Is the therapeutic index better with gemcitabine-based chemoradiation than with 5-fluorouracil-based chemoradiation in locally advanced pancreatic cancer?

Concurrent radiotherapy and gemcitabine for unresectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma: impact of adjuvant chemotherapy on survival

PURPOSE

To retrospectively analyze results of concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) using gemcitabine (GEM) for unresectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Records of 108 patients treated with concurrent external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) and GEM were reviewed. The median dose of EBRT in all 108 patients was 50.4 Gy (range, 3.6-60.8 Gy), usually administered in conventional fractionations (1.8-2 Gy/day). During radiotherapy, most patients received GEM at a dosage of 250 to 350 mg/m(2) intravenously weekly for approximately 6 weeks. After CCRT, 59 patients (54.6%) were treated with adjuvant chemotherapy (AC), mainly with GEM. The median follow-up for all 108 patients was 11.0 months (range, 0.4-37.9 months).

RESULTS

Initial responses after CCRT for 85 patients were partial response: 26 patients, no change: 51 patients and progressive disease: 8 patients. Local progression was observed in 35 patients (32.4%), and the 2-year local control (LC) rate in all patients was 41.9%. Patients treated with total doses of 50 Gy or more had significantly more favorable LC rates (2-year LC rate, 42.9%) than patients treated with total doses of less than 50 Gy (2-year LC rate, 29.6%). Regional lymph node recurrence was found in only 1 patient, and none of the 57 patients with clinical N0 disease had regional lymph node recurrence. The 2-year overall survival (OS) rate and the median survival time in all patients were 23.5% and 11.6 months, respectively. Patients treated with AC had significantly more favorable OS rates (2-year OS, 31.8%) than those treated without AC (2-year OS, 12.4%; p < 0.0001). On multivariate analysis, AC use and clinical T stage were significant prognostic factors for OS.

CONCLUSIONS

CCRT using GEM yields a relatively favorable LC rate for unresectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma, and CCRT with AC conferred a survival benefit compared to CCRT without AC.

Gemcitabine alone versus gemcitabine plus radiotherapy in patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer: an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group trial

PURPOSE

The purpose of this trial was to evaluate the role of radiation therapy with concurrent gemcitabine (GEM) compared with GEM alone in patients with localized unresectable pancreatic cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with localized unresectable adenocarcinoma of the pancreas were randomly assigned to receive GEM alone (at 1,000 mg/m(2)/wk for weeks 1 to 6, followed by 1 week rest, then for 3 of 4 weeks) or GEM (600 mg/m(2)/wk for weeks 1 to 5, then 4 weeks later 1,000 mg/m(2) for 3 of 4 weeks) plus radiotherapy (starting on day 1, 1.8 Gy/Fx for total of 50.4 Gy). Measurement of quality of life using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Hepatobiliary questionnaire was also performed.

RESULTS

Of 74 patients entered on trial and randomly assigned to receive GEM alone (arm A; n = 37) or GEM plus radiation (arm B; n = 34), patients in arm B had greater incidence of grades 4 and 5 toxicities (41% v 9%), but grades 3 and 4 toxicities combined were similar (77% in A v 79% in B). No statistical differences were seen in quality of life measurements at 6, 15 to 16, and 36 weeks. The primary end point was survival, which was 9.2 months (95% CI, 7.9 to 11.4 months) and 11.1 months (95% CI, 7.6 to 15.5 months) for arms A and B, respectively (one-sided P = .017 by stratified log-rank test).

CONCLUSION

This trial demonstrates improved overall survival with the addition of radiation therapy to GEM in patients with localized unresectable pancreatic cancer, with acceptable toxicity.

Gemcitabine/cisplatin versus 5-fluorouracil/mitomycin C chemoradiotherapy in locally advanced pancreatic cancer: a retrospective analysis of 93 patients

Background

Despite of a growing number of gemcitabine based chemoradiotherapy studies in locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC), 5-fluorouracil based regimens are still regarded to be standard and the debate of superiority between the two drugs is going on. The aim of this retrospective analysis was to evaluate the effect of two concurrent chemoradiotherapy regimens using 5-fluorouracil or gemcitabine to compare their effect and tolerance.

Methods

We have performed a single centre retrospective analysis of 93 patients treated with conventionally fractionated radiotherapy of 55.8 Gray using either concurrent 5-fluorouracil, 1 g/m² on days 1-5 and 29-33 of radiotherapy and 10 mg/m² of mitomycin C on day 1, 29 of radiotherapy (FM group, 35 patients) versus gemcitabine (300 mg/m²) and cisplatin, (30 mg/m²) on days 1, 8, 22, and 29 (GC group, 58 patients). Primary endpoint was the median overall survival (OS) rate.

Results

The median OS rate was 12.7 months in the GC group and 9.7 months in the FM group. The 1-year OS rate was 53% versus 40%, respectively (p = 0.009). GC led to more grade 3 leukocytopenia and thrombocytopenia than FM, but not to more grade 4 myelosuppression. Thrombocytopenia was the most frequently observed grade 4 toxicity in both groups (11% after FM versus 12% after GC). No grade 3/4 febrile neutropenia was observed. Grade 3 nausea was more common in the FM group (20% versus 9%) and grade 4 nausea was observed in one patient per group only.

Conclusions

GC was superior to FM for overall survival and both regimens were similar in terms of tolerance. We conclude that GC leads to encouraging results and that the use of FM for chemoradiotherapy in LAPC cannot be recommended without concerns.

Phase II study of radiation therapy combined with weekly low-dose gemcitabine for locally advanced, unresectable pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

Through a phase I study with a fixed radiation dose of 54 Gy and escalating doses of weekly gemcitabine, we established a recommended dose of gemcitabine at 250 mg/m in combination with radiation therapy for patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this phase-II study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the regimen which was established in the phase I study.

METHODS

In all patients with unresectable stage III and limited stage IV pancreatic cancer with no distant metastasis except for para-aortic lymph node involvement at a level as low as the left renal vein, a total dose of 54 Gy was delivered in 30 fractions of 1.8 Gy/d. Gemcitabine was given weekly at a dose of 250 mg/m.

RESULTS

Between December 2002 and March 2006, 22 patients were enrolled in this study and one withdrew after enrollment. Twenty of 21 patients (95%) completed the protocol therapy. Radiologic partial response was observed in 6 and stable disease was noted in 15. Normalization of the tumor marker (CA19-9) occurred in 61% of patients. The 1-year survival rate was 74% and the median survival time was 16.6 months. The major toxicity was leucopenia; grade 3 in 14 (67%), anorexia grade 3 in 2 (9.5%), and grade 3 gastric ulcer in 2 (10%) in National Cancer Institute's Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 3.0 (NCI-CTCAE v3.0). Neither grade 4 nor 5 was recognized.

CONCLUSION

Treatment with gemcitabine combined with radiation therapy according to the present schedule is well tolerated and can provide prolonged survival in patients with localized, unresectable pancreatic cancer.

Pretreatment carbohydrate antigen 19-9 level indicates tumor response, early distant metastasis, overall survival, and therapeutic selection in localized and unresectable pancreatic cancer

PURPOSE

The use of chemoradiotherapy (CRT) for localized and unresectable pancreatic cancer has been disputed because of high probability of distant metastasis. Thus, we analyzed the effect of clinical parameters on tumor response, early distant metastasis within 3 months (DM(3m)), and overall survival to identify an indicator for selecting patients who would benefit from CRT.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

This study retrospectively analyzed the data from 84 patients with localized and unresectable pancreatic cancer who underwent CRT between August 2002 and October 2009. Sex, age, tumor size, histological differentiation, N classification, pre- and post-treatment carbohydrate antigen (CA) 19-9 level, and CA 19-9 percent decrease were analyzed to identify risk factors associated with tumor response, DM(3m), and overall survival.

RESULTS

For all 84 patients, the median survival time was 12.5 months (range, 2-31.9 months), objective response (complete response or partial response) to CRT was observed in 28 patients (33.3%), and DM(3m) occurred in 24 patients (28.6%). Multivariate analysis showed that pretreatment CA 19-9 level (≤400 vs. >400 U/ml) was significantly associated with tumor response (45.1% vs. 15.2%), DM(3m) (19.6% vs. 42.4%), and median overall survival time (15.1 vs. 9.7 months) (p < 0.05 for all three parameters).

CONCLUSION

For patients with localized and unresectable pancreatic cancer, pretreatment CA 19-9 level could be helpful in predicting tumor response, DM(3m), and overall survival and identifying patients who will benefit from CRT.

Gemcitabine in the chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced pancreatic cancer: a meta-analysis

AIMS

Whether gemcitabine based chemoradiotherapy (GEM-based CRT) is superior to 5-fluorouracil based chemoradiotherapy (5-FU-based CRT) for locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) remains uncertain. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effect of GEM-based CRT compared with 5-FU-based CRT.

METHODS

Electronic database including Medline, Embase, Cochrane controlled trials register, PubMed (update to December 2010) and manual bibliography searches were carried out. A meta-analysis of all randomized clinical trials (RCTs) or other comparative studies comparing GEM-based CRT and 5-FU-based CRT were performed.

RESULTS

Three RCTs and one retrospective comparative study including 229 patients were assessed. Meta-analysis showed survival advantage of GEM-based CRT compared with 5-FU-based CRT for 12-month (12-mo) survival rates (SRs) (RR=1.54, 95% CI 1.05-2.26, p=0.03). Moreover, there were also trends of benefit for SR after 6-months (RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.98-1.30, p=0.09) and 24-months (24-mo: RR 2.41, 95% CI 0.90-6.48, p=0.08), though the trends did not reach statistical significance. More frequent severe acute hematologic toxicities were found in the GEM-based CRT group.

CONCLUSIONS

The meta-analysis found that GEM-based CRT was better than 5-FU-based CRT in the treatment of LAPC, especially for 12-mo SRs. However, the acute toxicity should be carefully regarded.

Phase I study of conformal radiotherapy and concurrent full-dose gemcitabine with erlotinib for unresected pancreatic cancer

PURPOSE

To determine the recommended dose of radiotherapy when combined with full-dose gemcitabine and erlotinib for unresected pancreas cancer.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Patients with unresected pancreatic cancer (Zubrod performance status 0-2) were eligible for the present study. Gemcitabine was given weekly for 7 weeks (1,000 mg/m(2)) with erlotinib daily for 8 weeks (100 mg). A final toxicity assessment was performed in Week 9. Radiotherapy (starting at 30 Gy in 2-Gy fractions, 5 d/wk) was given to the gross tumor plus a 1-cm margin starting with the first dose of gemcitabine. A standard 3 plus 3 dose escalation (an additional 4 Gy within 2 days for each dose level) was used, except for the starting dose level, which was scheduled to contain 6 patients. In general, Grade 3 or greater gastrointestinal toxicity was considered a dose-limiting toxicity, except for Grade 3 anorexia or Grade 3 fatigue alone.

RESULTS

A total of 20 patients were treated (10 men and 10 women). Nausea, vomiting, and infection were significantly associated with the radiation dose (p = .01, p = .03, and p = .03, respectively). Of the 20 patients, 5 did not complete treatment and were not evaluable for dose-escalation purposes (3 who developed progressive disease during treatment and 2 who electively discontinued it). Dose-limiting toxicity occurred in none of 6 patients at 30 Gy, 2 of 6 at 34 Gy, and 1 of 3 patients at 38 Gy.

CONCLUSION

The results of the present study have indicated that the recommended Phase II dose is 30 Gy in 15 fractions.

Neoadjuvant GTX chemotherapy and IMRT-based chemoradiation for borderline resectable pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

To improve the likelihood of achieving a margin-free resection, neoadjuvant induction chemotherapy with GTX (gemcitabine, docetaxel, and capecitabine) followed by 5-FU-IMRT was administered to patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. The utility of computed tomography (CT), endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), positron emission tomography (PET), and CA 19-9 during diagnostic workup and assessment of response was also examined.

METHODS

Seventeen patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer received a median of three cycles of neoadjuvant GTX induction chemotherapy followed by 5-FU-IMRT with dose painting. CA 19-9, CT mass size, and PET SUV were examined before and after neoadjuvant treatment.

RESULTS

Diagnostic EUS and CT scans displayed similar mean mass sizes and extent of vascular involvement. Eight of the 17 patients achieved an R0 resection. Median CA 19-9 levels, CT mass size, and PET SUV all significantly decreased after neoadjuvant therapy. The median progression-free survival and overall survival were 10.48 and 15.64 months, respectively. Six patients are still alive.

CONCLUSIONS

Neoadjuvant GTX induction chemotherapy followed by 5-FU-IMRT shows promise in improving the likelihood of resectability with negative margins in borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. CT and EUS play complimentary roles during diagnostic workup. CT scans, CA 19-9, and PET scans are useful in judging response to neoadjuvant therapy.

Chemotherapy followed by chemoradiotherapy in locally advanced pancreatic cancer: A literature review and report of two cases

The optimal treatment of patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer remains to be elucidated. Chemo-radiotherapy is regarded as the treatment of choice, and studies have examined the sequential schedule of induction chemoradiotherapy followed by chemoradiotherapy, with favourable results. This study investigated the principal clinical trials of chemoradiotherapy treatment in locally advanced pancreatic cancer in 2 patients. The 2 patients received induction chemotherapy with gemcitabine 1000 mg/mq day on days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle for two cycles, followed by chemoradiotherapy with concurrent radiosensitizer bi-weekly gemcitabine 50 mg/mq for six weeks. Radiotherapy consisted of an external conformational 3D treatment administered to the pancreatic bed and locoregional nodes, with a total dose of 4500 Gy fractionated in 180 Gy/day, and a boost of 900 Gy to the neoplastic mass. Efficacy was evaluated four weeks after the end of treatment by a computed tomography (CT) scan and by fluorodeoxyglucose positron-emission tomography/CT. The patients underwent further treatment with periodical instrumental evaluation. A disease control rate was observed in the two patients following sequential treatment, enhanced by subsequent treatment. The two patients remained alive 23-24 months following the diagnosis. The sequential treatment schedule therefore was an effective option in our locally advanced pancreatic cancer patients. A phase III trial and further investigation are required to verify this option in clinical practice.

Prospective phase I study of capecitabine and oxaliplatin concurrent with radiation therapy for the treatment of locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma, and retrospective comparison to concurrent 5-fluorouracil/radiation and gemcitabine/radiation

PURPOSE

The aims of this study is to determine the maximum tolerated dose of capecitabine and oxaliplatin (CAPOX) delivered concurrent with radiation therapy (RT) in the treatment of locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma and to retrospectively compare outcomes with this regimen to concurrent 5-fluorouracil or capecitabine with RT (5FU-RT) or concurrent gemcitabine-based chemotherapy with RT (GEM-RT).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twelve patients were enrolled in a phase I study using 50.4 Gy RT concurrent with capecitabine chemotherapy (twice daily, 7 days per week) and oxaliplatin (once weekly during weeks 1, 2, 4, and 5). Capecitabine and oxaliplatin doses were 400 mg/m(2) and 50 mg/m(2), respectively, at dose level 1; 600 mg/m(2) and 50 mg/m(2) at level 2; and 600 mg/m(2) and 60 mg/m(2) at level 3. A standard dose of gemcitabine was recommended following RT or following surgery (if done). The outcomes of patients treated with this regimen were retrospectively compared to 20 patients treated with 5FU-RT and 30 patients treated with GEM-RT.

RESULTS

Dose level 3 was tolerated with acceptable toxicity. Survival in patients receiving CAPOX-RT did not differ from GEM-RT or 5FU-RT. Response of the primary tumor was observed in 38% of patients treated with CAPOX-RT, 31% of patients treated with 5FU-RT, and 66% of patients treated with GEM-RT (p = 0.03 GEM-RT versus 5FU-RT).

CONCLUSIONS

CAPOX-RT has acceptable toxicity. A retrospective comparison shows higher response rate with GEM-RT versus 5FU-RT, but this difference did not translate into improvement in overall survival.

Preoperative capecitabine and concurrent radiation for borderline resectable pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

Patients with borderline resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDA) represent a high-risk group of patients due to tumor or patient-related characteristics. The optimal management of these patients has not been fully defined.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All patients undergoing evaluation for PDA between 2005 and 2008 were identified. Clinical, radiographic, and pathological data were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were staged as borderline resectable using the M.D. Anderson Cancer Center (MDACC) classification.

RESULTS

A total of 170 patients with PDA were identified, 40 with borderline resectable disease. Of these, 34 borderline resectable patients (85%) completed neoadjuvant therapy and were restaged; pancreatic resection was completed in 16 patients (46%). Also, 8 patients completed 50 Gy of radiation in 28 fractions in 6 weeks, whereas 8 patients received 50 Gy in 20 fractions in 4 weeks plus chronomodulated capecitabine. An R0 resection was achieved in 12 of the 16 patients (75%). Also, 5 patients (63%) treated in 20 fractions had >90% pathologic response versus 1 (13%) treated in 28 fractions (P < .05). Borderline resectable patients completing surgery had similar survival to patients with resectable disease who underwent surgery. Patients receiving accelerated fractionation radiation had improved survival compared with patients treated with standard fractionation protocol.

CONCLUSIONS

A neoadjuvant approach to borderline resectable PDA identifies patients who are most likely to benefit from pancreatic resection. Preoperative capecitabine-based chemoradiation is an effective, well-tolerated treatment for these patients. Neoadjuvant therapy for borderline resectable PDA warrants further investigation using treatment schedules that can safely intensify irradiation dose.

Current and emerging therapies for the treatment of pancreatic cancer

Pancreatic adenocarcinoma carries a dismal prognosis and remains a significant cause of cancer morbidity and mortality. Most patients survive less than 1 year; chemotherapeutic options prolong life minimally. The best chance for long-term survival is complete resection, which offers a 3-year survival of only 15%. Most patients who do undergo resection will go on to die of their disease. Research in chemotherapy for metastatic disease has made only modest progress and the standard of care remains the purine analog gemcitabine. For resectable pancreatic cancer, presumed micrometastases provide the rationale for adjuvant chemotherapy and chemoradiation (CRT) to supplement surgical management. Numerous randomized control trials, none definitive, of adjuvant chemotherapy and CRT have been conducted and are summarized in this review, along with recent developments in how unresectable disease can be subcategorized according to the potential for eventual curative resection. This review will also emphasize palliative care and discuss some avenues of research that show early promise.

The role of radiotherapy in locally advanced pancreatic carcinoma

The prognosis for locally advanced pancreatic carcinoma remains dismal despite advances in chemotherapy and radiotherapy over the past few decades. The use of radiotherapy for pancreatic carcinoma is often disputed because of the hypothesis that patients with pancreatic cancer die from distant metastases. It is well accepted that the greatest chance for cure of pancreatic cancer involves surgical resection of the primary tumor. However, there is much controversy about the role of radiotherapy in local disease control. The aim of this Review is to discuss data from the available studies, both prospective and retrospective, that evaluate treatment options for locally advanced pancreatic cancer. We focus on the benefits associated with local therapies, including radiotherapy and surgical resection, as they relate to improved local disease control, prolonged overall survival and improved symptom control.

The role of radiotherapy in multimodal treatment of pancreatic carcinoma

Pancreatic ductal carcinoma is one of the most lethal malignancies, but in recent years a number of positive developments have occurred in the management of pancreatic carcinoma. This article aims to give an overview of the current knowledge regarding the role of radiotherapy in the treatment of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). The results of meta-analyses, phase III-studies, and phase II-studies using chemoradiotherapy and chemotherapy for resectable and non-resectable PDAC were reviewed. The use of radiotherapy is discussed in the neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings as well as in the locally advanced situation. Whenever possible, radiotherapy should be performed as simultaneous chemoradiotherapy. Patients with PDAC should be offered entry into clinical trials to identify optimal treatment results.

Curative radiation therapy for pancreatic malignancies

Surgery is generally considered as the only curative therapy for pancreatic cancer; however, even with optimal surgery, long-term cure is achieved in very few patients, thus highlighting the need for adjuvant therapies. Radiation therapy, usually in combination with chemotherapy, plays a role in the setting of unresectable, nonmetastatic pancreatic cancer. Its role in the adjuvant setting remains controversial and as yet undefined. This article reviews the role of radiation therapy in the adjuvant and definitive settings, and describes recent improvements in the delivery of radiotherapy that allow for improved dose delivery with decreased toxicity.

Chemoradiation in pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a literature review

Adenocarcinoma of the exocrine pancreas has an annual incidence of 7,400 cases in the U.K. In comparison with other common cancers of solid organs, namely, breast, colorectal, and prostate cancer, pancreatic cancer has a high morbidity and mortality. Radical resection is possible in only 15%-20% of patients, and only 3%-4% of all patients presenting with this condition achieve long-term control and cure. Various strategies in the form of neoadjuvant and adjuvant treatment have been employed over the years to improve outcome, with limited success. Systemic chemotherapy remains the gold standard in the metastatic setting in good performance status patients, and adjuvant chemotherapy after resection of localized and locally advanced cancer has been found to improve outcome. The role of radiotherapy, however, remains controversial and is an area that merits further investigation in well-conducted multicenter trials at various stages of the disease in combination with systemic agents and exploiting recent advances in the delivery of radiotherapy. In this article, we review the published literature on the use of chemoradiation as a modality in various stages of pancreatic adenocarcinoma and highlight areas that future trials in this field should target for a way forward in this malignancy.

Phase II study of gemcitabine chemotherapy alone for locally advanced pancreatic carcinoma: JCOG0506

OBJECTIVE

Chemoradiotherapy with 5-fluorouracil has been accepted as a standard care for locally advanced pancreatic cancer; however, it has not been shown to be superior to chemotherapy alone in the gemcitabine era. The present multicentre phase II study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of Gem monotherapy against locally advanced pancreatic cancer in comparison with the historical data of chemoradiotherapy with 5-fluorouracil.

METHODS

Eligibility criteria included patients with histologically proven locally advanced pancreatic cancer, all lesions encompassed by a square of 15 cm on one side, no prior treatment, good performance status and adequate organ function. Gemcitabine was given intravenously at a dose of 1000 mg/m(2) over 30 min on days 1, 8 and 15, repeated every 4 weeks. The primary endpoint was %1-year survival. Expected and threshold %1-year survival were 40 and 25%, respectively.

RESULTS

Between January 2006 and February 2007, 50 locally advanced pancreatic cancer patients were registered. The major grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropaenia (62%), thrombocytopaenia (18%), fatigue (12%) and infection-biliary tree (12%). Haematological toxicity was mostly transient and there was no episode of infection with grade 3-4 neutropaenia. Up to the final follow-up in February 2009, the median overall survival was 15.0 months with a %1-year survival of 64.0%.

CONCLUSIONS

Gemcitabine monotherapy demonstrated far better survival than historical data for chemoradiotherapy with 5-fluorouracil with mild toxicities. Gemcitabine could be consider as a standard treatment for locally advanced pancreatic cancer.

Estimating optimal dose of twice-weekly gemcitabine for concurrent chemoradiotherapy in unresectable pancreatic carcinoma: mature results of GEMRT-01 Phase I trial

PURPOSE

To accurately determine the maximal tolerated dose, feasibility, and antitumor activity of concurrent chemoradiotherapy including twice-weekly gemcitabine in patients with unresectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Eligible patients with histologically proven adenocarcinoma of the pancreas were included in this Phase I trial. Radiotherapy was delivered to a total dose of 50 Gy. Concurrent chemotherapy with twice-weekly gemcitabine was administered during the 5 weeks of radiotherapy, from an initial dose of 30 mg/m(2). The gemcitabine doses were escalated in 10-mg/m(2) increments in a three-plus-three design, until dose-limiting toxicities were observed.

RESULTS

A total of 35 patients were included in the trial. The feasibility of chemoradiotherapy was high, because all the patients received the planned total radiation dose, and 26 patients (74%) received > or = 70% of the planned chemotherapy dose. The mean total delivered dose of gemcitabine was 417 mg/m(2) (i.e., 77% of the prescribed dose). The maximal tolerated dose of twice-weekly gemcitabine was 70 mg/m(2). Of the 35 patients, 13 had a partial response (37%) and 21 had stable disease (60%). Overall, the median survival and the 6-, 12-, and 18-month survival rates were 10.6 months and 82%, 31%, and 11%, respectively. Survival was significantly longer in patients with an initial performance status of 0 or 1 (p = .004).

CONCLUSION

Our mature data have indicated that gemcitabine doses can be increased < or = 70 mg/m(2), when delivered twice-weekly with concurrent radiotherapy. This combination shows promises to achieve better recurrence-free and overall survival. These results will serve as a basis for further implementation of the multimodal treatment of locally advanced pancreatic carcinoma.

A systematic review of resectability and survival after concurrent chemoradiation in primarily unresectable pancreatic cancer

PURPOSE

The objective of this study was to determine the effect on resection rate and survival of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for primarily unresectable locally advanced pancreatic carcinoma.

METHODS

A systematic review of recently published literature was performed. Resection rates and survival data were derived from reports published from 2000 onwards. Only recent studies, based on radiotherapy with standard dose and fractionation, have been analyzed.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies with a total of 510 patients met selection criteria. A resection rate of 8.3-64.2% was reported (median, 26.5%). Of the operated patients, 57.1-100% (median, 87.5%) had R0 tumor resection. Most papers reported occasional pathological complete responses (CR, 3.0-8.8%). When outcome in all patients was considered, median survival ranged from 9 to 23 (median, 13.3) months, comparing favorably with literature data based on concurrent chemoradiation alone (range, 8.6-13 months). Surprisingly, in patients with unresectable tumor at presentation, median survival after surgery ranged from 16.4 to 32.3 (median, 23.6) months.

CONCLUSIONS

The finding of a high proportion of R0 resection among all resections performed confirms the activity of neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy and should not be neglected. Based on these data, patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer without disease progression after chemoradiotherapy should be considered for radical surgery.

Feasibility and efficacy of combination therapy with preoperative full-dose gemcitabine, concurrent three-dimensional conformal radiation, surgery, and postoperative liver perfusion chemotherapy for T3-pancreatic cancer

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate both the feasibility and efficacy of our combined therapy, which consisted of preoperative chemoradiation, surgery, and postoperative liver perfusion chemotherapy (LPC) for patients with T3 (extended beyond the pancreatic confines) cancer of the pancreas.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Because of the high incidence of local recurrence and liver metastasis, long-term outcomes for patients after resection of T3-pancreatic cancer are extremely poor.

METHODS

During the period from 2002 to 2007, 38 patients with T3-pancreatic cancers consented to receive a combination of preoperative chemoradiation, surgery, and postoperative LPC. With the aid of 3D radiation planning, irradiation fields were constructed that included both the primary pancreatic tumor and retropancreatic tissues while taking care to exclude any section of the gastrointestinal tract. The total dose of radiation was 50 Gy (2 Gy x 25 fractions/5 weeks) and was administered in combination with gemcitabine treatments (1000 mg/m/week x 9/3 months). Preoperative restaging via computerized tomography and intraoperative inspection were used to determine if pancreatectomy was indicated. For respected cases, one catheter was placed into the gastroduodenal artery and another one into the superior mesenteric vein. Postoperatively, 5-FU (125 mg/day x 28 days) was infused via each of these 2 routes.

RESULTS

Preoperative chemoradiation was completed for all 38 patients, including 3 patients who required gemcitabine-dose reduction. Seven patients (18%) did not undergo surgical resection because either distant metastases or progressive local tumors had been detected after chemoradiation. The remaining 31 patients (82%) underwent pancreatectomy plus postoperative LPC, without postoperative or in-hospital mortality. The 5-year survival rate after pancreatectomy was 53%, with low incidences of both local recurrence (9%) and liver metastasis (7%). Postoperative histopathologic study revealed a marked degenerative change in cancer tissue, showing negative surgical margins (R0) for 30 patients (96%) and negative nodal involvement for 28 patients (90%).

CONCLUSION

Results of this trial suggest that a combination of preoperative full-dose gemcitabine, concurrent 3D-conformal radiation, surgery, and postoperative LPC is feasible for the treatment of T3-pancreatic cancer. Using the method described in this article, we were able to effectively reduce the incidence of both local and liver recurrence. Therefore, this type of combination therapy seems promising for improving long-term outcomes for patients with T3-cancers of the pancreas. This study is registered with University hospital Medical information Network clinical trials Registry number, UMIN000001804.

External beam radiotherapy plus 24-hour continuous infusion of gemcitabine in unresectable pancreatic carcinoma: long-term results of a phase II study

PURPOSE

To evaluate the efficacy of gemcitabine-based chemoradiation (CT-RT) in treating patients (pts) affected by locally advanced pancreatic cancers (LAPC).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Weekly gemcitabine (100 mg/m(2)) was given as a 24-hour infusion during the course of three-dimensional radiotherapy (50.4 Gy to the tumor, 39.6 Gy to the nodes). After CT-RT, pts received five cycles of sequential chemotherapy with gemcitabine (1000 mg/m(2); 1, 8, q21). Response rate was assessed according to World Health Organization criteria 6 weeks after the end of CT-RT. Local control (LC), time to progression (TTP), metastases-free survival (MFS), and overall survival (OS) were analyzed by the Kaplan Meier method.

RESULTS

Forty pts (male/female 22/18; median age 62 years, range, 36-76) were treated from 2000 to 2005. The majority had T4 tumour (n = 34, 85%), six pts (15%) had T3 tumour. Sixteen pts (40%) were node positive at diagnosis. Grade 3-4 acute toxicity was observed in 21 pts (52.5%). Thirty pts (75%) completed the treatment schedule. A clinical response was achieved in 12 pts (30%). With a median follow-up of 76 months (range, 32-98), 2-year LC was 39.6% (median, 12 months), 2-year TTP was 18.4% (median, 10 months), and 2-year MFS was 29.7% (median, 10 months). Two-year OS (25%; median, 15.5 months) compared with our previous study on 5-fluorouracil-based CT-RT (2.8%) was significantly improved (p <0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Gemcitabine CT-RT seems correlated with improved outcomes. Healthier patients who are likely to complete the treatment schedule may benefit most from this therapy.

The integration of chemoradiation in the care of patient with localized pancreatic cancer

The use of chemoradiation for patients with localized pancreatic cancer is controversial. Although some randomized trials have indicated that chemoradiation improves the median survival of patients with locally advanced as well as resected pancreatic cancer, other more recent trials have called into question the role of chemoradiation and have supported the use of chemotherapy. In the adjuvant setting, the high local tumor recurrence/persistence rate in all trials probably reflects the inclusion of patients with incompletely resected tumors, whose prognosis is similar to the prognosis of patients with locally advanced who do not undergo resection, making these trials difficult to interpret. More precise clinical staging and selection of patients appropriate for surgical resection is an important goal. The keys to the successful integration of radiotherapy in the care of patients with localized pancreatic cancer are selection, sequencing and smaller treatment volumes. A strategy of initial chemotherapy followed by consolidation with a well-tolerated chemoradiation regimen both in the adjuvant and locally advanced settings maximizes benefits of both treatment options, which are in fact complementary. Herein, we discuss the rationale for this approach as well as the ongoing investigation of novel radiation approaches designed to enhance outcome through the molecular and physical targeting of disease as well as the investigation of neoadjuvant chemoradiation in radiographically resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer.

Chemoradiotherapy in the management of locally advanced pancreatic carcinoma: a qualitative systematic review

PURPOSE

Pancreatic carcinoma is one of the leading causes of cancer-related mortality. At time of diagnosis, 30% of patients present with a locally advanced unresectable but nonmetastatic pancreatic carcinoma (LAPC). The French program Standards, Options, and Recommendations was promoted to conduct a qualitative systematic review to evaluate the role of radiotherapy in patients with LAPC.

METHODS

A search to identify eligible studies was undertaken using the MEDLINE database. All phase III randomized trials and systematic reviews evaluating the role of radiotherapy in LAPC were included, together with some noncontrolled studies if no phase III trials were retrieved. The quality and clinical relevance of the studies were evaluated using validated checklists, which allowed associating each result with a level of evidence.

RESULTS

Twenty-one studies were included, as follows: two meta-analyses, 13 randomized trials, and six nonrandomized trials. Chemoradiotherapy increases overall survival when compared with best supportive care (level of evidence C) or with exclusive radiotherapy (level B1), but is more toxic (level B1). Chemoradiotherapy is not superior to chemotherapy in terms of survival (level B1) and increases toxicity (level A). Recent data favor limited irradiation to the tumor volume (level C). Fluorouracil is still the reference chemotherapy in association with radiotherapy (level B1). Induction chemotherapy before chemoradiotherapy improves survival (level C).

CONCLUSION

No standard treatment exists, but there are two options for treatment of LAPC; these are gemcitabine-based chemotherapy and chemoradiotherapy. Induction chemotherapy followed by a chemoradiotherapy is a promising strategy for selection of patients without early metastatic/progressing disease.

Results of a retrospective analysis of gemcitabine as a second-line treatment after chemoradiotherapy and maintenance chemotherapy using 5-fluorouracil in patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

Many studies of concurrent chemoradiation therapy with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) for locally advanced pancreatic cancer have been reported with a median survival time of approximately 10 months. Recently, gemcitabine (GEM) has been administered immediately after chemoradiation. The clinical outcome of chemoradiation therapy in conjunction with 5-FU and second-line chemotherapy with GEM after disease progression has not been clarified.

METHODS

Patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer were treated with concurrent radiation therapy (1.8 Gy/fraction; total dose, 50.4 Gy) with 5-FU (200 mg/m(2) every day) until disease progression, followed by GEM (1000 mg/m(2), days 1, 8, 15, and every 4 weeks) as second-line therapy.

RESULTS

Of the 18 patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer who received chemoradiation therapy with 5-FU, there were three partial responses, giving a response rate of 17%. The median time to progression was 170 days. The median survival time was 443 days. During chemoradiation therapy, the incidences of grade 3 or 4 anorexia, nausea, mucositis, and gastric ulcer were 33%, 22%, 17%, and 17%, respectively. Sixteen patients received second-line chemotherapy with GEM, of whom one patient had a partial response. The median time to progression from the initiation of GEM was 113 days, and median overall survival time was 231 days. Major toxicities were hematological toxicities: grade 3 or 4 leukopenia in 75% and anemia in 31%.

CONCLUSIONS

The treatment strategy with concurrent chemoradiation and maintenance chemotherapy with 5-FU followed by second-line chemotherapy with GEM may be an option for locally advanced pancreatic cancer.

Borderline resectable pancreatic cancer: on the edge of survival

BACKGROUND

Patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer are at high risk of having positive surgical margins due to involvement of the tumor with adjacent vasculature. This article reviews the management of this subset of pancreatic cancer patients.

METHODS

The authors review the current definitions of borderline resectable pancreatic cancer and how it is diagnosed and staged. The history, current approaches, and future directions in neoadjuvant therapy for borderline resectable pancreatic cancer are also reviewed with emphasis on various chemotherapy regimens that have been used. The application of intensity-modulated radiation therapy and image-guided radiation therapy that accounts for respiratory motion to targeting the gross tumor volume in the pancreas are discussed, and the promise of integrating targeted therapies in neoadjuvant treatment programs is highlighted.

RESULTS

The use of neoadjuvant treatment programs that employ gemcitabine-based chemotherapy regimens followed by chemoradiation increases the likelihood of subsequent margin-negative resection in borderline resectable pancreatic cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

There has been progress in the imaging, staging, surgical technique, and the use of chemotherapy and chemoradiotherapy in the management of borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. Patients can benefit from multidisciplinary management at high-volume pancreatic cancer treatment centers.

Chemoradiotherapy with twice-weekly administration of low-dose gemcitabine for locally advanced pancreatic cancer

AIM: To evaluate the chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced pancreatic cancer utilizing low dose gemcitabine as a radiation sensitizer administered twice weekly.

METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of chemoradiotherapy utilizing gemcitabine administered twice weekly at a dose of 40 mg/m². After that, maintenance systemic chemotherapy with gemcitabine, at a dose of 1000 mg/m², was administered weekly for 3 wk with 1-wk rest until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity developed.

RESULTS: Eighteen patients with locally advanced unresectable pancreatic cancer were enrolled. Three of those patients could not continue with the therapy; one patient had interstitial pneumonia during radiation therapy and two other patients showed liver metastasis or peritoneal metastasis during an early stage of the therapy. The median survival was 15.0 mo and the overall 1-year survival rate was 60%, while the median progression-free survival was 8.0 mo. The subgroup which showed the reduction of tumor development, more than 50% showed a tendency for a better prognosis; however, other parameters including age, gender and performance status did not correlate with survival. The median survival of the groups that died of liver metastasis and peritoneal metastasis were 13.0 mo and 27.7 mo, respectively.

CONCLUSION: Chemoradiotherapy with low-dose gemcitabine administered twice weekly could be effective to patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer; however, patients developing liver metastases had a worse prognosis. Another chemoradiotherapy strategy might be needed for those patients, such as administrating one or two cycles of chemotherapy initially, followed by chemoradiotherapy for the cases with no distant metastases.

Upper gastrointestinal tumors: current status and future perspectives

Recent therapeutic developments that have provided new promising and successful approaches to the treatment of solid tumors are in large part due to the increasing understanding of their molecular biology. Despite this progress, these new therapies have provided minimal benefit in the treatment of upper gastrointestinal (GI) malignancies. Hence, the overall survival of patients with upper GI tumors remains dismal. These disappointing results are largely due to the lack of early detection strategies, inadequate medical treatments and the poor understanding of upper GI tumor biology. Clinically, the treatment paradigm has been evolving for these malignancies. Esophageal cancer is now commonly treated with preoperative chemoradiation in the USA, in both academic and community cancer centers, due to its theoretical advantages. Adjuvant chemotherapy and chemoradiation are also frequently used in patients with pancreatic cancer. Exciting prospects remain in the medical and surgical treatment of these malignancies with the inclusion of biologic agents in many protocols, newer chemotherapeutic agents (such as S-1 in the treatment of gastric cancer), and the use of minimally invasive procedures for the treatment of premalignant and, possibly, early malignant lesions of the esophagus and stomach. This review focuses on the current practice in the management of upper GI tumors and summarizes the recent advances in the field.

Modulation of radiosensitivity in Chinese hamster lung fibroblasts by cisplatin

The effects of cisplatin exposure time, concentration, and irradiation sequence on the sensitivity of Chinese hamster lung fibroblasts (V79) to gamma-ray exposure were examined. Based on clonogenic cell survival, the cisplatin concentrations corresponding to 50% cell survival (EC(50)) for exposure times of 1 h to 7 days followed a 2-phase exponential decay and ranged from 28.26 +/- 3.32 to 1.53 +/- 0.24 micromol/L, respectively. When cells were treated at EC(50) for exposures of less than 4 h and irradiated immediately, cisplatin inhibited the effect of radiation. Exposures of 4-6 h did not affect radiosensitivity. For exposures of 8-12 h, radiosensitization was observed, which disappeared at 14 h and reappeared for much longer cisplatin treatments. At the lowest achievable EC(50) (1.53 micromol/L), radiosensitization was observed if irradiation was delayed for 1-8 h. This enhancement in radiosensitivity disappeared for irradiation delays of 10-12 h, but reappeared when irradiation was delayed for 14-18 h. These data demonstrate that the mode of interaction between cisplatin and gamma-irradiation depends on the concentration and exposure time of cisplatin, as well as on the timing of irradiation after cisplatin administration. Consideration of changes in cell cycle kinetics may contribute to the improvement of treatment outcomes in adjuvant chemoradiotherapy involving cisplatin.

Pancreatic cancer: progress in cancer therapy

Pancreatic cancer continues to be a highly lethal disease. In fact the overall 5-year survival rate is less than 4% and has hardly improved over the past two decades. Surgery is the only potential curative treatment, but the majority of patients have an unresectable disease at the diagnosis. After the demonstration in 1997 that gemcitabine could lead to an improvement in clinical benefit and overall survival this chemotherapy agent became the standard of care for advanced pancreatic cancer patients. Several authors tried to improve results obtained with single agent gemcitabine by exploring the activity of novel chemotherapy on biologically targeted agents in combination with gemcitabine. Unfortunately, global findings were often disappointing with only a marginally significant survival benefit. New treatment strategies and a more careful evaluation of innovative therapies are clearly needed for this disease. In this review we will focus on treatment strategies both in resectable and advanced pancreatic cancer.

Neoadjuvant chemoradiation in patients with potentially resectable pancreatic cancer

OBJECTIVES

To retrospectively evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of 5-fluorouracil and low-dose cisplatin (FP)-based preoperative concurrent chemoradiotherapy (PCRT) and gemcitabine (GEM)-based PCRT in patients with potentially resectable pancreatic cancer.

METHODS

Between December 2000 and December 2004, 32 patients with potentially resectable pancreatic cancer were treated with PCRT. All patients received external beam radiotherapy (total dose of 40 Gy) for 4 weeks. Concurrently, chemotherapy was performed intravenously with continuous 5-fluorouracil 200 mg/m2/d and intermittent cisplatin bolus 3 to 6 mg/m2/d for 4 weeks (Arm FP-PCRT, n = 14) or weekly GEM 400 mg/m2 for 3 weeks (Arm GEM-PCRT, n = 18). The patients were restaged 3 to 4 weeks after the end of PCRT and explored for resection in cases without distant metastases.

RESULTS

The 3-year survival rates and median survival were 29.4% and 20.5 months for the resected patients (n = 24) and 0% and 5.5 months for unresected patients (n = 8), respectively (P < 0.0001). The 1-, 2-, 3-year survival rates and median survival were 87.5%, 62.5%, 33.3%, and 26 months for the resected patients treated with FP-PCRT and 75%, 40%, 26.7%, and 19.9 months for the resected patients treated with GEM-PCRT (respectively; P = not significant). Most of the toxicities of both regimens were slight and were in grade1 to 2. Grade 1 to 3 leukopenia (43% vs 100%) and thrombocytopenia (0% vs 39%) were significantly different between the FP-PCRT and GEM-PCRT patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The PCRT regimens in this article enabled selection of 24 of 32 patients for surgery and resulted in encouraging survival results and acceptable toxicities.

Antitumour effect of polyoxomolybdates: induction of apoptotic cell death and autophagy in in vitro and in vivo models

Polyoxomolybdates (PMs) as discrete molybdenum-oxide cluster anions have been investigated in the course of study of their medical applications. Here, we show the significant antitumour potency of the polyoxomolybdate [Me(3)NH](6)[H(2)Mo(V)(12)O(28)(OH)(12)(Mo(VI)O(3))(4)].2H(2)O (PM-17), which is a photo-reduced compound of [NH(3)Pr(i)](6)[Mo(7)O(24)].3H(2)O. The effect of PM-17 on the growth of cancer cell lines and xenografts was assessed by a cell viability test and analysis of tumour expansion rate. Morphological analysis was carried out by Hoechst staining, flow-cytometric analysis of Annexin V staining, terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase-mediated 'nick-end' labelling staining, and electron-microscopic analysis. Activation of autophagy was detected by western blotting and fluorescence-microscopic analysis of the localisation of GFP-LC3 in transfected tumour cells. PM-17 inhibited the growth of human pancreatic cancer (AsPC-1) xenografts in a nude mice model, and induced morphological alterations in tumour cells. Correspondingly, PM-17 repressed the proliferation of AsPC-1 cells and human gastric cancer cells (MKN45) depending on the dose in vitro. We observed apoptotic patterns as the formation of apoptotic small bodies and translocation of phosphatidylserine by Hoechst staining and flow-cytometric analysis following Annexin V staining, and in parallel, autophagic conformation by the formulation of autophagosomes and localisation of GFP-LC3 by electron- and fluorescence-microscopic analysis.

Primary advanced unresectable pancreatic cancer

Median as well as overall survival of pancreatic cancer patients in the advanced stage is extremely low despite advances in cancer therapy regarding tumor cell biology, therapy resistance, and diagnosis. In matters of chemoradiation therapy (CRT) in locally advanced pancreatic cancer, favorable positive effect has been reached with different radiotherapy proceedings such as intraoperative radiation therapy with or without external chemo-/radiation therapy or with CRT alone with regard to local tumor pain, local tumor remission, or local control of disease and overall survival. Primary (chemo-) radiation therapy only rarely leads to local remission. Intraoperative radiation therapy (IORT) merely reaches pain palliation in most cases. By administering up-to-date primary CRT, especially with gemcitabine-associated CRT, local remission in up to 50% of patients can be observed. By applying neoadjuvant CRT, better resectability and the reduction of postoperative positive lymph node metastasis has been seen in patients with resectable or possibly resectable pancreatic cancer. With primary CRT, resectability can also be achieved in patients with primary unresectable pancreatic cancer. It has been shown at the evaluation of patients' progression samples--either treated with neoadjuvant or primarily with radiotherapy (with conventional radiation technique)--that the rate of local recurrence or local progression can be reduced in comparison with historical cohorts. By contrast, the rate on distant metastases was not affected. Whereas concurrent CRT leads to favorable local tumor control, this procedure has a minor effect as to the survival in most of the studies. Because metastases occur mostly out of the irradiation field and because of partly advanced local tumor progression, the concept of combined CRT with continuing chemotherapy was developed. Median survival of pancreatic patients in the advanced stage is approx. 3-5 months, with a 12-month survival probability of 10% despite advances in cancer therapy. On the other hand, the 5-year survival probability is 0.4%-3.0%. The causes of such a dismal prognosis can be understood first of all in the commonly late diagnosis, second in the aggressive tumor cell biology with continuing therapy resistance, and finally because an acceptable resection rate can be achieved only in specialized centers. Only 10%-15% of patients can be resected after the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer. Resection is considered a potential curative therapy. However, median survival of these patients amounts to only 13-18 months, with a 5-year survival of 10%-20%. The survival rate did not improve with a radical resection and extended lymphadenectomy. Furthermore, 15%-30% of primary nonmetastatic pancreatic cancer is unresectable due to extended vessel infiltration at time of diagnosis. The prognosis for these patients is very dismal due to lack of specific therapy; moreover, median overall survival is a maximum of 6-8 months.

Induction chemotherapy selects patients with locally advanced, unresectable pancreatic cancer for optimal benefit from consolidative chemoradiation therapy

BACKGROUND

The current study was conducted to determine whether there were differences in outcome for patients with unresectable locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) who received treatment with chemoradiation therapy (CR) versus induction chemotherapy followed by CR (CCR).

METHODS

Between December 1993 and July 2005, 323 consecutive patients with LAPC were treated at the authors' institution with radiotherapy and concurrent gemcitabine or fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy. Two hundred forty-seven patients received CR as initial treatment, and 76 patients received a median of 2.5 months of gemcitabine-based induction chemotherapy prior to CR. Most patients received a radiation dose of 30 grays in 10 fractions (85%) concurrently with infusional 5-fluorouracil (41%), gemcitabine (39%), or capecitabine (20%).

RESULTS

The median follow-up was 5.5 months (range, 1-63 months). For all patients, the median overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were 9 months and 5 months, respectively, and the 2-year estimated OS and PFS rates were 9% and 5%, respectively. The median OS and PFS were 8.5 months and 4.2 months, respectively, in the CR group and 11.9 months and 6.4 months, respectively, in the CCR group (both P < .001). The median times to local and distant progression were 6.0 months and 5.6 months, respectively, in the CR group and 8.9 and 9.5 months, respectively, in the CCR group (P = .003 and P = .007, respectively). There was no significant difference in the patterns of failure with the use of induction chemotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

The results from this analysis indicated that, by excluding patients with rapid distant progression, induction chemotherapy may select patients with LAPC for optimal benefit from consolidative CR. The authors believe that this strategy of enriching the population of patients who receive a locoregional treatment modality merits prospective randomized evaluation.

Future chemoradiation strategies in pancreatic cancer

Although not universally accepted, 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)-based chemoradiation is considered a standard treatment for patients with localized pancreatic cancer. Randomized trials have indicated that chemoradiation improves median survival of both locally advanced and resected pancreatic cancer. While the use of adjuvant chemoradiation in pancreatic cancer has been called into question since the publication of the European Study Group for Pancreatic Cancer (ESPAC)-1 trial, this study has not changed standard practice in the United States. All randomized trials investigating adjuvant chemoradiation have reported significant local as well as distant disease control limitations, making the study of novel chemoradiation and adjuvant chemotherapy important. Selected centers are investigating neoadjuvant chemoradiation in radiographically resectable patients. Advantages of neoadjuvant chemoradiation compared to postoperative therapy include increased local control, increased access to therapy, addressing the systemic disease recurrence risk without delay, and optimal patient selection for pancreaticoduodenectomy through exclusion of patients with rapidly progressive metastatic disease. In the years since it was approved for use in pancreatic cancer, gemcitabine has stood the test of time as a systemic agent but has not been widely adopted as a radiosensitzer in pancreatic cancer. Single-arm clinical trials that initially explored gemcitabine as a radiosensitzer in locally advanced pancreatic cancer demonstrated the potential for significant toxicity without dramatic improvements in efficacy. Recent strategies for improving the efficacy of chemoradiation include improved chemoradiation sensitization through the concurrent incorporation of molecular targeted agents, and the use of new radiation technology such as intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and stereotactic radiotherapy. Herein, we discuss the relative merits of strategies that seek to improve outcome through these novel means and present recent data from novel strategies that will provide the background for future trials.

Locally advanced pancreatic cancer: a review

It is anticipated that there will be 37,170 new cases of pancreatic cancer diagnosed in the United States this year, resulting in approximately 33,370 deaths from the disease. Approximately 40% of these patients will present with locally advanced, non-metastatic disease. Treatment regimens that incorporate conventional radiation therapy for local tumor control, and chemotherapy to prevent distant failure in this metastasis-prone malignancy, are the current standard of care. A number of clinical studies have been undertaken to establish the optimal definitive chemoradiation treatment in this setting. Other potential treatment strategies include chemoradiation incorporating novel chemotherapeutic agents, intraoperative radiation therapy, brachytherapy, and the integration of combined therapies that utilize targeted molecular agents. This review summarizes the current status, controversies, and future prospects for the treatment of locally advanced pancreatic cancer.

A phase I trial of S-1 with concurrent radiotherapy for locally advanced pancreatic cancer

This study investigated the maximum tolerated dose of S-1 based on the frequency of its dose-limiting toxicities (DLT) with concurrent radiotherapy in patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer. S-1 was administered orally at escalating doses from 50 to 80 mg m⁻² b.i.d. on the day of irradiation during radiotherapy. Radiation therapy was delivered through four fields as a total dose of 50.4 Gy in 28 fractions over 5.5 weeks, and no prophylactic nodal irradiation was given. Twenty-one patients (50 three; 60 five; 70 six; 80 mg m⁻² seven patients) were enrolled in this trial. At a dose of 70 mg m⁻² S-1, two of six patients demonstrated DLT involving grade 3 nausea and vomiting and grade 3 haemorrhagic gastritis, whereas no patients at doses other than 70 mg m⁻² demonstrated any sign of DLT. Among the 21 enrolled patients, four (19.0%) showed a partial response. The median progression-free survival time and median survival time for the patients overall were 8.9 and 11.0 months, respectively. The recommended dose of S-1 therapy with concurrent radiotherapy is 80 mg m⁻² day⁻¹. A multi-institutional phase II trial of this regimen in patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer is now underway.

Concurrent gemcitabine and radiotherapy with and without neoadjuvant gemcitabine for locally advanced unresectable or resected pancreatic cancer: A phase I-II study

PURPOSE

To determine the safety, efficacy, and tolerability of biweekly gemcitabine with concurrent radiotherapy (RT) for resected and locally advanced (LA) pancreatic cancer.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Eligible patients had either LA or resected pancreatic cancer. Between March 1999 and July 2001, 63 patients (31 with LA and 32 with resected disease) were treated. Of the 63 patients, 28 were enrolled in a Phase I study of increasing radiation doses (35 Gy [n = 7], 43.75 Gy [n = 11], and 52.5 Gy [n = 10] given within 4, 5, or 6 weeks, respectively, in 1.75-Gy fractions) concurrently with 40 mg/m(2) gemcitabine biweekly. Subsequently, 35 were enrolled in a Phase II study with the addition of induction gemcitabine 1000 mg/m(2) within 7 or 8 weeks to concurrent biweekly gemcitabine (40 mg/m(2)) and 52.5 Gy RT within 6 weeks.

RESULTS

In the LA population, the best response observed was a complete response in 1, partial response in 3, stable disease in 10, and progressive disease in 17. In the phase II trial, gemcitabine plus RT was not delivered to 8 patients because of progression with induction gemcitabine alone (n = 5) or by patient request (n = 3). On intent-to-treat analysis, the median survival in the LA patients was 13.9 months and the 2-year survival rate was 16.1%. In the resected population, the median progression-free survival was 8.3 months, the median survival was 18.4 months, and the 2- and 5-year survival rate was 36% and 19.4%, respectively. The treatment was well tolerated; the median gemcitabine dose intensity was 96% of the planned dose in the neoadjuvant and concurrent portions of the Phase II study. No treatment-related deaths occurred.

CONCLUSION

Biweekly gemcitabine (40 mg/m(2)) concurrently with RT (52.5 Gy in 30 fractions of 1.75 Gy) with or without induction gemcitabine is safe and tolerable and shows efficacy in patients with LA and resected pancreatic cancer.

The concurrent chemoradiation paradigm—general principles

During the past 20 years, the advent of neoadjuvant, primary, and adjuvant concurrent chemoradiotherapy has improved cancer care dramatically. Significant contributions have been made by technological improvements in radiotherapy, as well as by the introduction of novel chemotherapy agents and dosing schedules. This article will review the rationale for the use of concurrent chemoradiotherapy for treating malignancies. The molecular basis and mechanisms of action of combining classic cytotoxic agents (e.g. platinum-containing drugs, taxanes, etc.) and novel agents (e.g. tirapazamine, EGFR inhibitors and other targeted agents) with radiotherapy will be examined. This article is part one of two articles. In the subsequent article, the general principles outlined here will be applied to head and neck cancer, in which the impact of concurrent chemoradiotherapy is particularly evident.