Tumor Treating Fields With Gemcitabine and Nab-Paclitaxel for Locally Advanced Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: Randomized, Open-Label, Pivotal Phase III PANOVA-3 Study.
1/5 보강
PICO 자동 추출 (휴리스틱, conf 2/4)
유사 논문P · Population 대상 환자/모집단
571 patients with newly diagnosed LA-PAC were randomly assigned to receive gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m and nab-paclitaxel 125 mg/m by intravenous infusion once a day on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle with or without TTFields.
I · Intervention 중재 / 시술
추출되지 않음
C · Comparison 대조 / 비교
추출되지 않음
O · Outcome 결과 / 결론
Most device-related skin AEs were mild to moderate, with 7.7% of patients reporting a grade 3 AE. [CONCLUSION] This study demonstrated significant OS, pain-free survival, and distant PFS benefits for TTFields with gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel versus gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel in patients with unresectable LA-PAC, with no additive systemic toxicity.
[PURPOSE] Tumor treating fields (TTFields) use alternating electric fields to disrupt cancer cell proliferation.
- 95% CI 15.0 to 18.0
APA
Babiker HM, Picozzi V, et al. (2025). Tumor Treating Fields With Gemcitabine and Nab-Paclitaxel for Locally Advanced Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: Randomized, Open-Label, Pivotal Phase III PANOVA-3 Study.. Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, 43(21), 2350-2360. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO-25-00746
MLA
Babiker HM, et al.. "Tumor Treating Fields With Gemcitabine and Nab-Paclitaxel for Locally Advanced Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: Randomized, Open-Label, Pivotal Phase III PANOVA-3 Study.." Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, vol. 43, no. 21, 2025, pp. 2350-2360.
PMID
40448572
Abstract
[PURPOSE] Tumor treating fields (TTFields) use alternating electric fields to disrupt cancer cell proliferation. Feasibility of TTFields therapy with gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel was previously demonstrated in patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma. PANOVA-3 was designed to confirm safety and efficacy of TTFields in patients with unresectable locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma (LA-PAC).
[METHODS] In this global phase III trial, 571 patients with newly diagnosed LA-PAC were randomly assigned to receive gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m and nab-paclitaxel 125 mg/m by intravenous infusion once a day on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle with or without TTFields. The primary end point was overall survival (OS). Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), local PFS, pain-free survival, and overall response rate (ORR). Distant PFS was analyzed post hoc.
[RESULTS] OS was significantly prolonged using TTFields with gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel versus gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (median, 16.2 months [95% CI, 15.0 to 18.0] 14.2 months [95% CI, 12.8 to 15.4]; hazard ratio [HR], 0.82 [95% CI, 0.68 to 0.99]; = .039). PFS, local PFS, and ORR were not improved. Pain-free survival was significantly prolonged with TTFields with gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (median, 15.2 months [95% CI, 10.3 to 22.8] 9.1 months [95% CI, 7.4 to 12.7]; HR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.56 to 0.97]; = .027), as was distant PFS (median, 13.9 months [95% CI, 12.2 to 16.8] 11.5 months [95% CI, 10.4 to 12.9]; HR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.57 to 0.96]; = .022). Device-related skin adverse events (AEs) were experienced by 76.3% of patients. Most device-related skin AEs were mild to moderate, with 7.7% of patients reporting a grade 3 AE.
[CONCLUSION] This study demonstrated significant OS, pain-free survival, and distant PFS benefits for TTFields with gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel versus gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel in patients with unresectable LA-PAC, with no additive systemic toxicity.
[METHODS] In this global phase III trial, 571 patients with newly diagnosed LA-PAC were randomly assigned to receive gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m and nab-paclitaxel 125 mg/m by intravenous infusion once a day on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle with or without TTFields. The primary end point was overall survival (OS). Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), local PFS, pain-free survival, and overall response rate (ORR). Distant PFS was analyzed post hoc.
[RESULTS] OS was significantly prolonged using TTFields with gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel versus gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (median, 16.2 months [95% CI, 15.0 to 18.0] 14.2 months [95% CI, 12.8 to 15.4]; hazard ratio [HR], 0.82 [95% CI, 0.68 to 0.99]; = .039). PFS, local PFS, and ORR were not improved. Pain-free survival was significantly prolonged with TTFields with gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (median, 15.2 months [95% CI, 10.3 to 22.8] 9.1 months [95% CI, 7.4 to 12.7]; HR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.56 to 0.97]; = .027), as was distant PFS (median, 13.9 months [95% CI, 12.2 to 16.8] 11.5 months [95% CI, 10.4 to 12.9]; HR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.57 to 0.96]; = .022). Device-related skin adverse events (AEs) were experienced by 76.3% of patients. Most device-related skin AEs were mild to moderate, with 7.7% of patients reporting a grade 3 AE.
[CONCLUSION] This study demonstrated significant OS, pain-free survival, and distant PFS benefits for TTFields with gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel versus gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel in patients with unresectable LA-PAC, with no additive systemic toxicity.