Effect of S-1 on survival outcomes in 838 patients with advanced pancreatic cancer: A 7-year multicenter observational cohort study in Taiwan

Objective

Studies have rarely explored the efficacy of S‐1 in treating advanced pancreatic cancer outside Japan. This study compared the survival outcomes of patients with advanced pancreatic cancer treated with S‐1 with the survival outcomes of those without S‐1 treatment before and after S‐1 reimbursement was introduced in Taiwan in June of 2014.

Method

We retrospectively analyzed 838 patients with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer who underwent palliative chemotherapy from 2010 to 2016 at 4 institutes in Taiwan. For survival analysis, patients were categorized into two groups according to whether they received S‐1 treatment as palliative chemotherapy after diagnosis: (a) S‐1‐treated (n = 335) and (b) non‐S‐1‐treated (n = 503) groups.

Results

The median overall survival was longer in the S‐1‐treated group than in the non‐S‐1‐treated group (10.7 vs 6.0 mo, P < 0.001). Subgroup survival analyses showed that the S‐1‐treated group had more favorable outcomes than the non‐S‐1‐treated group in terms of stage III (19.6 vs 10.1 mo, P < 0.001) and stage IV (8.5 vs 5.3 mo, P < 0.001) disease. The disease control rates were 43.6% and 32.8% (P < 0.001) in patients treated with and without S‐1 in the first‐line setting, respectively. In multivariate analysis, exposure to S‐1 treatment was an independent prognosticator for survival.

Conclusion

Our results support the clinical use of S‐1 as the treatment of choice for patients with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer, particularly in resource‐limited situations.

Post-progression survival following second-line chemotherapy in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer previously treated with gemcitabine: a meta-analysis

Background Post-progression survival (PPS) could be a confounding element in interpreting data from clinical trials of second-line chemotherapy in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer (PC) previously treated with gemcitabine (GEM) because a recent meta-analysis of oxaliplatin combination therapy showed statistical heterogeneity for overall survival (OS) but not for progression-free survival (PFS). This study aimed to improve the understanding of the impact of PPS on OS in this setting. Methods Databases were searched to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in the salvage setting. We evaluated relationships between OS and PFS, PPS, and other variables. Results Totally, 17 RCTs with 3253 patients were identified. Median OS was strongly and moderately associated with median PPS and PFS, respectively (r = 0.913; p < 0.001 and 0.780; p < 0.001, respectively). The proportion of patients with good performance status was significantly associated with both PPS and PFS (r = 0.574, p < 0.001 and 0.492, p < 0.001, respectively). The induction rate of subsequent chemotherapy was related to the duration of PPS and OS (r = 0.640, p < 0.001 and 0.647, p < 0.001, respectively). Median PPS and OS were significantly longer in recent trials than those in older trials (3.55 versus 2.78 months, p < 0.001 and 6.29 versus 5.02 months, p < 0.001). Conclusions Median PPS was strongly correlated with median OS. Given the recently increased opportunity for subsequent chemotherapy and supportive care, PPS may serve as an important element to clarify problems in this setting.