assigned between 08/2018 and 06/2019. The ORR was numerically higher with nab-P/S versus nab-P/G (35.0% vs 25.0%, P = 0.49). The ORRs of the primary lesion for both arms were similar (30.0% and 25.0%, P = 0.72). Disease control rate was 70.0% in each arm. There was no significant difference in PFS and OS between the two arms (median PFS, 6.3 vs 5.7 months, P = 0.34; median OS, 10.2 vs 10.2 months, P = 0.92). Risks of hematological toxicity, liver injury and rash were significantly decreased in the nab-P/S arm.
conclusionsA biweekly combination of nab-P/S yielded comparable efficacy with nab-P/G but improved safety profile. It may be a promising and convenient alternative as first-line and neoadjuvant settings for advanced PDAC.
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.