SNFGE SNFGE
 
Thématique :
- Cancers autres (hors CCR et CHC)
Originalité :
Intermédiaire
Solidité :
Intermédiaire
Doit faire évoluer notre pratique :
Dans certains cas
 
 
Nom du veilleur :
Dr Yann TOUCHEFEU
Coup de coeur :
 
 
Journal of clinical oncology (JCO)
  2019/01  
 
  2019 Jan ;37(3):230-238.  
  doi: 10.1200/JCO.18.00089.  
 
  Phase I/II Trial to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of Nanoparticle Albumin-Bound Paclitaxel in Combination With Gemcitabine in Patients With Pancreatic Cancer and an ECOG Performance Status of 2.  
 
  Macarulla T, Pazo-Cid R, Guillén-Ponce C, López R, Vera R, Reboredo M, Muñoz Martin A, Rivera F, Díaz Beveridge R, La Casta A, Martín Valadés J, Martínez-Galán J, Ales I, Sastre J, Perea S, Hidalgo M  
  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30523758  
 
 

Abstract

PURPOSE:

Gemcitabine plus nanoparticle albumin-bound (NAB) paclitaxel (GA) significantly improved survival compared with gemcitabine alone in patients with metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) and a Karnofsky performance status (PS) of 70% or greater. Because of the low number of patients with reduced PS, the efficacy of this regimen in fragile patients remains unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of different GA dosing regimens in patients with a poor PS.

PATIENTS AND METHODS:

In the phase I part of this study, patients were randomly assigned to one of the following four parallel GA treatment arms (six patients per arm): a biweekly schedule of NAB-paclitaxel (150 mg/m2 [arm A] or 125 mg/m2 [arm C]) plus gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m2 or a standard schedule of 3 weeks on and 1 week off of NAB-paclitaxel (100 mg/m2 [arm B] or 125 mg/m2 [arm D]) plus gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m2. The two regimens with the better tolerability profile on the basis of predefined criteria were evaluated in the phase II part of the study, the primary end point of which was 6-month actuarial survival.

RESULTS:

Arms B and D were selected for the phase II part of the study. A total of 221 patients (111 patients in arm B and 110 patients in arm D) were enrolled. Baseline characteristics including median age (71 and 68 years in arms B and D, respectively), sex (51% and 55% men in arms B and D, respectively), and metastatic disease (88% and 84% in arms B and D, respectively) were comparable between arms. The most frequent grade 3 or 4 toxicities in arms B and D were anemia (12% and 7%, respectively), neutropenia (32% and 30%, respectively), thrombocytopenia (7% and 11%, respectively), asthenia (14% and 16%, respectively), and neurotoxicity (11% and 16%, respectively). In arms B and D, there were no significant differences in response rate (24% and 28%, respectively), median progression-free survival (5.7 and 6.7 months, respectively), and 6-month overall survival (63% and 69%, respectively).

CONCLUSION:

NAB-paclitaxel administered at either 100 and 125 mg/m2 in combination with gemcitabine on days 1, 8, and 15 every 28 days is well tolerated and results in acceptable safety and efficacy in patients with metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma and a poor PS.

 

 
Question posée
 
Quelle est la dose de gemcitabine et nab-paclitaxel tolérable pour les patients ayant un adénocarcinome et un « mauvais » état général (OMS =2)?
 
Question posée
 
Les différents dosages, notamment le traitement standard, sont bien tolérés.
 
Commentaires

En pratique quotidienne, la limite entre les score OMS 1 et 2 est parfois mince. Il est sans doute possible de traiter des patients avec score OMS à 2 sans crainte particulière de toxicité, ce qui était peut-être déjà fait « en pratique clinique ».

 
www.snfge.org