ArticleBritish journal of cancer2022
Gemcitabine + Nab-paclitaxel or Gemcitabine alone after FOLFIRINOX failure in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a real-world AGEO study.
Article in British journal of cancer, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Second-Line Systemic Therapy Following First-Line FOLFIRINOX or NALIRIFOX in Metastatic Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of gastrointestinal cancer · 2026Pooled it
- Comparison of different second line treatments for metastatic pancreatic cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.BMC gastroenterology · 2023Pooled it
- Treatment landscape from first- to third-line therapy and quality of life data of patients with pancreatic cancer from the prospective German PARAGON (Platform for Outcome, Quality of Life, and Translational Research on Pancreatic Cancer) registry (IKF-PARAGON study).International journal of cancer · 2026Article
- Second-line chemotherapy after gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel in metastatic pancreatic cancer: comparative outcomes and AI-guided treatment selection.The oncologist · 2026Observational
- Current Systemic Treatment Options for Advanced Pancreatic Cancer-An Overview Article.Biomedicines · 2026Review
- Nimotuzumab Plus Gemcitabine-based Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Resectable Pancreatic Cancer: A Retrospective Observational Study.Pancreas · 2026Observational
- Impact of second-line combination chemotherapy on post-progression survival in metastatic and recurrent pancreatic cancer.International journal of clinical oncology · 2025Article
- Predictive and prognostic factors of efficacy of third-line chemotherapy in patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer: a cohort-based study.The oncologist · 2025Article
- Efficacy of gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel in second-line treatment of metastatic pancreatic cancer.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- ABCG2 protein expression in tumors of patients with non-resectable pancreatic cancer treated with gemcitabine andFrontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Prognostic analysis and outcomes of metastatic pancreatic cancer patients receiving nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine as second or later-line treatment.Cancer medicine · 2024Article
- Peak Risk of Recurrence Occurs during the First Two Years after a Pancreatectomy in Patients Receiving Neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX.Cancers · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
15 authors at 10 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGemcitabine (Gem) alone or with Nab-paclitaxel (Gem-Nab) is used as second-line treatment for metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (mPA) after FOLFIRINOX (FFX) failure; however, no comparative data exist. This study evaluates the efficacy and safety of adding Nab-paclitaxel to Gem for mPA after FFX failure.
methodsIn this retrospective real-world multicenter study, from 2011 to 2019, patients with mPA receiving Gem-Nab (Gem 1000 mg/m² + Nab 125 mg/m², 3 out of 4 weeks) or Gem alone were included after progression on FFX.
resultsA total of 427 patients were included. Patients receiving Gem-Nab had more metastatic sites, peritoneal disease and less PS 2 (24% vs. 35%). After median follow-up of 22 months, Gem-Nab was associated with better disease control rate (DCR) (56% vs. 32%; P < 0.001), progression-free survival (PFS) (3.5 vs. 2.3 months; 95% CI: 0.43-0.65) and overall survival (OS) (7.1 vs. 4.7 months; 95% CI: 0.53-0.86). After multivariate analysis, Gem-Nab and PS 0/1 were associated with better OS and PFS. Grade 3/4 toxicity was more frequent with Gem-Nab (44% vs. 29%).
conclusionIn this study, Gem-Nab was associated with better DCR, PFS and OS compared with Gem alone in patients with mPA after FFX failure, at the cost of higher toxicity.
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.