ArticleESMO open2025
NALIRIFOX in the treatment of metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: an exploratory analysis of real-world data.
Article in ESMO open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNALIRIFOX, a triplet chemotherapy regimen combining nanoliposomal irinotecan, 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin, and oxaliplatin, demonstrated superior survival outcomes versus gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel in the NAPOLI 3 trial for metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (mPDAC). However, its performance in routine clinical practice remains underexplored. PATIENTS AND
methodsThis multicenter retrospective study evaluated the real-world efficacy and safety of NALIRIFOX as first-line treatment in 80 patients with mPDAC. Primary endpoints were time to failure of strategy (TFS) and overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints included treatment-related toxicity, disease control rate (DCR), and molecular subgroup analyses based on homologous recombination repair mutations (HRRm) and KRAS status.
resultsMedian TFS and OS were 5.66 and 11.15 months, respectively, with improved outcomes (TFS 6.05 months; OS 12.92 months) in patients meeting strict NAPOLI 3 inclusion criteria. DCR was 57.5%, and grade 3-4 toxicities occurred in 22.5% of patients-lower than reported in randomized trials. HRRm patients (20%) achieved significantly prolonged TFS (7.96 versus 5.23 months, P = 0.049) and OS (16.24 versus 11.11 months, P = 0.043). KRAS G12D/V mutations were associated with worse OS (11.15 months versus not reached, P < 0.05), but not TFS.
conclusionsThis first real-world analysis of NALIRIFOX confirms its clinical effectiveness and manageable toxicity in an unselected patient population. The favorable outcomes in HRRm subgroups and the prognostic impact of KRAS variants underscore the need for molecular stratification in guiding first-line therapy for mPDAC.
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.