User login
TOPLINE:
Although practice patterns vary widely, and it is less likely to cause febrile neutropenia.
METHODOLOGY:
- No randomized controlled trials have directly compared modified FOLFIRINOX to standard FOLFIRINOX; this meta-analysis aims to fill the evidence gap.
- The investigators winnowed hundreds of first-line FOLFIRINOX studies down to 37 – 11 prospective and 26 retrospective analyses – to assess practice patterns and clinical outcomes.
- Dose information was grouped into four categories: planned dose in the standard FOLFIRINOX group; actual administered dose in the standard group; planned dose in the modified group; actual administered dose in the modified group.
TAKEAWAY:
- There were 12 types of “planned” dose reductions in FOLFIRINOX: 75%-100% oxaliplatin, 75%-100% irinotecan, 0%-100% 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) bolus, and 75%-133% 5-FU continuous injection.
- Doses actually delivered fell further to 54%-96% for oxaliplatin, 61%-88% for irinotecan, 0%-92% for 5-FU bolus, and 63%-98% 5-FU continuous injection.
- Despite the variations in dosing, reduced doses of FOLFIRINOX were associated with a slightly but not significantly higher objective response rate: 33.8% versus 28.2% for standard dosing (P = .1).
- The incidence of febrile neutropenia was significantly lower in the reduced-dose groups: 5.5% with modified FOLFIRINOX versus 11.6% with standard (P = .03).
IN PRACTICE:
Although the study supports reduced-dose regimens, it also shows that there is “still no consensus” on appropriate dose modification, the authors said. “The best dose modification protocol” remains to be determined and standardized for metastatic pancreatic cancer.
SOURCE:
The study was led by Kwangrok Jung at Seoul (South Korea) National University, and was published June 29 in Therapeutic Advances in Medical Oncology.
LIMITATIONS:
- Only 11 of the 37 studies were prospective.
- The studies often lacked key information, including the reason for dose reductions or detailed dose reduction protocols.
- Studies were also inconsistent in how they reported FOLFIRINOX dose modifications.
DISCLOSURES:
There was no funding for the study, and the investigators had no disclosures.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
Although practice patterns vary widely, and it is less likely to cause febrile neutropenia.
METHODOLOGY:
- No randomized controlled trials have directly compared modified FOLFIRINOX to standard FOLFIRINOX; this meta-analysis aims to fill the evidence gap.
- The investigators winnowed hundreds of first-line FOLFIRINOX studies down to 37 – 11 prospective and 26 retrospective analyses – to assess practice patterns and clinical outcomes.
- Dose information was grouped into four categories: planned dose in the standard FOLFIRINOX group; actual administered dose in the standard group; planned dose in the modified group; actual administered dose in the modified group.
TAKEAWAY:
- There were 12 types of “planned” dose reductions in FOLFIRINOX: 75%-100% oxaliplatin, 75%-100% irinotecan, 0%-100% 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) bolus, and 75%-133% 5-FU continuous injection.
- Doses actually delivered fell further to 54%-96% for oxaliplatin, 61%-88% for irinotecan, 0%-92% for 5-FU bolus, and 63%-98% 5-FU continuous injection.
- Despite the variations in dosing, reduced doses of FOLFIRINOX were associated with a slightly but not significantly higher objective response rate: 33.8% versus 28.2% for standard dosing (P = .1).
- The incidence of febrile neutropenia was significantly lower in the reduced-dose groups: 5.5% with modified FOLFIRINOX versus 11.6% with standard (P = .03).
IN PRACTICE:
Although the study supports reduced-dose regimens, it also shows that there is “still no consensus” on appropriate dose modification, the authors said. “The best dose modification protocol” remains to be determined and standardized for metastatic pancreatic cancer.
SOURCE:
The study was led by Kwangrok Jung at Seoul (South Korea) National University, and was published June 29 in Therapeutic Advances in Medical Oncology.
LIMITATIONS:
- Only 11 of the 37 studies were prospective.
- The studies often lacked key information, including the reason for dose reductions or detailed dose reduction protocols.
- Studies were also inconsistent in how they reported FOLFIRINOX dose modifications.
DISCLOSURES:
There was no funding for the study, and the investigators had no disclosures.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
Although practice patterns vary widely, and it is less likely to cause febrile neutropenia.
METHODOLOGY:
- No randomized controlled trials have directly compared modified FOLFIRINOX to standard FOLFIRINOX; this meta-analysis aims to fill the evidence gap.
- The investigators winnowed hundreds of first-line FOLFIRINOX studies down to 37 – 11 prospective and 26 retrospective analyses – to assess practice patterns and clinical outcomes.
- Dose information was grouped into four categories: planned dose in the standard FOLFIRINOX group; actual administered dose in the standard group; planned dose in the modified group; actual administered dose in the modified group.
TAKEAWAY:
- There were 12 types of “planned” dose reductions in FOLFIRINOX: 75%-100% oxaliplatin, 75%-100% irinotecan, 0%-100% 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) bolus, and 75%-133% 5-FU continuous injection.
- Doses actually delivered fell further to 54%-96% for oxaliplatin, 61%-88% for irinotecan, 0%-92% for 5-FU bolus, and 63%-98% 5-FU continuous injection.
- Despite the variations in dosing, reduced doses of FOLFIRINOX were associated with a slightly but not significantly higher objective response rate: 33.8% versus 28.2% for standard dosing (P = .1).
- The incidence of febrile neutropenia was significantly lower in the reduced-dose groups: 5.5% with modified FOLFIRINOX versus 11.6% with standard (P = .03).
IN PRACTICE:
Although the study supports reduced-dose regimens, it also shows that there is “still no consensus” on appropriate dose modification, the authors said. “The best dose modification protocol” remains to be determined and standardized for metastatic pancreatic cancer.
SOURCE:
The study was led by Kwangrok Jung at Seoul (South Korea) National University, and was published June 29 in Therapeutic Advances in Medical Oncology.
LIMITATIONS:
- Only 11 of the 37 studies were prospective.
- The studies often lacked key information, including the reason for dose reductions or detailed dose reduction protocols.
- Studies were also inconsistent in how they reported FOLFIRINOX dose modifications.
DISCLOSURES:
There was no funding for the study, and the investigators had no disclosures.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.