Prognostic value of health-related quality of life in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a random forest methodology.

PURPOSE: Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG-PS) is currently an important parameter in the choice of treatment strategy for metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (mPA) patients. However, previous research has shown that patients' self-reported health-related quality of life (HRQOL) scales provided additional prognostic information in homogeneous groups of patients with respect to ECOG-PS. The aim of this study was to identify HRQOL scales with independent prognostic value in mPA and to propose prognostic groups for these patients. METHODS: We analysed data from 98 chemotherapy-naive patients with histologically proven mPA recruited from 2007 to 2011 in the FIRGEM phase II study which aimed to compare the effectiveness of two chemotherapy regimen. HRQOL data were assessed with the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 questionnaire. A random survival forest methodology was used to impute missing data and to identify major prognostic factors for overall survival. RESULTS: Baseline HRQOL assessment was completed by 60 % of patients (59/98). Twelve prognostic variables were identified. The three most important prognostic variables were fatigue, appetite loss, and role functioning, followed by three laboratory variables. The model's discriminative power assessed by Harrell's C statistic was 0.65. Fatigue score explained almost all the survival variability. CONCLUSION: HRQOL scores have prognostic value for mPA patients with good ECOG-PS. Moreover, the patient's fatigue, appetite loss, and self-perception of daily activities were more reliable prognostic indicators than clinical and laboratory variables. These HRQOL scores, especially the fatigue symptom, should be urgently included for prognostic assessment of mPA patients (with good ECOG-PS).

Fixed-dose rate gemcitabine alone or alternating with FOLFIRI.3 (irinotecan, leucovorin and fluorouracil) in the first-line treatment of patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma: an AGEO randomised phase II study (FIRGEM).

BACKGROUND: Fluorouracil and irinotecan-based, and gemcitabine-based regimens, are the standard of care in the first-line treatment of patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer. New approaches are needed to improve survival and quality of life. Whether a sequential approach alternating irinotecan, fluorouracil and gemcitabine may be effective and tolerable in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer is unknown. METHODS: In this randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 2 trial, patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma, World Health Organisation (WHO) performance status 0-1, and bilirubin levels <1.5 upper limit of normal values (ULN) were randomised 1:1 to receive as first-line treatment either FOLFIRI.3 (irinotecan, leucovorin and fluorouracil) alternating with fixed-dose rate gemcitabine as 2-month periods (FIRGEM, arm A), or fixed-dose rate gemcitabine alone (arm B). Treatment was continued until disease progression or limiting toxicity. The primary end-point was the crude progression-free survival (PFS) rate at 6 months. The study is registered with EudraCT (N° 2006-005703-34). RESULTS: Between October 2007 and March 2011, 98 patients were enroled. The observed 6-month PFS rate was 43.5% (95% confidence interval (CI), [28.6-58.4%]) in arm A reaching the Fleming decision rules criteria to reject H0 and 26.1% (95% CI [12.9-39.3%]) in arm B. Objective response rates were 37% (23-51%) in arm A and 10% (1-19%) in arm B. Median PFS (5.0 versus 3.4 months, hazard ratio (HR)=0.59 [0.38-0.90]) and overall survival (11.0 versus 8.2 months, HR=0.71 [0.46-1.10]) were higher in arm A compared to arm B. The most frequent grade 3-4 toxicities were neutropenia (49%/24%; febrile neutropenia, 4%/0% in arms A/B), diarrhoea (arm A, 12% and arm B, 0%), and nausea/vomiting (8%/4%). No toxic deaths occurred. CONCLUSION: The FIRGEM strategy appears to be effective and feasible in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer.

The prognosis of patients having received optimal therapy for nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding might be worse in daily practice than in randomized clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Combination of endoscopic haemostatic and high-dose intravenous proton-pump inhibitors is considered to be the standard care for patients with acute peptic ulcer bleeding. AIM: This study assessed predictive factors of rebleeding and death in unselected patients presented to our hospital. METHODS: Consecutive patients with nonmalignant bleeding ulcers and stigmata of recent haemorrhage who received optimal treatment, between 22 August 2003 and 15 October 2007, were studied retrospectively. RESULTS: Among 140 included patients, 45 (32%) rebled and 30 received another haemostatic endoscopy, which was successful in 20 cases. In multivariate analysis, the only significant predictive factor of rebleeding was duodenal site of the ulcer [adjusted odds ratio (OR): 2.75; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.28-6.19]. In-hospital death occurred in 27 (19%) patients; with five deaths related to uncontrolled or recurrent bleeding. In multivariate analysis, predictors of in-hospital mortality were rebleeding (adjusted OR: 3.28; 95% CI: 1.17-9.16), a Rockall score higher than 6 (adjusted OR: 9.12; 95% CI: 2.57-44.29) and bleeding occurring in the intensive care unit (adjusted OR: 15.68; 95% CI: 4.41-55.82). CONCLUSION: In unselected patients, rebleeding and mortality rates are substantially higher than those found in prospective randomized clinical trials. Intensive care unit stay is an important predictive factor of hospital mortality and should be considered in further therapeutic trials in ulcer bleeding.