Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38546797›Full record

Trial reportAnnals of surgical oncology2024

Results of a Randomized Clinical Study of Gemcitabine Plus Nab-Paclitaxel Versus Gemcitabine Plus S-1 as Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Resectable and Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma (RCT, CSGO-HBP-015).

Daisaku Yamada, Shogo Kobayashi, Hidenori Takahashi, Yoshifumi Iwagami, Hirofumi Akita, Kei Asukai, Junzo Shimizu, Terumasa Yamada, Masahiro Tanemura, Shigekazu Yokoyama and 7 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled TrialComparative Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in Annals of surgical oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
5.9field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
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

17 authors at 10 institutions in 1 country.

Daisaku YamadaDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka University, Suita, Japan.
Shogo KobayashiDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka University, Suita, Japan. skobayashi@gesurg.med.osaka-u.ac.jp.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8828-1067
Hidenori TakahashiDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka University, Suita, Japan.
Yoshifumi IwagamiDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka University, Suita, Japan.
Hirofumi AkitaDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, Osaka International Cancer Institute, Osaka, Japan.
Kei AsukaiDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, Osaka International Cancer Institute, Osaka, Japan.
Junzo ShimizuDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, Toyonaka Municipal Hospital, Toyonaka, Japan.
Terumasa YamadaDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, Higashiosaka City Medical Center, Higashiosaka, Japan.
Masahiro TanemuraDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, Rinku General Medical Center, Izumisano, Japan.
Shigekazu YokoyamaDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, Hyogo Prefectural Nishinomiya Hospital, Nishinomiya, Japan.
Masanori TsujieDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, Osaka Rosai Hospital, Sakai, Japan.
Tadafumi AsaokaDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, Osaka Police Hospital, Osaka, Japan.
Yutaka TakedaDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, Kansai Rosai Hospital, Amagasaki, Japan.
Osakuni MorimotoDepartment of Surgery, Japan Community Health Care Organization Osaka Hospital, Osaka, Japan.
Akira TomokuniDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, Osaka General Medical Center, Osaka, Japan.
Yuichiro DokiDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka University, Suita, Japan.
Hidetoshi EguchiDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka University, Suita, Japan.
The University of Osaka · JPOsaka International Cancer Institute · JPHyogo Prefectural Nishinomiya Hospital · JPKansai Rosai Hospital · JPOsaka City General Hospital · JPOsaka Hospital · JPOsaka Police Hospital · JPOsaka Prefectural Medical Center · JPOsaka Rosai Hospital · JPToyonaka Municipal Hospital · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe optimal neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) regimen for patients with localized pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) remains uncertain. This trial aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of two neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) regimens, gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (GA) and gemcitabine plus S-1 (GS), in patients with resectable/borderline-resectable (R/BR) PDAC. PATIENTS AND

methodsTreatment-naïve patients with R/BR-PDAC were enrolled and randomly allocated. They received two cycles (2 months) of each standard protocol, followed by radical surgery for those without tumor progression in general hospitals belonging to our intergroup. The primary endpoint was to determine the superior regimen on the basis of achieving a 10% increase in the rate of patients with progression-free survival (PFS) at 2 years from allocation.

resultsA total of 100 patients were enrolled, with 94 patients randomly assigned to the GS arm (N = 46) or GA arm (N = 48). The 2-year PFS rates did not show the stipulated difference [GA, 31% (24-38%)/GS, 26% (18-33%)], but the Kaplan-Myer analysis showed significance (median PFS, GA/GS 14 months/9 months, P = 0.048; HR 0.71). Secondary endpoint comparisons yielded the following results (GA/GS arm, P-value): rates of severe adverse events during NAC, 73%/78%, P = 0.55; completion rates of the stipulated NAC, 92%/83%, P = 0.71; resection rates, 85%/72%, P = 0.10; average tumor marker (CA19-9) reduction rates, -50%/-21%, P = 0.01; average numbers of lymph node metastasis, 1.7/3.2, P = 0.04; and median overall survival times, 42/22 months, P = 0.26.

conclusionsThis study found that GA and GS are viable neoadjuvant treatment regimens in R/BR-PDAC. Although the GA group exhibited a favorable PFS outcome, the primary endpoint was not achieved.

Indexed as

AlbuminsAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsCarcinoma, Pancreatic DuctalDeoxycytidineDrug CombinationsGemcitabineNeoadjuvant TherapyOxonic AcidPaclitaxelPancreatic NeoplasmsTegafurAdenocarcinomaAdultAgedFemaleFollow-Up Studies130-nm albumin-bound paclitaxelAlbuminsDeoxycytidineDrug CombinationsGemcitabineOxonic AcidPaclitaxelS 1 (combination)TegafurGEM+nPTXGEM+S-1NACR/BR-PDACR-PDAC

Identifiers

PMID38546797
PMCPMC11164807
OpenAlexW4393277948

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.