Trial reportBMC cancer2026
Comparison of chemoradiotherapy and gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel for locally advanced pancreatic cancer: an integrated analysis of two randomized phase II trials (JCOG2408A).
Trial report in BMC cancer, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
30 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTwo main therapeutic approaches are currently used for locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC): chemoradiotherapy and systemic chemotherapy. It remains unclear which approach may be more promising, or whether these strategies should be considered alternative or complementary therapeutic options in the management of LAPC. Clinical outcomes and safety were assessed for S-1 plus concurrent radiotherapy (S-1 + RT) and gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (GnP) in patients with LAPC.
methodsWe conducted a pooled exploratory analysis of individual patient data derived from two multi-institutional randomized phase II trials conducted by the Japan Clinical Oncology Group (JCOG1106 and JCOG1407). JCOG1106 evaluated S-1 + RT with or without induction chemotherapy. JCOG1407 compared GnP with modified FOLFIRINOX. Based on the results of these trials, S-1 + RT and GnP were selected as promising regimens for chemoradiotherapy and systemic chemotherapy, respectively. The primary endpoint of this study was progression-free survival (PFS). Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) with stabilized weights was applied based on the propensity score to account for baseline imbalances between the two groups.
resultsA total of 113 patients were included. After adjustment for patient characteristics, Kaplan–Meier curves showed median PFS, overall survival (OS), and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) of 10.2 vs. 9.3 (hazard ratio [HR], 0.88; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.60–1.30), 19.1 vs. 21.2 (HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.48–1.11), and 11.5 vs. 13.1 months (HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.49–1.08) for S-1 + RT and GnP, respectively. Treatment received after protocol therapy differed substantially: 77.5% in the S-1 + RT group received single-agent chemotherapy, whereas 50.0% in the GnP group, received more intensive regimens, including multi-agent chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy.
conclusionsGnP may offer advantages in suppressing micrometastatic disease, whereas S-1 + RT may provide benefits in local disease control. These findings suggest that both approaches represent important and complementary therapeutic options for LAPC. Prospective randomized studies are warranted to determine the optimal initial strategy.
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.