Phase III Randomized Comparison of Gemcitabine Versus Gemcitabine Plus Capecitabine in Patients With Advanced Pancreatic Cancer

2009 Journal of Clinical Oncology 814 citations

Abstract

Purpose Both gemcitabine (GEM) and fluoropyrimidines are valuable treatment for advanced pancreatic cancer. This open-label study was designed to compare the overall survival (OS) of patients randomly assigned to GEM alone or GEM plus capecitabine (GEM-CAP). Patients and Methods Patients with previously untreated histologically or cytologically proven locally advanced or metastatic carcinoma of the pancreas with a performance status ≤ 2 were recruited. Patients were randomly assigned to GEM or GEM-CAP. The primary outcome measure was survival. Meta-analysis of published studies was also conducted. Results Between May 2002 and January 2005, 533 patients were randomly assigned to GEM (n = 266) and GEM-CAP (n = 267) arms. GEM-CAP significantly improved objective response rate (19.1% v 12.4%; P = .034) and progression-free survival (hazard ratio [HR], 0.78; 95% CI, 0.66 to 0.93; P = .004) and was associated with a trend toward improved OS (HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.72 to 1.02; P = .08) compared with GEM alone. This trend for OS benefit for GEM-CAP was consistent across different prognostic subgroups according to baseline stratification factors (stage and performance status) and remained after adjusting for these stratification factors (P = .077). Moreover, the meta-analysis of two additional studies involving 935 patients showed a significant survival benefit in favor of GEM-CAP (HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.75 to 0.98; P = .02) with no intertrial heterogeneity. Conclusion On the basis of our trial and the meta-analysis, GEM-CAP should be considered as one of the standard first-line options in locally advanced and metastatic pancreatic cancer.

Keywords

MedicineGemcitabineCapecitabineInternal medicineHazard ratioPancreatic cancerOncologyOverall survivalGastroenterologyConfidence intervalCancerColorectal cancer

Affiliated Institutions

Related Publications

Phase III, Randomized Study of Gemcitabine and Oxaliplatin Versus Gemcitabine (fixed-dose rate infusion) Compared With Gemcitabine (30-minute infusion) in Patients With Pancreatic Carcinoma E6201: A Trial of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group

Purpose Single-agent gemcitabine (GEM) is standard treatment of metastatic pancreatic cancer. Fixed-dose rate (FDR) GEM and GEM plus oxaliplatin have shown promise in early clin...

2009 Journal of Clinical Oncology 423 citations

Gemcitabine Plus Capecitabine Compared With Gemcitabine Alone in Advanced Pancreatic Cancer: A Randomized, Multicenter, Phase III Trial of the Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research and the Central European Cooperative Oncology Group

Purpose This phase III trial compared the efficacy and safety of gemcitabine (Gem) plus capecitabine (GemCap) versus single-agent Gem in advanced/metastatic pancreatic cancer. P...

2007 Journal of Clinical Oncology 588 citations

Publication Info

Year
2009
Type
article
Volume
27
Issue
33
Pages
5513-5518
Citations
814
Access
Closed

External Links

Social Impact

Social media, news, blog, policy document mentions

Citation Metrics

814
OpenAlex

Cite This

David Cunningham, Ian Chau, Deborah Stocken et al. (2009). Phase III Randomized Comparison of Gemcitabine Versus Gemcitabine Plus Capecitabine in Patients With Advanced Pancreatic Cancer. Journal of Clinical Oncology , 27 (33) , 5513-5518. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2009.24.2446

Identifiers

DOI
10.1200/jco.2009.24.2446