-
Cancer Science Jul 2022Irinotecan is a topoisomerase inhibitor, widely used in treatment of malignancies including pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) as part of the FOLFIRINOX regimen... (Review)
Review
Irinotecan is a topoisomerase inhibitor, widely used in treatment of malignancies including pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) as part of the FOLFIRINOX regimen prescribed as a first-line treatment in several countries. However, irinotecan has not been successfully introduced as a second-line treatment for pancreatic cancer and few randomized clinical studies have evaluated its added value. Efficacy of liposomal irinotecan (nal-IRI) combined with 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin (5-FU/LV) was reported in the phase III NAPOLI-1 trial in metastatic PDAC following failure of gemcitabine-based therapy. Several features of nal-IRI pharmacokinetics (PK) could result in better outcomes versus nonliposomal irinotecan. Irinotecan is a prodrug that is converted to active SN-38 by carboxylesterase enzymes and inactivated by cytochrome P450 3A4/3A5. SN-38 is inactivated by UGT1A1 enzymes. Individual variations in their expression and activity could influence enhanced localized irinotecan activity and toxicity. Liposomal irinotecan exploits the enhanced permeability and retention effect in cancer, accumulating in tumor tissues. Liposomal irinotecan also has a longer half-life and higher area under the concentration-time curve (0-∞) than nonliposomal irinotecan, as the liposomal formulation protects cargo from premature metabolism in the plasma. This results in irinotecan activation in tumor tissue, leading to enhanced cytotoxicity. Importantly, despite the longer exposure, overall toxicity for nal-IRI is no worse than nonliposomal irinotecan. Liposomal irinotecan exemplifies how liposomal encapsulation of a chemotherapeutic agent can alter its PK properties, improving clinical outcomes for patients. Liposomal irinotecan is currently under investigation in other malignancies including biliary tract cancer (amongst other gastrointestinal cancers), brain tumors, and small-cell lung cancer.
Topics: Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Clinical Trials, Phase III as Topic; Fluorouracil; Humans; Irinotecan; Leucovorin; Liposomes; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 35445479
DOI: 10.1111/cas.15377 -
BMC Cancer Dec 2021The prognosis of pancreatic cancer (PC) has been improved by new chemotherapy regimens (combination of 5-fluorouracil, oxaliplatin, irinotecan, and leucovorin...
BACKGROUND
The prognosis of pancreatic cancer (PC) has been improved by new chemotherapy regimens (combination of 5-fluorouracil, oxaliplatin, irinotecan, and leucovorin (FOLFIRINOX) or gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (GnP)). Unfortunately, chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) is a common adverse event of these two regimens. The efficacy of pregabalin for CIPN has been reported in previous studies. However, the efficacy of mirogabalin for CIPN remains unknown. Thus, in this study, we aimed to clarify which drug (mirogabalin or pregabalin) was more valuable for improving CIPN.
METHODS
A total of 163 PC patients who underwent FOLFIRINOX or GnP between May 2014 and January 2021 were enrolled. Among them, 34 patients were diagnosed with CIPN. Thirteen patients were treated with mirogabalin (mirogabalin group), and twenty-one patients were treated with pregabalin (pregabalin group). Treatment efficacy was compared between the two groups.
RESULTS
In both the mirogabalin group and the pregabalin group, the grade of patients with CIPN at 2, 4, and 6 weeks after the initiation of treatment showed significant improvement compared to the pretreatment grade. Notably, the rate of CIPN improvement was higher in the mirogabalin group than in the pregabalin group (2 weeks: 84.6% (11/13) vs 33.3% (7/21), P value = 0.005; 4 weeks, 6 weeks: 92.3% (12/13) vs 33.3% (7/21), P value = 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS
Although both mirogabalin and pregabalin were effective at improving CIPN, mirogabalin might be a suitable first choice for CIPN in PC patients.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
Not applicable.
Topics: Aged; Analgesics; Antineoplastic Agents; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Bridged Bicyclo Compounds; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions; Female; Fluorouracil; Humans; Irinotecan; Leucovorin; Male; Middle Aged; Oxaliplatin; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Peripheral Nervous System Diseases; Pregabalin; Retrospective Studies; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 34886831
DOI: 10.1186/s12885-021-09069-9 -
The Lancet. Oncology May 2021Advanced biliary tract cancer has a poor prognosis. Cisplatin and gemcitabine is the standard first-line chemotherapy regimen, but no robust evidence is available for... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Randomized Controlled Trial
BACKGROUND
Advanced biliary tract cancer has a poor prognosis. Cisplatin and gemcitabine is the standard first-line chemotherapy regimen, but no robust evidence is available for second-line chemotherapy. The aim of this study was to determine the benefit derived from second-line FOLFOX (folinic acid, fluorouracil, and oxaliplatin) chemotherapy in advanced biliary tract cancer.
METHODS
The ABC-06 clinical trial was a phase 3, open-label, randomised trial done in 20 sites with expertise in managing biliary tract cancer across the UK. Adult patients (aged ≥18 years) who had histologically or cytologically verified locally advanced or metastatic biliary tract cancer (including cholangiocarcinoma and gallbladder or ampullary carcinoma) with documented radiological disease progression to first-line cisplatin and gemcitabine chemotherapy and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1 were randomly assigned (1:1) centrally to active symptom control (ASC) and FOLFOX or ASC alone. FOLFOX chemotherapy was administered intravenously every 2 weeks for a maximum of 12 cycles (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m, L-folinic acid 175 mg [or folinic acid 350 mg], fluorouracil 400 mg/m [bolus], and fluorouracil 2400 mg/m as a 46-h continuous intravenous infusion). Randomisation was done following a minimisation algorithm using platinum sensitivity, serum albumin concentration, and stage as stratification factors. The primary endpoint was overall survival, assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was also assessed in the intention-to-treat population. The study is complete and the final results are reported. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01926236, and EudraCT, 2013-001812-30.
FINDINGS
Between March 27, 2014, and Jan 4, 2018, 162 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to ASC plus FOLFOX (n=81) or ASC alone (n=81). Median follow-up was 21·7 months (IQR 17·2-30·8). Overall survival was significantly longer in the ASC plus FOLFOX group than in the ASC alone group, with a median overall survival of 6·2 months (95% CI 5·4-7·6) in the ASC plus FOLFOX group versus 5·3 months (4·1-5·8) in the ASC alone group (adjusted hazard ratio 0·69 [95% CI 0·50-0·97]; p=0·031). The overall survival rate in the ASC alone group was 35·5% (95% CI 25·2-46·0) at 6 months and 11·4% (5·6-19·5) at 12 months, compared with 50·6% (39·3-60·9) at 6 months and 25·9% (17·0-35·8) at 12 months in the ASC plus FOLFOX group. Grade 3-5 adverse events were reported in 42 (52%) of 81 patients in the ASC alone group and 56 (69%) of 81 patients in the ASC plus FOLFOX group, including three chemotherapy-related deaths (one each due to infection, acute kidney injury, and febrile neutropenia). The most frequently reported grade 3-5 FOLFOX-related adverse events were neutropenia (ten [12%] patients), fatigue or lethargy (nine [11%] patients), and infection (eight [10%] patients).
INTERPRETATION
The addition of FOLFOX to ASC improved median overall survival in patients with advanced biliary tract cancer after progression on cisplatin and gemcitabine, with a clinically meaningful increase in 6-month and 12-month overall survival rates. To our knowledge, this trial is the first prospective, randomised study providing reliable, high-quality evidence to allow an informed discussion with patients of the potential benefits and risks from second-line FOLFOX chemotherapy in advanced biliary tract cancer. Based on these findings, FOLFOX should become standard-of-care chemotherapy in second-line treatment for advanced biliary tract cancer and the reference regimen for further clinical trials.
FUNDING
Cancer Research UK, StandUpToCancer, AMMF (The UK Cholangiocarcinoma Charity), and The Christie Charity, with additional funding from The Cholangiocarcinoma Foundation and the Conquer Cancer Foundation Young Investigator Award for translational research.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Biliary Tract Neoplasms; Female; Fluorouracil; Humans; Leucovorin; Male; Middle Aged; Organoplatinum Compounds; Prospective Studies
PubMed: 33798493
DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(21)00027-9 -
Disease Models & Mechanisms Jul 2018Syngeneic, immunocompetent allograft tumor models recapitulate important aspects of the tumor microenvironment and have short tumor latency with predictable growth...
Syngeneic, immunocompetent allograft tumor models recapitulate important aspects of the tumor microenvironment and have short tumor latency with predictable growth kinetics, making them useful for trialing novel therapeutics. Here, we describe surgical techniques for orthotopic and heterotopic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) tumor implantation and characterize phenotypes based on implantation site.Mice (=8 per group) were implanted with 10 cells in the pancreas or flank. Hy15549 and Han4.13 cell lines were derived from primary murine PDAC (Ptf1-Cre; LSL-KRAS-G12D; Trp53 Lox/+) on C57BL/6 and FVB strains, respectively. Single-cell suspension and solid tumor implants were compared. Tumors were treated with two intravenous doses of FOLFIRINOX and responses evaluated.All mice developed pancreatic tumors within 7 days. Orthotopic tumors grew faster and larger than heterotopic tumors. By 3 weeks, orthotopic mice began losing weight, and showed declines in body condition requiring euthanasia starting at 4 weeks. Single-cell injection into the pancreas had near 100% engraftment, but solid tumor implant engraftment was ∼50% and was associated with growth restriction. Orthotopic tumors were significantly more responsive to intravenous FOLFIRINOX compared with heterotopic tumors, with greater reductions in size and increased apoptosis. Heterotopic tumors were more desmoplastic and hypovascular. However, drug uptake into tumor tissue was equivalent regardless of tumor location or degree of fibrosis, indicating that microenvironment differences between heterotopic and orthotopic tumors influenced response to therapy.Our results show that orthotopic and heterotopic allograft locations confer unique microenvironments that influence growth kinetics, desmoplastic response and angiogenesis. Tumor location influences chemosensitivity to FOLFIRINOX and should inform future preclinical trials.This article has an associated First Person interview with the first author of the paper.
Topics: Adenocarcinoma; Allografts; Animals; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Autografts; Carcinoma, Pancreatic Ductal; Cell Line, Tumor; Cell Proliferation; Disease Models, Animal; Drug Combinations; Fluorouracil; Humans; Irinotecan; Kinetics; Leucovorin; Male; Mice, Inbred C57BL; Organometallic Compounds; Oxaliplatin; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Phenotype; Transplantation, Heterotopic
PubMed: 29903803
DOI: 10.1242/dmm.034793 -
The Journal of Nutrition Jul 2019Curcumin is the main active ingredient of the spice turmeric, investigated extensively for putative anticancer properties. (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
BACKGROUND
Curcumin is the main active ingredient of the spice turmeric, investigated extensively for putative anticancer properties.
OBJECTIVES
This phase IIa open-labelled randomized controlled trial aimed to assess safety, efficacy, quality of life, neurotoxicity, curcuminoids, and C-X-C-motif chemokine ligand 1 (CXCL1) in patients receiving folinic acid/5-fluorouracil/oxaliplatin chemotherapy (FOLFOX) compared with FOLFOX + 2 g oral curcumin/d (CUFOX).
METHODS
Twenty-eight patients aged >18 y with a histological diagnosis of metastatic colorectal cancer were randomly assigned (1:2) to receive either FOLFOX or CUFOX. Safety was assessed by Common Toxicity Criteria-Adverse Event reporting, and efficacy via progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Quality of life and neurotoxicity were assessed using questionnaires (European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-C30 and Functional Assessment of Cancer Treatment-Gynecologic Oncology Group-Neurotoxicity). Plasma curcuminoids were determined with liquid chromatography (LC) electrospray ionization tandem mass spectrometry and CXCL1 by ELISA.
RESULTS
Addition of daily oral curcumin to FOLFOX chemotherapy was safe and tolerable (primary outcome). Similar adverse event profiles were observed for both arms. In the intention-to-treat population, the HR for PFS was 0.57 (95% CI: 0.24, 1.36; P = 0.2) (median of 171 and 291 d for FOLFOX and CUFOX, respectively) and for OS was 0.34 (95% CI: 0.14, 0.82; P = 0.02) (median of 200 and 502 d for FOLFOX and CUFOX, respectively). There was no significant difference between arms for quality of life (P = 0.248) or neurotoxicity (P = 0.223). Curcumin glucuronide was detectable at concentrations >1.00 pmol/mL in 15 of 18 patients receiving CUFOX. Curcumin did not significantly alter CXCL1 over time (P = 0.712).
CONCLUSION
Curcumin is a safe and tolerable adjunct to FOLFOX chemotherapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT01490996 and at www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu as EudraCT 2011-002289-19.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Aged; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Colorectal Neoplasms; Curcumin; Female; Fluorouracil; Humans; Leucovorin; Male; Middle Aged; Neoplasm Metastasis; Organoplatinum Compounds; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 31132111
DOI: 10.1093/jn/nxz029 -
British Journal of Cancer Feb 2021Cetuximab plus FOLFIRI improved overall survival compared with bevacizumab plus FOLFIRI in KRAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in FIRE-3, but no... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
BACKGROUND
Cetuximab plus FOLFIRI improved overall survival compared with bevacizumab plus FOLFIRI in KRAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in FIRE-3, but no corresponding benefit was found for progression-free survival. This analysis aimed to determine whether cetuximab improves response and survival versus bevacizumab among response-evaluable patients receiving first-line FOLFIRI for RAS wild-type mCRC and the effect of primary tumour side on outcomes.
METHODS
The intent-to-treat population included 593 patients with KRAS exon 2 wild-type mCRC. Further testing identified 400 patients with extended RAS wild-type disease; of these, 352 (88%) who received ≥3 cycles of therapy and had ≥1 post-baseline scan were evaluable for response and constituted the per-protocol population (169 cetuximab and 183 bevacizumab). Patients received 5-fluorouracil, folinic acid and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) with either weekly cetuximab or biweekly bevacizumab given on day 1 of each 14-day cycle until response, progression or toxicity occurred. The primary endpoint was the objective response rate (ORR) in the per-protocol population. Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). The effect of primary tumour location was evaluated.
RESULTS
Median OS in the RAS wild-type population was 31 vs 26 months in the cetuximab and bevacizumab groups, respectively (HR 0.76, P = 0.012). In the per-protocol population, outcomes favoured cetuximab for ORR (77% vs 65%, P = 0.014) and median OS (33 vs 26 months, HR 0.75, P = 0.011), while PFS was comparable between groups. The advantage of cetuximab over bevacizumab occurred only in patients with left-sided primary tumours.
CONCLUSIONS
FOLFIRI plus cetuximab resulted in a significantly higher ORR and longer OS compared to FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab among patients with left-sided tumours. The superior response associated with cetuximab may particularly benefit patients with symptomatic tumours or borderline-resectable metastases. CLINICALTRIALS.
GOV IDENTIFIER
NCT00433927.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Bevacizumab; Camptothecin; Cetuximab; Colorectal Neoplasms; Drug Administration Schedule; Fluorouracil; Genes, ras; Humans; Intention to Treat Analysis; Leucovorin; Middle Aged; Progression-Free Survival
PubMed: 33154570
DOI: 10.1038/s41416-020-01140-9 -
Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine Aug 2020
Topics: Adult; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Brain Diseases; Female; Fluorouracil; Humans; Leucovorin; Medical Illustration; Organoplatinum Compounds; Rectal Neoplasms
PubMed: 32868300
DOI: 10.3949/ccjm.87a.19126 -
JAMA Network Open Jan 2024The NAPOLI 3 trial showed the superiority of fluorouracil, leucovorin, liposomal irinotecan, and oxaliplatin (NALIRIFOX) over the combination of gemcitabine and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
The NAPOLI 3 trial showed the superiority of fluorouracil, leucovorin, liposomal irinotecan, and oxaliplatin (NALIRIFOX) over the combination of gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel (GEM-NABP) as first-line treatment of metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Analyses comparing NALIRIFOX and GEM-NABP with fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin (FOLFIRINOX) have not yet been reported.
OBJECTIVE
To derive survival, response, and toxic effects data from phase 3 clinical trials and compare NALIRIFOX, FOLFIRINOX, and GEM-NABP.
DATA SOURCES
After a systematic search of PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and American Society of Clinical Oncology and European Society for Medical Oncology meetings' libraries, Kaplan-Meier curves were extracted from phase 3 clinical trials conducted from January 1, 2011, until September 12, 2023.
STUDY SELECTION
Phase 3 clinical trials that tested NALIRIFOX, FOLFIRINOX, or GEM-NABP as first-line treatment of metastatic PDAC and reported overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) curves were selected. This study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses of Individual Participant Data reporting guidelines.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Individual patient OS and PFS data were extracted from Kaplan-Meier plots of original trials via a graphic reconstructive algorithm. Overall response rates (ORRs) and grade 3 or higher toxic effects rates were also collected. A pooled analysis was conducted, and results were validated via a network meta-analysis.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
The primary end point was OS. Secondary outcomes included PFS, ORR, and toxic effects rates.
RESULTS
A total of 7 trials with data on 2581 patients were analyzed, including 383 patients treated with NALIRIFOX, 433 patients treated with FOLFIRINOX, and 1756 patients treated with GEM-NABP. Median PFS was longer in patients treated with NALIRIFOX (7.4 [95% CI, 6.1-7.7] months) or FOLFIRINOX (7.3 [95% CI, 6.5-7.9] months; [HR], 1.21 [95% CI, 0.86-1.70]; P = .28) compared with patients treated with GEM-NABP (5.7 [95% CI, 5.6-6.1] months; HR vs NALIRIFOX, 1.45 [95% CI, 1.22-1.73]; P < .001). Similarly, GEM-NABP was associated with poorer OS (10.4 [95% CI, 9.8-10.8]; months) compared with NALIRIFOX (HR, 1.18 [95% CI, 1.00-1.39]; P = .05], while no difference was observed between FOLFIRINOX (11.7 [95% CI, 10.4-13.0] months) and NALIRIFOX (11.1 [95% CI, 10.1-12.3] months; HR, 1.06 [95% CI, 0.81-1.39]; P = .65). There were no statistically significant differences in ORR among NALIRIFOX (41.8%), FOLFIRINOX (31.6%), and GEM-NABP (35.0%). NALIRIFOX was associated with lower incidence of grade 3 or higher hematological toxic effects (eg, platelet count decreased 1.6% vs 11.8% with FOLFIRINOX and 10.8% with GEM-NABP), but higher rates of severe diarrhea compared with GEM-NABP (20.3% vs 15.7%).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
In this systematic review and meta-analysis, NALIRIFOX and FOLFIRINOX were associated with similar PFS and OS as first-line treatment of advanced PDAC, although NALIRIFOX was associated with a different toxicity profile. Careful patient selection, financial toxic effects consideration, and direct comparison between FOLFIRINOX and NALIRIFOX are warranted.
Topics: Humans; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Irinotecan; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Leucovorin; Oxaliplatin; Gemcitabine; Fluorouracil; Adenocarcinoma
PubMed: 38190183
DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.50756 -
JCO Clinical Cancer Informatics Jul 2022Using real-world data (RWD)-based trial simulation approach, we aim to simulate colorectal cancer (CRC) trials and examine both effectiveness and safety end points in...
PURPOSE
Using real-world data (RWD)-based trial simulation approach, we aim to simulate colorectal cancer (CRC) trials and examine both effectiveness and safety end points in different simulation scenarios.
METHODS
We identified five phase III trials comparing new treatment regimens with an US Food and Drug Administration-approved first-line treatment in patients with metastatic CRC (ie, fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan) as the standard-of-care (SOC) control arm. Using Electronic Health Record-derived data from the OneFlorida network, we defined the study populations and outcome measures using the protocols from the original trials. Our design scenarios were (1) simulation of the SOC fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan arm and (2) comparative effectiveness research (CER) simulation of the control and experimental arms. For each scenario, we adjusted for random assignment, sampling, and dropout. We used overall survival (OS) and severe adverse events (SAEs) to measure effectiveness and safety.
RESULTS
We conducted CER simulations for two trials, and SOC simulations for three trials. The effect sizes of our simulated trials were stable across all simulation runs. Compared with the original trials, we observed longer OS and higher mean number of SAEs in both CER and SOC simulation. In the two CER simulations, hazard ratios associated with death from simulations were similar to that reported in the original trials. Consistent with the original trials, we found higher risk ratios of SAEs in the experiment arm, suggesting potentially higher toxicities from the new treatment regimen. We also observed similar SAE rates across all simulations compared with the original trials.
CONCLUSION
In this study, we simulated five CRC trials, and tested two simulation scenarios with several different configurations demonstrated that our simulations can robustly generate effectiveness and safety outcomes comparable with the original trials using real-world data.
Topics: Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Clinical Trials, Phase III as Topic; Colorectal Neoplasms; Fluorouracil; Humans; Irinotecan; Leucovorin
PubMed: 35839432
DOI: 10.1200/CCI.21.00195 -
BMC Cancer Jul 2023Nanoliposomal irinotecan (nal-IRI) plus 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)/levo-leucovorin (Levo-LV) was approved for unresectable pancreatic cancer (UR-PC) in March 2020 in Japan....
BACKGROUND
Nanoliposomal irinotecan (nal-IRI) plus 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)/levo-leucovorin (Levo-LV) was approved for unresectable pancreatic cancer (UR-PC) in March 2020 in Japan. Levo-LV is administered by intravenous infusion over 120 min following 90 min intravenous infusion of nal-IRI (conventional method), causing a significant burden on both patients and the outpatient chemotherapy room owing to the prolonged administration time. Thus, from July 2021, we introduced the simultaneous intravenous administration of nal-IRI and Levo-LV (parallel method) with the approval of the institutional regimen committee.
METHODS
We retrospectively reviewed the data of 69 patients with UR-PC who received nal-IRI plus 5-FU/Levo-LV at our hospital between June 2020 and October 2021. We examined the safety of the parallel method and compared the treatment outcomes and administration times between the two methods.
RESULTS
The median age was 66 years (54%, male). Disease statuses were locally advanced, metastatic, and postoperative recurrence after pancreatectomy in 7, 50, and 12 patients, respectively. Nal-IRI plus 5-FU/Levo-LV treatment was second and third-line or later in 35 and 34 patients, respectively. No intravenous line problems were observed during the parallel administration of nal-IRI and Levo-LV. Although there were no significant differences in response rates and adverse events between the two methods, the administration time was significantly shorter in the parallel method than in the conventional method.
CONCLUSION
The parallel administration of nal-IRI and Levo-LV is clinically safe and not inferior in efficacy. Moreover, parallel administration may offer convenience to patients and healthcare workers by reducing administration time.
Topics: Humans; Male; Aged; Female; Irinotecan; Levoleucovorin; Retrospective Studies; Leucovorin; Liposomes; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Fluorouracil; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Camptothecin
PubMed: 37518012
DOI: 10.1186/s12885-023-11205-6