Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38190183›Full record

SynthesisJAMA network open2024

NALIRIFOX, FOLFIRINOX, and Gemcitabine With Nab-Paclitaxel as First-Line Chemotherapy for Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Federico Nichetti, Simone Rota, Paolo Ambrosini, Chiara Pircher, Eleonora Gusmaroli, Michele Droz Dit Busset, Sara Pusceddu, Carlo Sposito, Jorgelina Coppa, Federica Morano and 6 more

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic ReviewNetwork Meta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in JAMA network open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 101 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
101citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
27.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

101 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 98 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Chemotherapy and radiotherapy for advanced pancreatic cancer.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

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

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Federico NichettiDepartment of Medical Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.
Simone RotaDepartment of Medical Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.
Paolo AmbrosiniDepartment of Medical Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.
Chiara PircherDepartment of Medical Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.
Eleonora GusmaroliDepartment of Medical Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.
Michele Droz Dit BussetHepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery and Liver Transplantation, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.
Sara PuscedduDepartment of Medical Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.
Carlo SpositoHepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery and Liver Transplantation, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.
Jorgelina CoppaHepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery and Liver Transplantation, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.
Federica MoranoDepartment of Medical Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.
Filippo PietrantonioDepartment of Medical Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.
Maria Di BartolomeoDepartment of Medical Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.
Luigi MarianiDepartment of Epidemiology and Data Science, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori di Milano, Milan, Italy.
Vincenzo MazzaferroHepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery and Liver Transplantation, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.
Filippo de BraudDepartment of Medical Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.
Monica NigerDepartment of Medical Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.
Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori · ITGerman Cancer Research Center · DEUniversity of Milan · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: The NAPOLI 3 trial showed the superiority of fluorouracil, leucovorin, liposomal irinotecan, and oxaliplatin (NALIRIFOX) over the combination of gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel (GEM-NABP) as first-line treatment of metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Analyses comparing NALIRIFOX and GEM-NABP with fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin (FOLFIRINOX) have not yet been reported. Objective: To derive survival, response, and toxic effects data from phase 3 clinical trials and compare NALIRIFOX, FOLFIRINOX, and GEM-NABP. Data Sources: After a systematic search of PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and American Society of Clinical Oncology and European Society for Medical Oncology meetings' libraries, Kaplan-Meier curves were extracted from phase 3 clinical trials conducted from January 1, 2011, until September 12, 2023. Study Selection: Phase 3 clinical trials that tested NALIRIFOX, FOLFIRINOX, or GEM-NABP as first-line treatment of metastatic PDAC and reported overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) curves were selected. This study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses of Individual Participant Data reporting guidelines. Data Extraction And Synthesis: Individual patient OS and PFS data were extracted from Kaplan-Meier plots of original trials via a graphic reconstructive algorithm. Overall response rates (ORRs) and grade 3 or higher toxic effects rates were also collected. A pooled analysis was conducted, and results were validated via a network meta-analysis. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was OS. Secondary outcomes included PFS, ORR, and toxic effects rates. Results: A total of 7 trials with data on 2581 patients were analyzed, including 383 patients treated with NALIRIFOX, 433 patients treated with FOLFIRINOX, and 1756 patients treated with GEM-NABP. Median PFS was longer in patients treated with NALIRIFOX (7.4 [95% CI, 6.1-7.7] months) or FOLFIRINOX (7.3 [95% CI, 6.5-7.9] months; [HR], 1.21 [95% CI, 0.86-1.70]; P = .28) compared with patients treated with GEM-NABP (5.7 [95% CI, 5.6-6.1] months; HR vs NALIRIFOX, 1.45 [95% CI, 1.22-1.73]; P < .001). Similarly, GEM-NABP was associated with poorer OS (10.4 [95% CI, 9.8-10.8]; months) compared with NALIRIFOX (HR, 1.18 [95% CI, 1.00-1.39]; P = .05], while no difference was observed between FOLFIRINOX (11.7 [95% CI, 10.4-13.0] months) and NALIRIFOX (11.1 [95% CI, 10.1-12.3] months; HR, 1.06 [95% CI, 0.81-1.39]; P = .65). There were no statistically significant differences in ORR among NALIRIFOX (41.8%), FOLFIRINOX (31.6%), and GEM-NABP (35.0%). NALIRIFOX was associated with lower incidence of grade 3 or higher hematological toxic effects (eg, platelet count decreased 1.6% vs 11.8% with FOLFIRINOX and 10.8% with GEM-NABP), but higher rates of severe diarrhea compared with GEM-NABP (20.3% vs 15.7%). Conclusions and Relevance: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, NALIRIFOX and FOLFIRINOX were associated with similar PFS and OS as first-line treatment of advanced PDAC, although NALIRIFOX was associated with a different toxicity profile. Careful patient selection, financial toxic effects consideration, and direct comparison between FOLFIRINOX and NALIRIFOX are warranted.

Indexed as

AdenocarcinomaPancreatic NeoplasmsAlbuminsAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsFluorouracilGemcitabineHumansIrinotecanLeucovorinOxaliplatinPaclitaxel130-nm albumin-bound paclitaxelAlbuminsFluorouracilfolfirinoxGemcitabineIrinotecanLeucovorinOxaliplatinPaclitaxel

Identifiers

PMID38190183
PMCPMC10774994
OpenAlexW4390661935

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.