An assessment of the benefit-risk balance of FOLFIRINOX in metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma

TY - JOUR

T1 - An assessment of the benefit-risk balance of FOLFIRINOX in metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma

AU - Péron, Julien

AU - Roy, Pascal

AU - Conroy, Thierry

AU - Desseigne, Françoise

AU - Ychou, Marc

AU - Gourgou-Bourgade, Sophie

AU - Stanbury, Trevor

AU - Roche, Laurent

AU - Ozenne, Brice

AU - Buyse, Marc

PY - 2016/10/19

Y1 - 2016/10/19

N2 - Background: We sought to assess the benefit-risk balance of FOLFIRINOX versus gemcitabine in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Methods: We used generalized pairwise comparisons. This statistical method permits the simultaneous analysis of several prioritized outcome measures. The first priority outcome was survival time (OS). Differences in OS that exceeded two months were considered clinically relevant. The second priority outcome was toxicity. The overall treatment effect was quantified using the net chance of a better outcome, which can be interpreted as the net probability for a random patient treated in the FOLFIRINOX group to have a better overall outcome than a random patient in the gemcitabine group. Results: In this trial 342 patients received either FOLFIRINOX or gemcitabine. The net chance of a better outcome favored strongly and significantly the FOLFIRINOX group (24.7; P < .001), suggesting a favorable benefit-risk balance of FOLFIRINOX versus gemcitabine. The positive benefit-risk balance of FOLFIRINOX was observed throughout all sensitivity analyses. Conclusions: Generalized pairwise comparisons are useful to perform a quantitative assessment of the benefit-risk balance of new treatments. It provides a clinically intuitive way of comparing patients with respect to all important efficacy and toxicity outcomes. Overall the benefit-risk balance of FOLFIRINOX was strongly positive.

AB - Background: We sought to assess the benefit-risk balance of FOLFIRINOX versus gemcitabine in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Methods: We used generalized pairwise comparisons. This statistical method permits the simultaneous analysis of several prioritized outcome measures. The first priority outcome was survival time (OS). Differences in OS that exceeded two months were considered clinically relevant. The second priority outcome was toxicity. The overall treatment effect was quantified using the net chance of a better outcome, which can be interpreted as the net probability for a random patient treated in the FOLFIRINOX group to have a better overall outcome than a random patient in the gemcitabine group. Results: In this trial 342 patients received either FOLFIRINOX or gemcitabine. The net chance of a better outcome favored strongly and significantly the FOLFIRINOX group (24.7; P < .001), suggesting a favorable benefit-risk balance of FOLFIRINOX versus gemcitabine. The positive benefit-risk balance of FOLFIRINOX was observed throughout all sensitivity analyses. Conclusions: Generalized pairwise comparisons are useful to perform a quantitative assessment of the benefit-risk balance of new treatments. It provides a clinically intuitive way of comparing patients with respect to all important efficacy and toxicity outcomes. Overall the benefit-risk balance of FOLFIRINOX was strongly positive.

U2 - 10.18632/oncotarget.12761

DO - 10.18632/oncotarget.12761

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 27765912

SN - 1949-2553

JO - Oncotarget

JF - Oncotarget

ER -