4.3 Article

Impact of Prior Chemotherapy Use on the Efficacy of Everolimus in Patients With Advanced Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors A Subgroup Analysis of the Phase III RADIANT-3 Trial

期刊

PANCREAS
卷 44, 期 2, 页码 181-189

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/MPA.0000000000000262

关键词

chemotherapy; everolimus; first-line therapy; mammalian target of rapamycin inhibition

资金

  1. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate efficacy and safety of everolimus in patients with pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (pNET) by prior chemotherapy use in the RAD001 in Advanced Neuroendocrine Tumors, Third Trial (RADIANT-3). Methods: Patients with advanced, progressive, low-or intermediate-grade pNETwere prospectively stratified by prior chemotherapy use and World Health Organization performance status and were randomly assigned (1: 1) to everolimus 10 mg/d (n = 207) or placebo (n = 203). Results: Of the 410 patients, 204 (50%) were naive to chemotherapy (chemonaive). Baseline characteristics were similar for patients with or without prior chemotherapy. Everolimus significantly prolonged median progression-free survival regardless of prior chemotherapy use (prior chemotherapy: 11.0 vs 3.2 months; hazard ratio, 0.34; 95% confidence interval, 0.25-0.48; P < 0.0001) (chemonaive: 11.4 vs 5.4 months; hazard ratio, 0.42; 95% confidence interval, 0.29-0.60; P < 0.0001). Stable disease was the best overall response in 73% of everolimus-treated patients (151/207). The most common drug-related adverse events included stomatitis (60%-69%), rash (47%-50%), and diarrhea (34%). Conclusions: As more treatment options become available, it is important to consider the goals of treatment and to identify patients who would potentially benefit from a specific therapy. Findings from this planned subgroup analysis suggest the potential for first-line use of everolimus in patients with advanced pNET.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据