Pilot study of celecoxib and infusional 5-fluorouracil as second-line treatment for advanced pancreatic carcinoma

Second-line chemotherapy for advanced pancreatic cancer: Which is the best option?

Despite recent biological insight and therapeutic advances, the prognosis of advanced pancreatic cancer still remains poor. For more than 15 years, gemcitabine monotherapy has been the cornerstone of first-line treatment. Recently, prospective randomized trials have shown that novel upfront combination regimens tested in prospective randomized trials have resulted in improved patients' outcome increasing the proportion of putative candidate to second-line therapy. There is no definite standard of care after disease progression. A novel formulation in which irinotecan is encapsulated into liposomal-based nanoparticles may increase the efficacy of the drug without incrementing its toxicity. NAPOLI-1 was the first randomized trial to compare nanoliposomal irinotecan and fluorouracil-leucovorin (5-FU/LV) to 5-FU/LV alone after a gemcitabine-based chemotherapy. This review focuses on the current data for the management of second-line treatment for metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma, presents the most interesting ongoing clinical trials and illustrates the biologically-driven future options beyond disease progression.

Second-line treatment in inoperable pancreatic adenocarcinoma: A systematic review and synthesis of all clinical trials

There remains uncertainty regarding the optimal second-line chemotherapy in advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). The current recommendation of 5-fluorouracil and oxaliplatin may not be relevant in current practice, as FOLFIRINOX (5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan and oxaliplatin) has become a more popular first line therapy in fit patients. The majority of studies in this setting are single-arm Phase II trials with significant heterogeneity of patient populations, treatments and outcomes. In this review, we sought to systematically review and synthesise all prospective data available for the second-line treatment of advanced PDAC.

Arsenic sulfide combined with JQ1, chemotherapy agents, or celecoxib inhibit gastric and colon cancer cell growth

BACKGROUND

Arsenic compounds have modest cytotoxic activity in solid tumors. We investigated if arsenic sulfide (As4S4) in combination with other distinct agents could enhance its cytotoxic activity.

METHODS

We used gastric and colon cancer cell lines to study the synergistic effect of As4S4 in combination with BRD4 inhibitor JQ1, or with chemotherapy drug cisplatin and irinotecan or with COX2 inhibitor celecoxib. We investigated the mechanism of the cytotoxic effect of these novel combinations.

RESULTS

We found that when As4S4 was combined with JQ1, cisplatin, irinotecan or celecoxib, its cytotoxic activity was dramatically enhanced in both gastric and colon cancer cell lines. As4S4 and JQ1 inhibited BRD4 and c-Myc while activating p53 expression synergistically. As4S4 inhibited COX2 and cyclin D1 expression. When As4S4 was combined with chemotherapy drug cisplatin or COX2 inhibitor celecoxib, its inhibition of COX2, BCL2, and p38 expression was enhanced. As4S4 and cisplatin synergistically stimulated p53, phosphor-p38 (p-p38), and increased cleaved caspase 3 (c-caspase 3).

CONCLUSION

As4S4 in combination with JQ1, cisplatin, irinotecan or celecoxib showed enhanced cytotoxic effect on gastric and colon cancer cells, indicating the potential application of these novel drug combinations as part of treatment strategy that warrants further investigation. As4S4 and JQ1 demonstrate synergistic activation of p53 and inhibition of c-Myc. As4S4 and cisplatin and celecoxib activated multiple apoptosis pathways.

Involvement of eicosanoids in the pathogenesis of pancreatic cancer: The roles of cyclooxygenase-2 and 5-lipoxygenase

The interplay between inflammation and cancer progression is a growing area of research. A combination of clinical, epidemiological, and basic science investigations indicate that there is a relationship between inflammatory changes in the pancreas and neoplastic progression. Diets high in ω-6 polyunsaturated fatty acids provide increased substrate for arachidonic acid metabolism by cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) and 5-lipoxygenase (5-LOX) to form eicosanoids. These eicosanoids directly contribute to pancreatic cancer cell proliferation. Both COX-2 and 5-LOX are upregulated in multiple cancer types, including pancreatic cancer. In vitro studies using pancreatic cancer cell lines have demonstrated upregulation of COX-2 and 5-LOX at both the mRNA and protein levels. When COX-2 and 5-LOX are blocked via a variety of mechanisms, cancer cell proliferation is abrogated both in vitro and in vivo. The mechanism of COX-2 has been shown to include effects on apoptosis as well as angiogenesis. 5-LOX has been implicated in apoptosis. The use of COX-2 and 5-LOX inhibitors in clinical studies in patients with pancreatic cancer has been limited. Patient enrollment has been restricted to those with advanced disease which makes evaluation of these drugs as chemopreventive agents difficult. COX-2 and 5-LOX expression have been shown to be present during the early neoplastic changes of pancreatic cancer, well before progression to invasive disease. This indicates that the ideal role for these interventions is early in the disease process as preventive agents, perhaps in patients with chronic pancreatitis or hereditary pancreatitis.

Beyond first-line chemotherapy for advanced pancreatic cancer: an expanding array of therapeutic options?

While an increasing number of therapeutic options are now available for the first-line treatment of locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer, the optimal choice for treatment in the second-line setting and beyond is less well defined. A variety of cytotoxic agents, either alone or in combination, have been evaluated, although primarily in the context of small single-arm or retrospective studies. Most regimens have been associated with median progression-free survival rates in the range of 2-4 mo and overall survival rates between 4-8 mo, highlighting the very poor prognosis of patients who are candidates for such treatment. Targeted therapies studied in this chemotherapy-refractory setting, meanwhile, have produced even worse efficacy results. In the current article, we review the clinical evidence for treatment of refractory disease, primarily in patients who have progressed on front-line gemcitabine-based chemotherapy. In the process, we highlight the limitations of the available data to date as well as some of the challenges in designing appropriate clinical trials in this salvage setting, including how to select an appropriate control arm given the absence of a well-established reference standard, and the importance of incorporating predictive biomarkers and quality of life measures whenever possible into study design.

Impact of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs on gastrointestinal cancers: current state-of-the science

Growing evidence from epidemiologic and preclinical studies suggests that nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) reduce the risk of gastrointestinal (GI) cancers, including esophageal, gastric, pancreatic, colorectal cancer, and hepatocellular carcinoma. However, there is also evidence indicating the absence of this benefit. The exact mechanism of NSAIDs' action on GI tumors is not known. Although some studies have suggested inhibition of carcinogenesis by NSAIDs through suppression effect on inflammation-associated cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) expression, other studies have suggested COX-2-independent mechanisms. Herein, we summarize the current state of-the-science regarding NSAID benefit for patients with GI cancers.

Second-line treatment in advanced pancreatic cancer: a comprehensive analysis of published clinical trials

BACKGROUND

There is currently no standard of care for the second-line treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer. The aim of this analysis was to compare the different therapeutic approaches in this setting.

METHODS

We carried out a systematic analysis of second-line studies in advanced pancreatic cancer that have progressed on or following gemcitabine and published or presented from 2000 to 2012.

RESULTS

Forty-four clinical trials (t) were identified; of which 34 met the inclusion criteria treating an aggregate total of 1503 patients (n). Patients who received treatments (t: 33; n: 1269) had a median overall survival (OS) of 6 months compared with 2.8 months for patients who received best supportive care only (t: 2; n: 234) (P = 0.013). The gemcitabine and platinum-based combination (t: 5; n: 154) provided a median progression-free survival and OS of 4 and 6 months compared with 1.6 and 5.3 for the rest of the regimens (t: 29; n: 1349) (P = 0.059 and 0.10, respectively) and 2.9 and 5.7 for the combination of 5-fluorouracil and platinum agents (t: 12; n: 450) (P = 0.60 and 0.22, respectively).

CONCLUSION(S)

Although not conclusive, these data showed that the advantage of second-line chemotherapy in pancreatic cancer is very limited and there is a need for more studies.

Molecularly targeted therapies in metastatic pancreatic cancer: a systematic review

Pancreatic cancer is the fourth leading cause of cancer-related death. Most patients present with an advanced stage of disease that has a dismal outcome, with a median survival of approximately 6 months. Evidently, there is a clear need for the development of new agents with novel mechanisms of action in this disease. A number of biological agents modulating different signal transduction pathways are currently in clinical development, inhibiting angiogenesis and targeting epidermal growth factor receptor, cell cycle, matrix metalloproteinases, cyclooxygenase-2, mammalian target of rapamycin, or proteasome. This is the first systematic review of the literature to synthesize all available data coming from trials and evaluate the efficacy and safety of molecular targeted drugs in unresectable and metastatic pancreatic cancer. However, it should be stressed that although multiple agents have been tested, only 9 phase 3 trials have been conducted and one agent (erlotinib) has been approved by the Food and Drug Administration for use in clinical practice. As knowledge accumulates on the molecular mechanisms underlying carcinogenesis in the pancreas, the anticipated development and assessment of molecularly targeted agents may offer a promising perspective for a disease which, to date, remains incurable.

The interaction of celecoxib with MDR transporters enhances the activity of mitomycin C in a bladder cancer cell line

BACKGROUND

An in vitro model was developed to understand if celecoxib could synergize with Mitomycin C (MMC), commonly used for the prevention of non-muscle invasive bladder cancer recurrence, and eventually elucidate if the mechanism of interaction involves multi drug resistance (MDR) transporters.

METHODS

UMUC-3, a non COX-2 expressing bladder cancer cell line, and UMUC-3-CX, a COX-2 overexpressing transfectant, as well as 5637, a COX-2 overexpressing cell line, and 5637si-CX, a non COX-2 expressing silenced 5637 cell line, were used in the present study. The expression of COX-2 and MDR pumps (P-gp, MDR-1 and BCRP) was explored through western blot. The anti-proliferative effect of celecoxib and MMC was studied with MTT test. Three biological permeability assays (Drug Transport Experiment, Substrate Transporter Inhibition, and ATP cell depletion) were combined to study the interaction between MDR transporters and celecoxib. Finally, the ability of celecoxib to restore MMC cell accumulation was investigated.

RESULTS

The anti-proliferative effect of celecoxib and MMC were investigated alone and in co-administration, in UMUC-3, UMUC-3-CX, 5637 and 5637si-CX cells. When administered alone, the effect of MMC was 8-fold greater in UMUC-3. However, co-administration of 1 μM, 5 μM, and 10 μM celecoxib and MMC caused a 2,3-fold cytotoxicity increase in UMUC-3-CX cell only. MMC cytotoxicity was not affected by celecoxib co-administration either in 5637, or in 5637si-CX cells. As a result of all finding from the permeability experiments, celecoxib was classified as P-gp unambiguous substrate: celecoxib is transported by MDR pumps and interferes with the efflux of MMC. Importantly, among all transporters, BCRP was only overexpressed in UMUC-3-CX cells, but not in 5637 and 5637si-CX.

CONCLUSIONS

The UMUC-3-CX cell line resembles a more aggressive phenotype with a lower response to MMC compared to the wt counterpart. However, the administration of celecoxib in combination to MMC causes a significant and dose dependent gain of the anti-proliferative activity. This finding may be the result of a direct interaction between celecoxib and MDR transporters. Indeed, BCRP is overexpressed in UMUC-3-CX, but not in UMUC-3, 5637, and 5637si-CX, in which celecoxib is ineffective.

Prostaglandin E2 (PGE2) in portal blood in patients with pancreatic tumor--a single institution series

BACKGROUND

Cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) may play a significant role in the development of pancreatic cancer. One of COX-2 main metabolites is prostaglandin E2 (PGE2), which is involved both in inflammation and carcinogenesis. As PGE2 is inactivated in the lungs and the liver we assumed that the best medium to assess the level of PGE2 is not peripheral but portal blood.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Fifty-seven patients with pathologically verified diagnosis of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC group, n = 38) and chronic pancreatitis (CP group, n = 19) were enrolled in this study. Sample of blood from central line was collected before surgery. Intraoperatively portal vein was identified and sampled. PGE2 levels were determined using ELISA test. All the patients were followed-up for 1-35 months.

RESULTS

PGE2 portal blood levels in patients with PDAC were higher than in patients with CP (190.55 ± 149.86 versus 120.23 ± 132.60; p = .04). PGE2 concentration at a cut-off value of 94.46 pg/ml had a sensitivity of 91.67%, specificity of 50%, AUC = 0.631 (95% CI, 0.489-0.758).

CONCLUSION

The PGE2 portal blood levels in PDAC patients are higher than in those with CP. The PGE2 portal concentration cannot be a single marker in diagnosing PDAC due to low specificity.

Current knowledge on pancreatic cancer

Pancreatic cancer is the fourth leading cause of cancer death with a median survival of 6 months and a dismal 5-year survival rate of 3-5%. The development and progression of pancreatic cancer are caused by the activation of oncogenes, the inactivation of tumor suppressor genes, and the deregulation of many signaling pathways. Therefore, the strategies targeting these molecules as well as their downstream signaling could be promising for the prevention and treatment of pancreatic cancer. However, although targeted therapies for pancreatic cancer have yielded encouraging results in vitro and in animal models, these findings have not been translated into improved outcomes in clinical trials. This failure is due to an incomplete understanding of the biology of pancreatic cancer and to the selection of poorly efficient or imperfectly targeted agents. In this review, we will critically present the current knowledge regarding the molecular, biochemical, clinical, and therapeutic aspects of pancreatic cancer.

Systematic review of immunohistochemical biomarkers to identify prognostic subgroups of patients with pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) carries a dismal prognosis. There is a need to identify prognostic subtypes of PDAC to predict clinical and therapeutic outcomes accurately, and define novel therapeutic targets. The purpose of this review was to provide a systematic summary and review of available data on immunohistochemical (IHC) prognostic and predictive markers in patients with PDAC.

METHODS

Relevant articles in English published between January 1990 and June 2010 were obtained from PubMed searches. Other articles identified from cross-checking references and additional sources were reviewed. The inclusion was limited to studies evaluating IHC markers in a multivariable setting.

RESULTS

Database searches identified 76 independent prognostic and predictive molecular markers implicated in pancreatic tumour growth, apoptosis, angiogenesis, invasion and resistance to chemotherapy. Of these, 11 markers (Ki-67, p27, p53, transforming growth factor β1, Bcl-2, survivin, vascular endothelial growth factor, cyclo-oxygenase 2, CD34, S100A4 and human equilibrative nucleoside transporter 1) provided independent prognostic or predictive information in two or more separate studies.

CONCLUSION

None of the molecular markers described can be recommended for routine clinical use as they were identified in small cohorts and there were inconsistencies between studies. Their prognostic and predictive values need to be validated further in prospective multicentre studies in larger patient populations. A panel of molecular markers may become useful in predicting individual patient outcome and directing novel types of intervention.

[Second line chemotherapy for pancreatic cancer]

Pancreatic cancer is a very lethal cancer. It is the 5th most common cause for cancer related mortality in Korea. Most of patients have unresectable pancreatic cancer, and systemic chemotherapy remains the only treatment option for them. Gemcitabine has been adopted as the standard first-line agent for advanced pancreatic cancer, but the progression free survival with gemcitabine is short. Many of patients need further treatment. We reviewed the clinical trials of second line chemotherapy for gemcitabine refractory pancreatic cancer and tried to show currently available treatment options.

Cyclooxygenase-2 in oncogenesis

Compelling experimental and clinical evidence supports the notion that cyclooxygenase-2, the inducible isoform of cyclooxygenase, plays a crucial role in oncogenesis. Clinical and epidemiological data indicate that aberrant regulation of cyclooxygenase-2 in certain solid tumors and hematological malignancies is associated with adverse clinical outcome. Moreover, findings extrapolated from experimental studies in cultured tumor cells and animal tumor models indicate that cyclooxygenase-2 critically influences all stages of tumor development from tumor initiation to tumor progression. Cyclooxygenase-2 elicits cell-autonomous effects on tumor cells resulting in stimulation of growth, increased cell survival, enhanced tumor cell invasiveness, stimulation of neovascularization, and tumor evasion from the host immune system. Additionally, the oncogenic effects of cyclooxygenase-2 stem from its unique ability to impact tumor cell surroundings and create a proinflammatory environment conducive for tumor development, growth and progression. The initial enthusiasm generated by the availability of cyclooxygenase-2 selective inhibitors for cancer prevention and therapy has been lessened by the severe cardiovascular adverse side effects associated with their long-term use, as well as by the mixed results of recent clinical trials evaluating the efficacy of cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors in adjuvant chemotherapy. Therefore, our ability to efficiently target the oncogenic effects of cyclooxygenase-2 for therapeutic and preventive purposes strictly depends on a better understanding of the spatial and temporal aspects of its activation in tumor cells along with a clearer elucidation of the signaling networks whereby cyclooxygenase-2 affects tumor cells and their interactions with the tumor microenvironment. This knowledge has the potential of leading to the identification of novel cyclooxygenase-2-dependent molecular and signaling networks that can be exploited to improve cancer prevention and therapy.

A Cancer and Leukemia Group B phase II study of sunitinib malate in patients with previously treated metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (CALGB 80603)

BACKGROUND

The Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB) conducted a phase II study evaluating sunitinib in patients with progressive metastatic pancreas adenocarcinoma following prior gemcitabine-based therapy (trial CALGB 80603; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT00397787). The primary endpoint was to determine the disease control rate (DCR) as measured by the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (complete response, partial response [PR], and stable disease) at 6 weeks.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients aged ≥18 years with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status score of 0-2 and with progressive pancreas adenocarcinoma following treatment with gemcitabine were eligible. Sunitinib was dosed at 50 mg orally days 1-28, every 42 days (1 cycle). The statistical plan called for a three-stage design. A DCR ≥15% was considered worthy of further study.

RESULTS

In total, 77 patients were enrolled. Forty-two (54.6%) enrollees were male. The median age was 65 years. The ECOG performance status score distribution was: 0, 39%; 1, 50%; 2, 11%. The DCR was 21.6%; one patient (1.4%) had a PR and 15 patients (20.3%) had stable disease as their best response. The progression-free survival time was 1.31 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.25-1.38 months) and overall survival time was 3.68 months (95% CI, 3.06-4.24 months).

CONCLUSIONS

The study met its primary endpoint; however sunitinib had minimal activity and moderate toxicity in a population of gemcitabine-refractory pancreas adenocarcinoma patients. For future studies, limiting enrollment to patients with an ECOG performance status score of 0-1 is recommended.

The molecular targets for the diagnosis and treatment of pancreatic cancer

Pancreatic cancer is considered an aggressive malignancy that responds poorly to current treatments and therefore has a dismal survival rate. This disease is usually not diagnosed until a late stage, at which point palliative chemotherapy with the purine analogue gemcitabine and/or a fluoropyrimidine or a platinum agent is the standard approach. There are some new data on the molecular and genetic changes that take place in pancreatic cancer, which may facilitate the accuracy of diagnosis and efficacy of treatments. However, translational efforts in clinical practice have increased clinicians' options with a targeted agent, erlotinib, in combination with the standard gemcitabine chemotherapy. Many other novel drugs currently being tested in the field of pharmaco-oncology target various altered biological pathways and molecules. Nevertheless, the lack of clinically significant improvements in treatments is rendering efforts to develop methods of early diagnosis both more urgent and promising. The aim of this review was to summarize the molecular basis of pancreatic carcinogenesis and the latest developments in diagnosis by molecular means, focusing on the results of clinical research into targeted and personalized treatments.

Effects of capecitabine and celecoxib in experimental pancreatic cancer

INTRODUCTION

Pancreatic cancer is a major health problem because of its aggressiveness and the lack of effective systemic therapies. The aim of the study was the identification of beneficial properties of combined celecoxib and capecitabine treatment during an experimental pancreatic cancer model.

METHODS

N-nitrosobis (2-oxopropyl)amine (BOP) was used as a tumoral agent for 12 weeks. Celecoxib and capecitabine were administered either as monotherapy or combined 12 weeks after cancer induction for a period of 24 weeks. The presence of well-developed or moderate adenocarcinoma was evaluated in the pancreas. Several markers of stress, such as lipoperoxides, reduced glutathione (GSH), superoxide dismutase (SOD), catalase (CAT) and glutathione peroxidase (GHS-Px) were determined.

RESULTS

BOP induced the presence of pancreatic tumors associated with a rise in lipoperoxides and the reduction of the antioxidant status in the pancreas. The administration of celecoxib and capecitabine reduced the number of animals with tumors (33 and 66%, respectively). This antitumoral effect was associated with a recovery of GSH, SOD and CAT activity in the pancreas of BOP-treated animals. The combined treatment exerted a synergic antitumoral effect and reduced pancreatic oxidative stress.

CONCLUSION

The combined administration of celecoxib and capecitabine exerted a synergistic antitumoral effect and increased the antioxidant status restoration in pancreatic cancer.

Pancreatic cancer: utility of dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging in assessment of antiangiogenic therapy

PURPOSE

To prospectively evaluate the utility of dynamic contrast material-enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) imaging in predicting the response of locally advanced pancreatic cancer to combined chemotherapy and antiangiogenic therapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This prospective, institutional review board-approved, HIPAA-compliant study with informed consent assessed dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging in 11 patients (mean age, 54.3 years; six men and five women) with locally invasive pancreatic cancer before and 28 days after combined chemotherapy and antiangiogenic therapy. Axial perfusion images were obtained after injection of 0.1 mmol gadopentetate dimeglumine per kilogram of body weight. Sagittal images of the upper abdominal aorta were obtained for arterial input function calculation. A two-compartment kinetic model was used to calculate the perfusion parameters K(trans) (the rate constant that represents transfer of contrast agent from the arterial blood into the extravascular extracellular space), K(ep) (the rate constant that represents transfer of contrast agent from the extravascular extracellular space to the blood plasma), and volume of distribution (v(e)). Semiquantitative measurements, peak tissue gadolinium concentration (C(peak)), maximum slope of gadolinium increase (slope), and area under the gadolinium curve at 60 seconds (AUC(60)) were also calculated. Perfusion parameters and tumor size changes were correlated with carbohydrate antigen 19-9 levels. Comparisons between pre- and posttreatment studies were performed by using the Wilcoxon signed rank test, and comparisons between responders and nonresponders were performed by using the Mann-Whitney test.

RESULTS

After therapy, K(trans), v(e), C(peak), slope, and AUC(60) decreased significantly (P = .02, .001, .002, .007, and .01, respectively). Tumor size and K(ep) were not significantly changed. Pretreatment K(trans) and K(ep) were significantly higher (P = .02 and .006, respectively) in tumors that showed marker response than in those that did not. A pretreatment K(trans) value (milliliters of blood per milliliter of tissue times minutes) of more than 0.78 mL/mL . min was 100% sensitive and 71% specific for subsequent tumor response. Semiquantative parameters and tumor size were not different between the groups.

CONCLUSION

Pretreatment K(trans) measurement in pancreatic tumors can predict response to antiangiogenic therapy. All perfusion parameters showed substantial reduction after 28 days of combined chemotherapy and antiangiogenic therapy.

Phase II study of S-1 in patients with gemcitabine-resistant advanced pancreatic cancer

PURPOSE

The primary objective of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of S-1 in patients with gemcitabine-resistant advanced pancreatic cancer.

METHODS

Patients with histologically or cytologically proven, advanced pancreatic cancer who had received first-line chemotherapy with gemcitabine were eligible for this study. S-1 was administered orally at a dose of 40 mg/m(2) twice daily for 28 days, followed by 14 days' rest. Treatment was repeated every 6 weeks until disease progression.

RESULTS

Twenty-one patients were enrolled in this study. Grade 3 and 4 toxicities included anorexia in 14% of the patients, abdominal pain in 4.8% and infection without neutropenia in 4.8%. S-1 was discontinued in two patients because of toxicity. Of the 21 eligible patients, 2 (9.5%) achieved a partial response and 9 (43%) had stable disease. A marked decrease (≥50%) in tumor marker (CA19-9) was observed in 5 (28%) of the 18 evaluable patients. The median progression-free survival and the median survival time from the first day of S-1 therapy were 4.1 months (95% CI, 1.3-6.9 months) and 6.3 months (95% CI, 3.6-8.9 months), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Second-line chemotherapy with S-1 was tolerated with acceptable toxicity and resulted in a relatively high disease control rate in patients with gemcitabine-resistant advanced pancreatic cancer. As an oral agent, S-1 may be a feasible treatment option for this patient population.

Phase I study of the botanical formulation PHY906 with capecitabine in advanced pancreatic and other gastrointestinal malignancies

PURPOSE

The botanical formulation, PHY906, has been used widely in Eastern countries to treat gastrointestinal symptoms including diarrhea, nausea and vomiting. PHY906 may also have anti-tumor properties and may potentiate the action of several chemotherapeutic agents based on pre-clinical studies. We conducted a Phase I study using PHY906 in combination with capecitabine in patients with advanced pancreatic and gastrointestinal malignancies to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of capecitabine in combination with PHY906.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This study was a single institution, open-label, Phase I study of PHY906 800mg BID on days 1-4 in combination with escalating doses of capecitabine (1000, 1250, 1500, and 1750mg/m(2)) orally twice daily on days 1-7 of a 14-day cycle (7/7 schedule). Capecitabine was increased until the appearance of dose limiting toxicities (DLTs). Measurements of efficacy included tumor response by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST).

RESULTS

Twenty-four patients with a median age of 67 years (range 40-84) with pancreatic cancer (15), colon cancer (6), cholangiocarcinoma (1), esophageal cancer (1) and unknown primary (1) received a total of 116 cycles (median 5 cycles; range 1-17 cycles) over 4 dose levels of capecitabine. One DLT (Grade 4 AST/ALT, Grade 3 hyponatremia) was observed in the 1000mg/m(2) cohort of patients. No further DLT was observed in the subsequent cohorts and doses of capecitabine were escalated to 1750mg/m(2) BID. There were no DLTs at the maximum dose level of 1750mg/m(2), however, the delivered dose-intensity of capecitabine was similar at the 1750mg/m(2) dose level as the 1500mg/m(2) dose level. Therefore, the MTD was defined at 1500mg/m(2) of capecitabine in this dosing schedule with PHY906. One patient achieved a partial response, and 13 patients had stable disease that lasted more than six weeks.

CONCLUSION

The MTD of capecitabine was determined to be 1500mg/m(2) BID administered in a 7/7 schedule, in combination with PHY906 800mg BID on days 1-4. This combination was well tolerated and warrants further study.

S-1 monotherapy as second-line treatment for advanced pancreatic cancer after gemcitabine failure

OBJECTIVE

No standard salvage chemotherapy regimen has been established for patients with advanced pancreatic cancer after failure of gemcitabine-based treatment. Although a Phase II study of S-1 monotherapy was conducted in patients with gemcitabine-refractory advanced pancreatic cancer, the number of patients enrolled was small.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 84 consecutive patients who received S-1 monotherapy as a second-line treatment after gemcitabine failure at the Shizuoka Cancer Center between May 2004 and April 2008. The selection criteria in this study were age 20-75 years, ECOG performance status <or=2 and preserved organ functions. S-1 was administered orally twice a day at a dose of 40 mg/m(2) for 28 days, followed by 14-day rest.

RESULTS

Fifty-two patients were selected for the analysis. Out of the 47/52 patients with measurable lesions, only 2 patients (4%) showed a partial response and 15 patients (32%) showed stable disease. The median progression-free survival was 2.1 months and the median overall survival was 5.8 months, with a 1-year survival rate of 12%. The common grade 3/4 toxicities were diarrhea (8%), anorexia (6%), fatigue (6%), anemia (6%) and leucopenia (4%).

CONCLUSIONS

S-1 monotherapy is marginally effective and well tolerated in the second-line setting in patients with gemcitabine-refractory advanced pancreatic cancer.

The role of COX-2 in intestinal inflammation and colorectal cancer

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a heterogeneous disease, including at least three major forms: hereditary, sporadic and colitis-associated CRC. A large body of evidence indicates that genetic mutations, epigenetic changes, chronic inflammation, diet and lifestyle are the risk factors for CRC. As elevated cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) expression was found in most CRC tissue and is associated with worse survival among CRC patients, investigators have sought to evaluate the effects of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and selective COX-2 inhibitors (COXIBs) on CRC. The epidemiological studies, clinical trials and animal experiments indicate that NSAIDs are among the most promising chemopreventive agents for this disease. NSAIDs exert their anti-inflammatory and antitumor effects primarily by reducing prostaglandin production by inhibition of COX-2 activity. In this review, we highlight breakthroughs in our understanding of the roles of COX-2 in CRC and inflammatory bowel disease. These recent data provide a rationale for re-evaluating COX-2 as both the prognostic and the predictive marker in a wide variety of malignancies and for renewing the interest in evaluating relative benefits and risk of COXIBs in appropriately selected patients for cancer prevention and treatment.

Second- and third-line chemotherapy in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma: feasibility and potential benefits in a retrospective series of 117 patients

BACKGROUND

Chemotherapy is effective in metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PAC), but the benefits of second- and third-line chemotherapy remain unclear.

METHODS

We studied all patients followed consecutively for metastatic PAC, and registered at our institution between 1997 and 2006. We retrospectively analyzed the following data in terms of chemotherapy: tumor response; time to tumor progression (TTP) for each line; and overall survival (OS). Efficacy of second-line regimens was assessed using the growth modulation index (GMI).

RESULTS

Out of 117 patients, 99 (85%) received at least one line of chemotherapy, 53 (45%) received two lines and 24 (21%) had three or more lines. Median OS was 6.7 months for all 117 patients, 1.8 months for 18 patients who never received chemotherapy, 4.6 months for 46 patients who received one-line chemotherapy and 11.5 months for 53 patients who received at least two lines. Median OS from the beginning of the second-line was 4.7 months. The GMI demonstrated beneficial effects of second-line treatment on disease progression, with a GMI greater than 1.33 in 57% (30/53) of patients.

CONCLUSION

More than half the patients with metastatic PAC progression while receiving one-line chemotherapy achieved better disease control on receiving two lines of treatment.

Second-line therapy for advanced pancreatic cancer: a review of the literature and future directions

Whereas first-line chemotherapy (CT) with single-agent gemcitabine or gemcitabine-based combinations provides a proven benefit in patients with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer (PC), the role of salvage CT after gemcitabine-failure is not well-established and to date no regimen has emerged as preferred in this setting. Several clinical trials have investigated the efficacy and toxicity-profile of second-line CT and indicated that selected patients may obtain significant benefit from it, also with regard to survival. However, definitive results from large randomized phase III studies are still lacking, and the evidence for clinical benefit of salvage CT is based on small phase II trials that evaluated different treatment schedules in heterogeneous populations. The main goal of this paper is reviewing this topic.

Toward molecularly selected chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer: state of the art and future perspectives

In the last few years therapeutic options for gastric cancer patients have slowly, but constantly expanded following the introduction of both new chemotherapy agents and innovative indications for treatment. Along with the medical therapy also our knowledge of the molecular mechanisms underlying this disease has progressively improved. However although the available treatment options have undoubtedly increased no clear definitive indications can be made for a standard chemotherapy regimen and we are still unable to accurately select the appropriate treatment for the appropriate patient. Many molecular determinants of response/toxicity to chemotherapy agents have been identified, but only few of them seem to possess the necessary potential for a subsequent application in the clinical practice. Some of these factors have also been indicated as a therapeutic target for a novel class of anti-cancer compounds. This systematic review will analyse available data about these factors with the aim to constitute a starting point for future research.

The role of celecoxib in Rad51 expression and cell survival affected by gefitinib in human non-small cell lung cancer cells

Celecoxib (Celebrex) is a cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) selective inhibitor and gefitinib (Iressa(R), ZD1839) is a selective epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor for human non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The addition of celecoxib to gefitinib to prolong the survival of patients with NSCLC still remains controversial and needs to be investigated. The Rad51 protein is essential for homologous recombination repair, and is overexpressed in chemo- or radioresistant carcinomas. In this study, we characterize the role of celecoxib in the cytotoxicity, ERK1/2 activation and Rad51 expression affected by gefitinib in NSCLC cells. We show that celecoxib can enhance the cytotoxicity induced by gefitinib in NSCLC cells. Treatment with celecoxib alone has no effect on the ERK1/2 activation, Rad51 mRNA and protein levels, however, combined treatment with gefitinib results in a significant reduction of phospho-ERK1/2 and Rad51 protein levels, and triggers the degradation of Rad51 via a 26S proteasome-dependent pathway. Expression of constitutively active MKK1/2 vectors (MKK1/2-CA) significantly rescues the decreased ERK1/2 activity, and restores Rad51 protein levels and cell survival under co-treatment with gefitinib and celecoxib. Furthermore, blocking ERK1/2 activation by U0126 (MKK1/2 inhibitor) and knocking down Rad51 expression by transfection with small interfering RNA of Rad51 can enhance the cytotoxicity of celecoxib.

Phase 2 trial of oxaliplatin plus capecitabine (XELOX) as second-line therapy for patients with advanced pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

To the authors' knowledge, there is no established second-line chemotherapy for patients with pancreatic cancer who have received gemcitabine-based therapy. A phase 2 trial was conducted to explore the efficacy of capecitabine and oxaliplatin (XELOX) in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer previously who were treated with gemcitabine.

METHODS

Patients aged < or = 65 years who had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) of 0 to 1 received oxaliplatin at a dose of 130 mg/m(2) given on Day 1 and capecitabine at a dose of 1000 mg/m(2) twice daily for 14 days. For patients aged >65 years or with an ECOG PS of 2, the oxaliplatin dose was 110 mg/m(2) on Day 1 and the capecitabine dose was 750 mg/m(2) twice daily for 14 days. The treatment was repeated every 3 weeks. Tumor measurements were performed every 9 weeks and the primary study objective was 6-month overall survival.

RESULTS

The study enrolled 41 patients. Of the 39 evaluable patients, 1 patient had a partial response and 10 patients demonstrated stable disease. The Kaplan-Meier estimate of the overall median survival was 23 weeks (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 17.0-31.0 weeks). Progression-free survival was 9.9 weeks (95% CI, 9.6-14.5 weeks). The 6-month and 1-year survival rates were 44% (95% CI, 31%-62%) and 21% (95% CI, 11%-38%), respectively. The most common grade 3-4 nonhematologic toxicity was fatigue (toxicity was graded using the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria [version 2.0]).

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of capecitabine and oxaliplatin is active in gemcitabine-pretreated patients with advanced pancreatic cancer, especially in patients with a good PS and those who have responded to first-line chemotherapy.

Pancreatic cancer: from molecular pathogenesis to targeted therapy

Pancreatic cancer is a deadly malignancy with still high mortality and poor survival despite the significant advances in understanding, diagnosis, and access to conventional and novel treatments. Though cytotoxic chemotherapy based on the purine analogue gemcitabine remains the standard approach in adjuvant and palliative setting the need for novel agents aiming at the main pathophysiological abnormalities and molecular pathways involved remains soaring. So far, evidence of clinical benefit, though small, exists only from the addition of the targeted agent erlotinib on the standard gemcitabine chemotherapy. Apart from the popular monoclonal antibodies and small molecules tyrosine kinase inhibitors, other novel compounds being tested in preclinical and clinical studies target mTOR, NF-kappaB, proteasome and histone deacetylase. These new drugs along with gene therapy and immunotherapy, which are also under clinical evaluation, may alter the unfavorable natural course of this disease. In this review we present the main pathophysiological alterations met in pancreatic cancer and the results of the florid preclinical and clinical research with regards to the targeted therapy associated to these abnormalities.

Phase II study of 5-fluorouracil and paclitaxel in patients with gemcitabine-refractory pancreatic cancer

PURPOSE

There is no effective salvage regimen for failed gemcitabine-based chemotherapy. This study evaluated the efficacy and toxicity of 5-fluorouracil and paclitaxel in patients with gemcitabine-refractory pancreatic cancer.

METHODS

Between January 2004 and December 2007, 28 patients with pancreatic cancer previously treated with gemcitabine-based chemotherapy were enrolled. 5-Fluorouracil 1,000 mg/m(2) was infused (days 1, 2, and 3) and paclitaxel 175 mg/m(2) (day 1) was administered every 4 weeks. The primary endpoint of this study was efficacy and toxicity and the secondary endpoint was time to progression and overall survival.

RESULTS

A total of 75 cycles were given, for a mean of 2.68 cycles per patient. The response could be evaluated in 20 patients. Two patients (10%) obtained a partial response, and four patients (20%) had stable disease. The median time to progression and overall survival was 2.5 and 7.6 months, respectively. Grade 3/4 hematological toxicity included neutropenia in six patients (21.4%), anemia in one (3.6%), and thrombocytopenia in one (3.6%). One (3.6%) patient experienced grade 4 neuropathy, and two (7.2%) patients experienced grade 3 diarrhea.

CONCLUSION

The 5-fluorouracil and paclitaxel combination treatment seems to be effective in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer that did not respond to a gemcitabine-based regimen.

Expression analysis of the prostaglandin E2 production pathway in human pancreatic cancers

OBJECTIVES

There is strong evidence for an important role of cyclooxygenase (COX) 2 and COX-2-generated PGE2 during pancreatic tumorigenesis. Cyclooxygenase 2 has therefore become a potential chemotherapeutic target for pancreatic cancer. However, recent studies raised concerns regarding the safety of selective COX-2 inhibitors. Although the benefits of COX-2 inhibition may eventually outweigh the associated cardiovascular risks, there are a number of alternative targets for inhibiting the formation of PGE2 in human tumors that may prove less harmful to the patient. This study aimed at analyzing the expression of various proteins involved in the generation of PGE2 in human pancreatic cancers.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Real-time polymerase chain reaction and Western blot analyses demonstrated overexpression of cytoplasmic phospholipase A2, COX-2, cytoplasmic prostaglandin E synthase, and microsomal prostaglandin E synthases 1 and 2 in most human pancreatic cancers when compared with matched normal pancreas. Immunohistochemistry revealed expression of these proteins predominantly by pancreatic cancer cells. Variable expression of these proteins was also confirmed in several human pancreatic cancer cell lines.

CONCLUSIONS

Our studies demonstrated for the first time that various proteins involved in the generation of PGE2 are overexpressed in human pancreatic cancers. These proteins may represent potentially novel targets for the therapy of pancreatic cancers.

PEFG (cisplatin, epirubicin, 5-fluorouracil, gemcitabine) regimen as second-line therapy in patients with progressive or recurrent pancreatic cancer after gemcitabine-containing chemotherapy

OBJECTIVE

The therapeutic arsenal for salvage therapy in pancreatic cancer is limited. PEFG (cisplatin, epirubicin, 5-fluorouracil [FU], gemcitabine) regimen is an effective upfront treatment in advanced pancreatic cancer. The activity and safety of this combination regimen were assessed by means of an observational study in a population of patients with progressive or recurrent pancreatic adenocarcinoma after gemcitabine-containing chemotherapy.

METHODS

Patients with age <76 years, Karnofsky performance status >50 were treated with either classic PEFG (until April 2004: cisplatin and epirubicin 40 mg/m day 1, gemcitabine 600 mg/m day 1 and 8, FU 200 mg/m/d continuous infusion day 1-28) or dose-intense PEFG (since May 2004: cisplatin and epirubicin 30 mg/m, gemcitabine 800 mg/m every 14 days; FU 200 mg/m/d continuous infusion day 1-28) until progressive disease or a maximum of 6 cycles of 28 days.

RESULTS

Forty-six patients (37 metastatic) received 69 cycles of classic PEFG (18 patients) or 104 cycles of dose-intense PEFG (28 patients) as second-line therapy. Prior treatment consisted of single agent gemcitabine (N = 17), gemcitabine-based chemotherapy (N = 4), or PEFG regimen (N = 25). Median previous progression-free survival was 7.6 months. Dose intensity (mg/m/wk) with classic PEFG was cisplatin and epirubicin 8.5; gemcitabine 230; FU 1035 and with dose-intense PEFG was cisplatin and epirubicin 11.5 (+36%); gemcitabine 259 (+13%); FU 1046 (+1%). Main grade >2 toxicity consisted of neutropenia in 26 patients (56%), thrombocytopenia in 10 (22%), anemia in 11 (24%), fatigue and stomatitis in 4 (9%), vomiting, diarrhea and hand-foot syndrome in 2 (4%). Partial response was observed in 11 patients (24%) (5 classic PEFG 28% + 6 dose-intense PEFG 21%). Median and 1-year survival was 8.3 months (8.0 vs. 9.0 months) and 26% (17% vs. 32%). Median and 6-months progression-free survival was 5.0 months (4.5 vs. 5.0 months) and 34% (33% vs. 38%).

CONCLUSIONS

PEFG regimen in gemcitabine refractory pancreatic cancer had an acceptable toxicity profile and interesting activity, and may constitute a treatment option in this setting.

Pancreatic cancer: from molecular signature to target therapy

Pancreatic adenocarcinoma is a leading cause of cancer death in western countries. The treatment of advanced disease with gemcitabine has only a modest activity on survival with a favourable impact on quality of life. However, recent data support the evidence that the combination of gemcitabine with erlotinib, capecitabine or platinum compounds could be more active than gemcitabine alone in advanced pancreatic cancer. New therapeutic strategies, particularly using molecular target agents, are under evaluation. A number of molecular mechanisms responsible of transformation and progression of pancreatic cancer have been identified, opening the possibility to identify also possible pharmacological targets. A promising approach is the pharmacological inhibition of tumor angiogenesis with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) agents, such as bevacizumab, cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors (celecoxib), thalidomide and others. Also epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) plays an important role in progression of pancreatic cancer. Erlotinib, an oral available anti-EGFR compound, was the first agent capable to significantly improve overall survival in a phase III trial, leading to its approval by Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in combination with gemcitabine as first-line therapy. Ongoing studies are exploring the role of targeted therapy in the adjuvant setting. However, despite these promising results, several questions remain to be resolved, including the rational selection of the patients who are more likely to obtain benefit of target therapy, the choice of the optimal therapeutic schedule of therapy, the clinical setting of choice, and the management of the toxicity.

A phase II study of S-1 in gemcitabine-refractory metastatic pancreatic cancer

PURPOSE

Gemcitabine monotherapy or gemcitabine-containing combination chemotherapy is the standard first-line therapy for advanced pancreatic cancer. After disease progression, there is no standard regimen available. In a previous phase II trial, S-1 has been reported to show considerable efficacy, achieving a response rate of 37.5% in chemo-naïve patients with pancreatic cancer. This study evaluated the efficacy and toxicity of S-1 in patients with gemcitabine-refractory metastatic pancreatic cancer.

METHODS

Eligibility criteria were histologically proven pancreatic adenocarcinoma with confirmation of progressive disease while receiving gemcitabine-based first-line chemotherapy, 20-74 years of age, Karnofsky performance status of 80-100 points, with measurable metastatic lesions, adequate hematological, renal and liver functions, and written informed consent. S-1 was administered orally at 40 mg/m(2) twice daily for 28 days with a rest period of 14 days as one course. Administration was repeated until the appearance of disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint of this study was an objective response, and secondary endpoints included toxicity, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival, as well as clinical benefit response in symptomatic patients.

RESULTS

Forty patients from two institutions were enrolled between September 2004 and November 2005. The most common adverse reactions were fatigue and anorexia, although most of those adverse reactions were tolerable and reversible. One patient developed grade 3 pneumonitis without neutropenia and recovered with appropriate antibiotic treatment. Although no complete response was seen, partial response was obtained in six patients (15, 95% confidence interval, 3.9-26%). Stable disease was noted in 17 patients (43%), and progressive disease in 15 patients (38%). Out of 19 evaluable patients, a clinical benefit response was observed in four patients (21%). The median PFS was 2.0 months, and the median survival time was 4.5 months with a 1-year survival rate of 14.1%.

CONCLUSION

S-1 as monotherapy had marginal anti-tumor activity with tolerable toxicity in patients with gemcitabine refractory metastatic pancreatic cancer.

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.

The role of second-line chemotherapy after gemcitabine failure in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer

Systemic chemotherapy with single-agent gemcitabine or a gemcitabine-based regimen still remains a standard of care for the treatment of patients with locally advanced and metastatic pancreatic cancer. To date, no standard treatment approach for patients that show progressive disease during gemcitabine therapy is defined. Several clinical trials have evaluated the safety and efficacy of second-line chemotherapy after gemcitabine failure in this patient population. Based on the currently available data, there is increasing evidence that selected patients may derive clinical benefit from salvage chemotherapy, also with regard to survival. However, results from large randomized Phase III trials are still lacking and therefore no evidence-based treatment recommendation can be given for patients with advanced pancreatic cancer after failure of first-line gemcitabine.

Imatinib-resistant K562 cells are more sensitive to celecoxib, a selective COX-2 inhibitor: role of COX-2 and MDR-1

Selective inhibition of the BCR/ABL tyrosine kinase by imatinib (STI571, Glivec/Gleevec) is the therapeutic strategy in patients with chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML). Despite significant hematologic and cytogenetic responses with imatinib, mainly due to the mutations in the Abl kinase domain, resistance occurs in patients with advanced disease. In the present study on imatinib-resistant K562 cells (IR-K562), however, no such mutations in the Abl kinase domain were observed. Further studies revealed the over-expression of COX-2 and MDR-1 in IR-K562 cells suggesting the possible involvement of COX-2 in the development of resistance to imatinib. So, we sought to examine the effect of celecoxib, a selective COX-2 inhibitor, on IR-K562 cells. The results clearly indicate that celecoxib is more effective in IR-K562 cells with a lower IC50 value of 10 microM compared to an IC50 value of 40 microM in K562 cells. This increase in the sensitivity of IR-K562 cells towards celecoxib suggests that the development of resistance in IR-K562 cells is COX-2 dependent. Further studies revealed down-regulation of MDR-1 by celecoxib and a decline in p-Akt levels. Celecoxib-induced apoptosis of IR-K562 cells led to release of cytochrome c, PARP cleavage and decreased Bcl2/Bax ratio. Also, celecoxib at 1 microM concentration induced apoptosis in IR-K562 cells synergistically with imatinib by reducing the IC50 value of imatinib from 10 to 6 microM. In conclusion, the present study indicates over-expression of COX-2 and MDR-1 in IR-K562 cells and celecoxib, a COX-2 specific inhibitor, induces apoptosis by inhibiting COX-2 and down-regulating MDR-1 expression through Akt/p-Akt signaling pathway.

A multi-centre retrospective review of second-line therapy in advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma

INTRODUCTION

Limited information on second-line treatment in patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma is available. At time of first-line treatment failure, approximately half of the patients are candidates for further treatment.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A retrospective review of 183 patients submitted to second-line therapy has been performed to identify prognostic factors, provides useful information for patients counseling and generates hypotheses for future studies. Inclusion criteria were: cytological or histologic diagnosis of pancreatic adenocarcinoma and prior gemcitabine-including chemotherapy. Any age, performance status (PS) and chemotherapy regimen were considered.

RESULTS

One hundred and eighty-three patients (106 males; 168 metastatic; median age 62 years; median PS 1; 63 submitted to prior curative surgery, 32 to prior radiotherapy) with a median previous progression-free survival (PFS) of 6.7 months were included. Median and 6-month PFS after initiation of salvage therapy were 3.0 months and 20%. Median, 1 and 2 years, overall survival after initiation of salvage therapy were 6.2 months, 17 and 4%, respectively. Previous PFS, CA19.9 levels and age independently predicted OS.

CONCLUSION

Re-challenge with gemcitabine and 5-fluorouracil administration may have a role in selected patients.

Targeted therapies for pancreatic cancer

INTRODUCTION

Pancreatic cancer is a devastating malignancy and a leading cause of cancer mortality. Furthermore, early diagnosis represents a serious hurdle for clinicians, as symptoms are non-specific and usually manifest in advanced, treatment-resistant stages of the disease.

SOURCES OF DATA

Here, we review the rationale and progress of targeted therapies currently under investigation.

AREAS OF AGREEMENT

At present, chemoradiation regimes are administered palliatively, and produce only marginal survival benefits, underscoring a desperate need for more effective treatment modalities.

AREAS OF CONTROVERSY

Questions have been raised as to whether erlotinib, the only targeted therapy to attain a statistically significant increase in median survival, is cost-effective.

GROWING POINTS

The last decade of research has provided us with a wealth of information regarding the molecular nature of pancreatic cancer, leading to the identification of signalling pathways and their respective components which are critical for the maintenance of the malignant phenotype.

AREAS TIMELY FOR DEVELOPING RESEARCH

These proteins thus represent ideal targets for novel molecular therapies which embody an urgently needed novel treatment strategy.

Impact of celecoxib on capecitabine tolerability and activity in pretreated metastatic breast cancer: results of a phase II study with biomarker evaluation

BACKGROUND

Preclinical evidence suggests that the cyclo-oxygenase-2 (COX-2) enzyme plays an important role in breast cancer progression. The aim of the present phase II study was to determine the activity and safety of the combination of the COX-2 inhibitor celecoxib with capecitabine in metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients pretreated with anthracyclines and/or taxanes.

METHODS

Eligible patients received capecitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) twice daily on days 1-14 every 21 days and celecoxib 200 mg twice daily, continuously, until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity.

RESULTS

About 42 pretreated MBC patients were enrolled into the study. Median number of previous chemotherapy lines for metastatic disease was 2 (0-3). Seven patients (19%) responded to treatment while disease stabilization occurred in 17 patients (40.5%). Overall, 20 patients (47.5%) achieved clinical benefit [objective responses (CR) plus stable disease (SD) >/=6 months]. Median time to progression (TTP) and median overall survival (OS) were 5.2 and 17.8 months, respectively. Treatment was very well tolerated: grade 3 toxicities were observed in only five patients, respectively, and no grade 4 adverse events were reported. Celecoxib was never discontinued for toxicity. Analysis of COX-2 expression in the 22 patients with available tissue revealed a significantly longer TTP and OS for patients whose tumors over-expressed COX-2.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of capecitabine and celecoxib is active and safe in far advanced MBC patients. Interestingly, this association resulted in a lower-than-expected toxicity, as compared to single-agent capecitabine. The clinical relevance of COX-2 as determinant of sensitivity to treatment with celecoxib should be further evaluated in larger series of patients.

Metronomic antiangiogenic therapy with capecitabine and celecoxib in advanced tumor patients--results of a phase II study

BACKGROUND

Combined therapy of continuous low dose capecitabine and high dose celecoxib targeting angiogenesis was used in a phase II trial to treat advanced cancer patients. Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) was used to monitor antiangiogenic effects.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

37 Patients (21 men, 16 women), mean age 60 years, with advanced and progressive cancer of various tumor types were included. Therapy consisted of 2 x 500 mg oral capecitabine/ day and 2 x 400 mg oral celecoxib/day continuously until progression of disease. To monitor antiangiogenic effects, DCE-MRI measurements were performed at baseline, after 1 month, and after 3 months of therapy. Tumor assessment was performed according to RECIST criteria, toxicity was evaluated according to the CTC version 2.0 catalogue.

RESULTS

Therapy was well tolerated without grade 3 and 4 toxicities. The mean number of treatment cycles was 4 (range: 1-15+). Disease stabilization after 3 cycles was seen in 11 patients. 6 patients were stable over long periods. The mean number of treatment cycles in this group was 10 (range: 7-15+). DCE-MRI demonstrated a reduction of tumor vessel permeability and blood flow in patients who reached stable disease or some minor regression.

CONCLUSION

Continuous dosing of the combination of capecitabine and celecoxib was well tolerated, produced antiangiogenic effects, and has antitumor activity. Patients with rapid progression did not benefit.

Capecitabine plus erlotinib in gemcitabine-refractory advanced pancreatic cancer

PURPOSE

The addition of either capecitabine or erlotinib to gemcitabine in the first-line treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer is associated with modest improvements in overall survival. We evaluated an oral regimen of capecitabine and erlotinib in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer who had experienced treatment failure with standard first-line therapy with gemcitabine.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Thirty patients with gemcitabine-refractory metastatic pancreatic cancer were treated with capecitabine, administered at a dose of 1,000 mg/m2 twice daily for 2 weeks, followed by a 1-week break. All patients also received erlotinib 150 mg daily. Patients were observed for evidence of response, toxicity, and survival. EGFR mutational status was assessed in available tumor blocks.

RESULTS

Treatment with capecitabine and erlotinib in gemcitabine-refractory patients was associated with an overall objective radiologic response rate of 10% and a median survival duration of 6.5 months. In addition, 17% of the treated patients experienced decreases in tumor marker (CA 19-9) levels of more than 50% from baseline. Common toxicities included diarrhea, skin rash, fatigue, and hand-foot syndrome. EGFR mutations were detected in two of five available tumors; no association between treatment response and EGFR mutational status was evident.

CONCLUSION

The combination of capecitabine and erlotinib is active in patients with gemcitabine-refractory pancreatic cancer. This regimen may represent an acceptable treatment option in patients who experience treatment failure with standard first-line therapy with gemcitabine or for whom gemcitabine may not be an appropriate first-line treatment option.

Meta-analysis: the use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and pancreatic cancer risk for different exposure categories

BACKGROUND

A better understanding of predictors of risk for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) could inform preventive efforts against this lethal cancer. While aspirin (ASA) and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDS) might protect against several gastrointestinal cancers, their role in the development of PDAC remains unclear.

AIM

To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis on the relation between ASA/NSAIDs exposure and the risk of PDAC. Methods We searched Pubmed, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane database of systematic reviews and reference lists of identified papers and included observational (cohort or case-control) studies and randomized controlled trials examining exposure to ASA and/or NSAIDs and the incidence or mortality of PDAC. We defined three categories (low, intermediate, high), based on exposure duration and dose.

RESULTS

Eight studies fulfilled our inclusion criteria (four cohort, three case controls, and one randomized controlled trial studies) enrolling 6301 patients between 1971-2004; all but one study took place in the US. The pooled OR were 0.99 (0.83-1.19), 1.11 (0.84-1.47) and 1.09 (0.67-1.75) in the low, intermediate and high exposure groups respectively, with considerable heterogeneity (I(2) ranging 60-86%). Sensitivity analysis by ASA use only, study design or sex did not reveal additional important information.

CONCLUSIONS

This study did not show an association between ASA/NSAIDs and PDAC. The large baseline exposure in controls in North-America may have obscured an association. There is need for additional studies, especially in Europe, to clarify this issue.

Efficacy and Patterns of Failure for Locally Advanced Cancer of the Cervix Treated With Celebrex (Celecoxib) and Chemoradiotherapy in RTOG 0128

PURPOSE

To determine the efficacy and patterns of initial failure for oral celecoxib, intravenous cisplatin, and 5-fluorouracil and concurrent pelvic radiotherapy in patients with locally advanced cancer of the cervix.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Patients were treated with concurrent 5-fluorouracil and cisplatin chemotherapy and pelvic radiotherapy and brachytherapy. Celecoxib was prescribed at a dose of 400 mg twice daily for 1 year beginning on the first day of radiotherapy. The overall and disease-free survival rates were determined.

RESULTS

A total of 84 patients were accrued, of whom 78 were eligible. The estimated 2-year disease-free survival and overall survival rate was 69% and 83%, respectively. Of the 78 patients, 24 had treatment failure: 3 with persistent local disease, 9 local only, 2 regional, 4 distant, 1 regional and distant, 1 local and distant, and 2 with local, regional, and distant disease, and 1 had died of cervical cancer without a reported site of first failure and 1 without evidence of disease.

CONCLUSION

At 2 years, the estimated disease-free survival and overall survival rate for patients with advanced cervical cancer who underwent a combination of chemoradiotherapy and celecoxib treatment was 69% and 83%, respectively. Recurrent disease developed in 24 patients, and, of those patients, 18 had a component of locoregional failure as a site of first failure. Thus, locoregional control continues to be problematic after chemoradiotherapy as delivered in our study. The identification of more active biologically targeted therapies is warranted for the treatment of advanced cancer of the cervix.

A multicenter phase II study of docetaxel in combination with gefitinib in gemcitabine-pretreated patients with advanced/metastatic pancreatic cancer

PURPOSE

To evaluate the efficacy and tolerance of the docetaxel/gefitinib combination as second-line treatment in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Twenty-six patients pretreated with gemcitabine-based chemotherapy were enrolled in the study. Docetaxel (75 mg/m(2), i.v.) was administered every 3 weeks for a maximum of 6 cycles and gefitinib (250 mg/day, p.o.) was given continuously.

RESULTS

Five (19.2%) patients achieved stable disease. The median duration of disease control was 4.8 months (range 1-13.2), the median time to disease progression 2.1 months (range 1-7.3) and the median survival time 2.9 months (range 1-13.9). Grade 3/4 neutropenia was recorded in 9 (34.6%) patients, although only 1 (3.8%) developed grade 2 febrile neutropenia. One (3.8%) patient experienced grade 3 fatigue and 2 (7.7%) grade 3 diarrhea. Grade 1/2 rash was observed in 13 (50%) patients. There were no treatment-related deaths.

CONCLUSION

The docetaxel/gefitinib combination, although safe, has no activity as salvage treatment for advanced pancreatic cancer after failure of gemcitabine-based chemotherapy.

Tumor size significantly correlates with postoperative liver metastases and COX-2 expression in patients with resectable pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND/AIM

Local treatment often fails in patients with resectable pancreatic cancer due to the postoperative development of distant metastases, especially liver metastases. We determined the prognostic factors for postoperative liver metastases in pancreatic cancer patients following surgical resection with combined radiotherapy.

METHODS

Sixty-four patients with nonmetastatic, resectable pancreatic cancer were entered into this study. All of these patients had pancreatic resection surgery combined with radiotherapy. The development of postoperative liver metastases was carefully followed, and the survival ratio was evaluated using the Kaplan-Meier method. The prognostic importance of clinicopathological factors and molecular characteristics was analyzed by the Cox proportional hazards model. The correlation study was performed using Fisher's exact test.

RESULTS

Tumor size, curability, and histological type of differentiation were statistically significant independent prognostic factors. On multivariate analysis, curability and histological type of differentiation were statistically significant. Only tumor size (> or = 3 cm) was significantly correlated with postoperative liver metastases, as well as cyclooxygenase-2 expression.

CONCLUSIONS

There were three significant prognostic factors in patients with resectable pancreatic cancer who had local therapy. Patients who have a large tumor require particularly careful follow-up for postoperative liver metastases.

Assessment of celecoxib pharmacodynamics in pancreatic cancer

Cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitors are being developed as chemopreventive and anticancer agents. This study aimed to determine the biological effect of the COX-2 inhibitor celecoxib in pancreatic cancer as an early step to the further development of the agent in this disease. Eight patients scheduled for resection of an infiltrating adenocarcinoma of the pancreas were randomized to receive celecoxib at a dose of 400 mg twice daily or placebo for 5 to 15 days before the surgery. In addition, carcinomas from nine additional patients were xenografted in nude mice, expanded, and treated with vehicle or celecoxib for 28 days. Celecoxib markedly decreased the intra-tumor levels of prostaglandin E2 in patient carcinomas and in the heterotransplanted xenografts. However, this effect did not result in inhibition of cell proliferation or microvessel density (as assessed by Ki67 and CD31 staining). In addition, a panel of markers, including bcl-2, COX-1, COX-2, and VEGF, did not change with treatment in a significant manner. Furthermore, there was no evidence of antitumor effects in the xenografted carcinomas. In summary, celecoxib efficiently inhibited the synthesis of prostaglandin E2 both in pancreatic cancer surgical specimens and in xenografted carcinomas but did not exert evident antitumor, antiproliferative, or antiangiogenic effect as a single agent. The direct pancreatic cancer xenograft model proved to be a valuable tool for drug evaluation and biological studies and showed similar results to those observed in resected pancreatic cancer specimens.