Skip to main content
. 2022 Apr 6;20:101414. doi: 10.1016/j.tranon.2022.101414

Table 1.

Characteristics of major adjuvant chemotherapy studies.

Author Trial type Year Country N Treatment arms Primary endpoint Result
Regimen/Drug Survival (Months)
Kim [25] R 2020 Korea 646 1. Fluoropyrimidine-based (123)
2. Ob (123)
Median OS
Median RFS
Fluoropyrimidine-based vs Ob
Fluoropyrimidine-based vs Ob
41 vs 36 (P = 0.134)
18 vs 16 (P = 0.205)
Al Abbas [32] R 2019 America 121 1. 5‐FU (14)
2. Gem (33)
3. Ob (74)
Median OS ACT vs Ob
5-FU vs Ob
Gem vs Ob
5-FU vs Gem
45.6 vs 32.1 (P = 0.032)
87.4 vs 32.1 (P = 0.046)
38.0 vs 32.1 (P = 0.167)
87.4 vs 38.0 (P = 0.203)
1. PB (58): 5-FU (6) Gem (24) Ob (28)
2. IN (39): 5-FU (4) Gem (6) Ob (29)
3. AM (24):5-FU (4) Gem (3) Ob (17)
Median OS PB: 5-FU vs Gem vs Ob
IN: 5-FU vs Gem vs Ob
AM: 5-FU vs Gem vs Ob
40.4 vs 30.4 vs 29.4 (P. NS)
52.7 vs NR vs 32.4 (P. NS)
87.4 vs 23.5 vs 33.5 (P. NS)
1. Stage Ⅰ + Ⅱ A: ACT (10) Ob (29)
2. Stage Ⅱ B + Ⅲ: ACT (37) Ob (26)
Median OS stage Ⅰ + Ⅱ A: ACT vs Ob
stage Ⅱ B + Ⅲ: ACT vs Ob
NS (P = 0.121)
38.6 vs 21.4 (P < 0.01)
Schiergens [33] R 2015 Germany 95 1. Gem (34)
2. Ob (60)
OS Gem vs Ob NS (P = 0.832)
1. PB (46): Gem (22) Ob (24)
2. IN (47): Gem (12) Ob (35)
3. Undifferentiated (2)
Median OS PB: Gem vs Ob
IN: Gem vs Ob
32 vs 13 (P = 0.013)
35 vs 112 (P = 0.193)
Moekotte [34] R 2020 Six countries 976 1. Gem-based (194)
2. Ob (194)
Median OS Gem vs Ob NR vs 60 (P = 0.051)
1. PB/AM (194): Gem-based (97) Ob (97)
2. IN (90): Gem-based (45) Ob (45)
Median OS PB/AM: Gem-based vs Ob
IN: Gem-based vs Ob
NR vs 32 (P = 0.020)
NR vs NR (P = 0.719)
Neoptolemos [35] RCT 2012 Europe Australia Japan Canada 428 1. CF + FU (143)
2. Gem (141)
3. Ob (144)
Median OS ACT vs Ob
CF + FU vs Ob
Gem vs Ob
43.1 vs 35.2 (P = 0.03)
38.9 vs 35.2 (P = 0.74)
45.7 vs 35.2 (P = 0.10)
Ramaswamy [36] R 2019 India 214 1. PB (105): Gem-based (64) Ob (16)
2. IN (109): Gem-based (50) Ob (9)
Median OS PB: Gem vs Ob
IN: Gem vs Ob
PB: 58.09 vs 18.46 (P < 0.001)
IT: NR vs 28.62 P < 0.001)
1. Stage Ⅰ + Ⅱ + Ⅲ (214): Gem-based (135) Ob (79)
2. Stage Ⅱ + Ⅲ (139): Gem-based (114) Ob (25)
Median OS Stage Ⅰ + Ⅱ + Ⅲ: Gem-based vs Ob
Stage Ⅱ +Ⅲ: Gem-based vs Ob
NS (P = 0.603)
NR vs 22.28 (P = 0.036)
Author Trial type Year Country N Treatment arms Primary endpoint Result
Regimen/Drug Survival (Months)
Ecker [39] R 2019 Multinational 357 1. FU-based (29)
2. Gem-based (57)
3. Ob (70)
OS ACT vs Ob
FU-Based vs Ob
Gem-Based vs Ob
NS (P = 0.69)
NS (P = 0.68)
NS (P = 0.74)
1. PB (65): 5-FU (9) Gem (29) Ob (27)
2. IN (78): 5-FU (19) Gem (18) Ob (41)
OS PB: 5-FU vs Ob
Gem vs Ob
IN: 5-FU vs Ob
Gem vs Ob
NS (P = 0.94)
NS (P = 0.77)
NS (P = 0.72)
NS (P = 0.63)
1. Stage Ⅰ (30): ACT (14) Ob (16)
2. Stage Ⅱ (19): ACT (12) Ob (7)
3. Stage Ⅲ (99): ACT (52) Ob (47)
OS stage Ⅰ: ACT vs Ob
stage Ⅱ: ACT vs Ob
stage Ⅲ: ACT vs Ob
NS (P = 0.05)
NS (P = 0.55)
NS (P = 0.36)
Kim [40] R 2013 Korea 21 XELOX (21) ORR
Median TTP
Median OS
38%
7.6
19.7
1. PB (10)
2. IN (7)
Median TTP PB vs IN 6.4 vs 13.1 (P = 0.038)
Overman [41] P 2009 America 30
SBA 18
AAC 12
CAPOX (30) ORR
Median TTP
Median OS
50%(SBA 61%,AAC 33%)
11.3
20.4
Kim [42] R 2010 Korea 29 Platinum-based (29) ORR
Median TTP
Median OS
27.5%
4.9
12.5
1. FP (11)
2. XP (9)
3. GP (9)
TTP
OS
FP vs XP vs GP
FP vs XP vs GP
NS (P = 0.79)
NS (P = 0.85)

Abbreviation: R retrospective; RCT randomized controlled trial; P prospective; Gem gemcitabine; 5-FU 5-fluorouracil; CF folinic acid; XELOX capecitabin + oxaliplatin; CAPOX capecitabin + oxaliplatin; Ob observation; FP 5-FU+cisplatin; XP capecitabine + cisplatin; GP gemcitabine + cisplatin; IN intestinal; PB pancreatobiliary; AM ambiguous; ACT adjuvant chemotherapy; OS overall survival; RFS recurrence-free survival; ORR objective response rate/overall response rate; TTP time to progression; PFS progression-free survival; AAC ampullary adenocarcinoma; SBA small bowel adenocarcinoma; NR not reached; NS not state. The value is a percentage