Luján, Mauricio

e16405 Background: Pancreatic cancer remains one of the most lethal malignancies, with a rising incidence and persistently poor survival outcomes. Gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel is an established standard regimen for advanced disease, however, the conventional triweekly schedule is frequently associated with significant toxicity. Biweekly dosing has been proposed to enhance tolerability while maintaining efficacy, although evidence remains limited and heterogeneous. The objective was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of biweekly versus standard gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. Methods: A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library was conducted to identify studies comparing Biweekly versus Standard Triweekly: gemcitabine / nab-paclitaxel in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. The primary outcomes of interest included partial response, and treatment-related toxicities, specifically anemia, neutropenia, and use of growth factors. Statistical analyses were performed using Review Manager. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I 2 statistic, and risk of bias was evaluated using the ROBINS-I tool. Results: A total of 1357 patients from eight observational studies were included. Comparative analysis showed no significant difference in partial response between biweekly and standard triweekly gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer with a risk ratio (RR) of 0.77 (95% CI 0.57,1.04, p = 0.09). Similarly, no significant differences were observed between regimens in the incidence of anemia (RR = 1.09; 95% CI 0.74–1.59; p = 0.66) or neutropenia (RR = 1.09; 95% CI 0.86–1.37; p = 0.48). however, growth factor use was significantly lower with biweekly dosing (RR = 0.71; 95% CI 0.58–0.87; p = 0.0009). Overall survival was comparable between groups RR = 1.02 (95% CI 0.71, 1.45 p = 0.93). Conclusions: Administration of gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel biweekly yielded clinical outcomes and safety profiles comparable to the conventional regimen, while significantly reducing the need for growth factors as supportive care. These data suggest that a biweekly regimen could be an effective alternative; however, further prospective randomized studies are necessary to verify these findings and better understand their clinical application.