Dose-intense PEFG (cisplatin, epirubicin, 5-fluorouracil, gemcitabine) in advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma

Exploring chemotherapy holiday and drugs re-challenge in advanced pancreatic cancer patients

PURPOSE

We aimed to explore the role of drugs re-challenge at the disease progression after a chemotherapy-free interval for pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) patients.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the outcome of re-treatments at the progression in two cohorts of advanced PDAC patients who had disease control (DC) and a treatment holiday ≥ 3 months after upfront chemotherapy.

RESULTS

Between 2015 and 2019, 66 advanced PDAC patients (cohort A) had DC with nab-paclitaxel-based chemotherapy (i.e. AG or PAXG = cisplatin, nab-paclitaxel, gemcitabine, capecitabine). At the time of progressive disease (PD), 34 patients were re-treated with AG (A1) and 32 were treated with other regimens (A2). The median (m) duration of chemotherapy holiday was 6.1 and 5.9 months in A1 and A2, respectively. Partial response (PR) and stable disease (SD) were found in 14 (41%) and 12 (35%) of patients in A1 and in 8 (25%) and 6 (19%) patients in A2. CA19-9 response was recorded in 23/33 evaluable patients (70%) in A1 and in 5/20 (25%) in A2. mPFS2 and mOS2, defined as the time between the second line of treatment start and the disease progression or death, were 4.8 and 12.2 months in A1 and 3.9 and 8.4 months in A2, respectively. Similarly, between 2006 and 2013, 64 patients (cohort B) had DC with upfront PEFG/PEXG/PDXG regimens (epirubicin or docetaxel, cisplatin, gemcitabine, capecitabine or 5-fluorouracil) and were re-treated at PD with either 4-drug (B1; N = 30) or other regimens (B2; N = 34), yielding a mOS2 of 10.9 and 7.2 months, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Our data endorse the strategy of resuming prior drugs after a chemotherapy holiday ≥ 3 months in advanced PDAC patients who achieved a  durable disease control after upfront treatments.

Time to CA19-9 nadir: a clue for defining optimal treatment duration in patients with resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Defining optimal treatment duration in patients with resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) receiving primary chemotherapy is an unmet need. The role of time to CA19-9 nadir and of nadir magnitude was explored in this study.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The databases of our institution's prospective trials were queried to speculate on the time to maximum chemotherapy response. Patients with pathologically proven, metastatic (N = 356) or non-metastatic non-resected (N = 163) PDAC and elevated baseline (> 34 UI/mL) CA19-9 were analyzed. Survival curves were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared by means of the log-rank test for analyses including at least 45 patients. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards model was used to estimate clinical features for their association with OS. All probability values were from two-sided tests.

RESULTS

Time to CA19-9 nadir was ≥ 4 months in 184 of 346 (53%) metastatic and 121 of 163 (74%) non-metastatic patients (p = 0.002). The likelihood of a later nadir was higher with taxane-based chemotherapy as compared to taxane-free combinations (73% versus 56%; p = 0.02). Both metastatic and non-metastatic patients had significantly longer survival when nadir occurred later. Patients with a larger CA19-9 nadir magnitude had significantly longer survival. Metastatic patients with CA19-9 reduced by < 50%, 50-89%, or > 89% and had a median survival of 7.4, 9.8, and 14.7 months, respectively (p ≤ 0.001 for all comparisons). The corresponding figures for non-metastatic patients were 10.6; 17.0; and 18.7 months, respectively (p ≤ 0.02 for < 50% versus 50-89% or > 89%; p = 0.14 for 50-89% versus > 89%). Multivariable analyses showed that time to CA19-9 nadir but not CA19-9 nadir magnitude was independently predictive of survival.

CONCLUSION

The present study suggests that a 4-6 months program might be a more suitable candidate for prospective assessment in comparison to shorter pre-defined period in patients who are candidates to surgery after primary chemotherapy.

Prognostic factors in gemcitabine-cisplatin polychemotherapy regimens in pancreatic cancer: XPD-Lys751Gln polymorphism strikes back

The use of platinated agents in combination chemotherapy regimens for advanced pancreatic cancer is controversial owing to the lack of an outstanding impact on the outcome and a substantial increase in hematologic and extra-hematologic toxicities. Pharmacogenetic studies to identify patients who could benefit most from such therapies are urgently needed. The Xeroderma-Pigmentosum group-D polymorphism at codon-751 (XPD-Lys751Gln) emerged as the most significant independent predictor for death- and progression-risk in our previous study on functional polymorphisms in 122 advanced pancreatic cancer patients treated with cisplatin-docetaxel-capecitabine-gemcitabine and cisplatin-epirubicin-capecitabine-gemcitabine (or EC-GemCap). To confirm the prognostic role of this variable, we further evaluated the correlation of XPD-Lys751Gln with outcome in another 125 patients treated with the same regimens, and 90 treated with gemcitabine monotherapy. Genotyping was successfully carried out in the vast majority of DNA samples. Genotype frequencies followed Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium, and XPD-Lys751Gln was associated with differential progression-free and overall-survival. Multivariate analysis confirmed its prognostic significance in platinum-based regimens. In particular, XPD-Gln751Gln was significantly associated with risk of death (hazard ratio, HR = 1.7, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1-2.6, p = 0.011) and risk of progression (HR = 1.7, 95% CI, 1.1-2.5, p = 0.013). No correlation was observed in gemcitabine monotherapy-treated patients. The analysis of DNA damage using extra-long-PCR in lymphocytes supported the association of XPD-Gln751Gln with greater resistance to cisplatin-induced damage. The increasing evidence of XPD-Lys751Gln impact on the outcome of gemcitabine-cisplatin-based polychemotherapy leads to plan prospective studies to validate the role of this polymorphism as a new tool for optimization of the currently available treatments in pancreatic cancer.

Neoadjuvant therapy in resectable pancreatic cancer: a critical review

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic cancer is among the deadliest tumors. Due to intrinsic chemo- and radio-resistance, surgical resection remains the only chance for cure. However surgery alone is unable to considerably improve survival and complementary chemotherapy and radiotherapy in a multimodal approach have been tested. Adjuvant chemotherapy yielded a modest outcome improvement, whereas the use of adjuvant chemoradiation is highly controversial. In this scenario, the neoadjuvant approach has a strong theoretical rationale, but limited information on the efficacy of this strategy is available.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This review critically overviews the current knowledge, the rationale, the available data and information on neoadjuvant treatment in resectable pancreatic cancer.

RESULTS

The very early systemic dissemination of pancreatic cancer endorses the rationale for an up-front use of systemic therapy. However, evidence collected so far depends on retrospective data, small case series that did not balance the different characteristics of patients suitable for surgery before or after neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

CONCLUSION

Currently there is no straightforward evidence to support the routine clinical use of this strategy. Only a properly designed randomized trial testing combination chemotherapy regimens selected on the basis of their efficacy and activity against metastatic disease can address this issue.

Chemotherapy-induced weakness and fatigue in skeletal muscle: the role of oxidative stress

SIGNIFICANCE

Fatigue is one of the most common symptoms of cancer and its treatment, manifested in the clinic through weakness and exercise intolerance. These side effects not only compromise patient's quality of life (QOL), but also diminish physical activity, resulting in limited treatment and increased morbidity.

RECENT ADVANCES

Oxidative stress, mediated by cancer or chemotherapeutic agents, is an underlying mechanism of the drug-induced toxicity. Nontargeted tissues, such as striated muscle, are severely affected by oxidative stress during chemotherapy, leading to toxicity and dysfunction.

CRITICAL ISSUES

These findings highlight the importance of investigating clinically applicable interventions to alleviate the debilitating side effects. This article discusses the clinically available chemotherapy drugs that cause fatigue and oxidative stress in cancer patients, with an in-depth focus on the anthracycline doxorubicin. Doxorubicin, an effective anticancer drug, is a primary example of how chemotherapeutic agents disrupt striated muscle function through oxidative stress.

FUTURE DIRECTIONS

Further research investigating antioxidants could provide relief for cancer patients from debilitating muscle weakness, leading to improved quality of life.

A multicenter analysis of GTX chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced and metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma

Purpose

Studies treating adenocarcinoma of the pancreas with gemcitabine alone or in combination with a doublet have demonstrated modest improvements in survival. Recent reports have suggested that using the triple-drug regimen FOLFIRINOX can substantially extend survival in patients with metastatic disease. We were interested in determining the clinical benefit of another three-drug regimen of gemcitabine, docetaxel and capecitabine (GTX) in patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

Patients and methods

The cases of 154 patients, who received treatment with GTX chemotherapy with histologically confirmed locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma, were retrospectively reviewed. All demographic and clinical data were captured including prior therapy, adverse events, treatment response and survival.

Results

One hundred and seventeen metastatic and 37 locally advanced cases of adenocarcinoma of the pancreas were reviewed. Partial responses were noted in 11% of cases, and stable disease was observed in 62% of patients. Responses significantly correlated with toxicity (neutropenia, ALT elevation and hospitalizations). Grade 3 or greater hematologic and non-hematologic toxicities were noted in 41% and 9% of cases, respectively. Overall median survival was 11.6 months. Chemotherapy naïve patients with metastatic and locally advanced disease achieved a median survival of 11.3 and 25.0 months, respectively.

Conclusions

We observe a substantial survival benefit with GTX chemotherapy in our cohort of patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. These findings warrant further investigation of this combination in this patient population.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00280-011-1704-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

A randomized phase II trial of two different 4-drug combinations in advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma: cisplatin, capecitabine, gemcitabine plus either epirubicin or docetaxel (PEXG or PDXG regimen)

PURPOSE

PEFG regimen (P:cisplatin, E:epirubicin, F:5-fluorouracil, G:gemcitabine) significantly prolonged progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) of patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PA) with respect to standard gemcitabine. The current trial was aimed at assessing whether the replacement of E with docetaxel (D) may improve 6 months PFS (PFS6).

METHODS

Chemo-naive patients with stage III or metastatic PA received P (30 mg/m(2) day 1 and 15), G (800 mg/m(2) day 1 and 15), and capecitabine (1,250 mg/m(2)/day days 1-28, without a break) and were randomized to receive either D at 25-30 mg/m(2) day 1 and 15 (arm A: PDXG regimen) or E at 30 mg/m(2) day 1 and 15 (arm B: PEXG regimen). Cycles were repeated every 28 days for a maximum of 6 months. The Fleming design was used to calculate the sample size on the probability of being PFS6. Assuming P0 = 40% and P1 = 60%, α = 0.05 and β = 0.10; the study was to enroll 52 patients per arm.

RESULTS

Between July 2005 and September 2008, 105 patients were enrolled, stratified by stage and randomized. Patients' characteristics were (A/B) the following: median age 61/59, PS >70 92/88%, metastatic disease 66/65%. PFS6 was 58%, and median OS was 11 months in both arms. A partial response was observed in 60/37% of patients. Main per cycle G3-4 toxicity was the following: neutropenia 4/13%, thrombocytopenia 2/4%, anemia 4/4%, and fatigue 6/3%.

CONCLUSIONS

The inclusion of D instead of E yielded more objective response and less G3-4 neutropenia but did not improve PFS and OS. The present trial confirms the relevant impact on outcome of advanced PA of 4-drug regimens.

Treatment trends in metastatic pancreatic cancer patients: Is it time to change?

BACKGROUND

Since gemcitabine became the standard treatment for metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma, combination chemotherapy obtained conflicting impact on survival (OS).

AIMS

To evaluate Italian treatment trends in metastatic pancreatic cancer.

METHODS

Data on treatment outcome of 943 chemo-naive patients with pathological diagnosis of stage IV pancreatic adenocarcinoma treated between 1997 and 2007 in Italian centres were analysed.

RESULTS

Four treatment groups could be identified: (1) single agent gemcitabine (N=529); (2) gemcitabine-platinating agent doublets (N=105); (3) gemcitabine-free three-drug intraarterial combination (N=75); (4) four-drug gemcitabine-cisplatin-fluoropyrimidine based combinations (N=170). Median and actuarial 1 y OS of the whole population were 6.2 months and 20%, respectively. Gemcitabine (median OS 5.1 months) appeared significantly inferior to gemcitabine-free triplets (median OS 6.0 months; p=.04), gemcitabine-platinating agent doublets (median OS 7.4 months; p=.00001), or gemcitabine-based four drug combinations (median OS 9.1 months; p<.00001).

CONCLUSION

These data mirror the Italian clinical practice in the therapeutic management of pancreatic cancer and suggest that four-drug combination chemotherapy may be included amongst the candidate regimens for phase III testing.

Neoadjuvant treatment for resectable pancreatic cancer: Time for phase III testing?

This paper discusses the rationale for phase III testing of neoadjuvant therapy in patients affected by resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma. The therapeutic management of patients affected by resectable pancreatic cancer is particularly troublesome due to the aggressiveness of the disease and to the limited efficacy and sometimes unfavourable risk-benefit ratio of the available therapeutic tools. Conflicting data on the role of adjuvant chemoradiation have been reported, while adjuvant single-agent chemotherapy significantly improved overall survival (OS) when compared to surgery alone. However, the OS figures for adjuvant chemotherapy remain disappointing. In effect, pancreatic cancer exhibits a prominent tendency to recur after a brief median time interval from surgery and extra-pancreatic dissemination represents the predominant pattern of disease failure. Neoadjuvant treatment has a strong rationale in this disease but limited information on the efficacy of this approach is available from single arm trials with low levels of evidence. Thus, in spite of two decades of investigation there is currently no evidence to support the routine use of pre-surgical therapy in clinical practice. To foster knowledge on the optimal management of this disease, and to produce evidence-based treatment guidelines, there is no alternative to well designed randomized trials. Systemic chemotherapy is a candidate for testing because it is supported by a more robust rationale than chemoradiation. Combination chemotherapy regimens with elevated activity in advanced disease warrant investigation. Caution would suggest the running of an exploratory phase II randomized trial before embarking on a large phase III study.

An Italian study on treatment trends and outcomes of patients with stage III pancreatic adenocarcinoma in the gemcitabine era: is it time to change?

A series of 650 patients treated between 1997 and 2007 at 10 Italian centers was analyzed to assess treatment trends and efficacy in stage III pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Data on patient characteristics, treatment and outcomes were collected. The inclusion criteria were pathological diagnosis of stage III pancreatic adenocarcinoma; age more than 18 years, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status less than 3, and no past therapy. Most patients (95%) received up-front chemotherapy, which mainly consisted of gemcitabine alone (N=323), gemcitabine-based four-drug combinations (N=107), gemcitabine-platinum compound doublets (N=87), or intra-arterial gemcitabine-free triplets (N=57). The use of gemcitabine-platinum compound doublets increased over time (1997-2001: 2%; 2002-2007: 21%) whereas an inverse trend was observed for gemcitabine (71-61%). No overall survival (OS) difference was observed between patients enrolled in clinical trials and those not enrolled. The median and 1-year OS were 9.5 months and 35.5% for patients treated with gemcitabine; 8.9 months and 36.8% for those treated with gemcitabine-free intra-arterial triplets; 13.3 months and 55.8% for those treated with gemcitabine-platinating agent doublets; and 16.2 months and 62.6% for those treated with gemcitabine-based four-drug combinations. Moreover, the median and 1-year OS were 12.7 months and 51.4% in patients who underwent planned consolidation chemoradiation, and 8.4 months and 30.4% in patients who did not. The use of a strategy consisting of a gemcitabine-platinating agent containing chemotherapy followed by consolidation chemoradiation has been increasing over time and may represent a suitable choice in the therapeutic management of stage III pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

The cisplatin, epirubicin, 5-fluorouracil, gemcitabine (PEFG) regimen in advanced biliary tract adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Biliary tract adenocarcinoma (BTA) is an uncommon tumor with a poor prognosis and no standard, systemic chemotherapy. The combined cisplatin, epirubicin, 5-fluorouracil, and gemcitabine (PEFG) regimen is an effective, upfront treatment for advanced pancreatic cancer. In this study, the authors assessed the activity and safety of this combination regimen in patients with advanced BTA.

METHODS

PEFG (cisplatin 40 mg/m(2) and epirubicin 40 mg/m(2) on Day 1; gemcitabine 600 mg/m(2) on Days 1 and 8; and 5-fluorouracil [FU] 200 mg/m(2) daily as a continuous infusion) was administered to chemotherapy-naive patients who had a cytologic or histologic diagnosis of locally advanced or metastatic BTA, aged <or=75 years, and a performance status (PS) >60 either until they had evidence progressive disease or for a maximum of 6 months. Tumor size was assessed every 2 months during treatment.

RESULTS

Between May 1999 and December 2005, 37 patients (62% metastatic) who had a median age of 62 years and a median PS of 90 received the PEFG regimen at the authors' institution. Primary tumor sites were the intrahepatic bile duct in 10 patients (27%), the extrahepatic bile duct in 8 patients (22%), the gallbladder in 12 patients (32%), and the ampulla of Vater in 7 patients (19%). A partial response was observed in 16 patients (43%), and stable disease was observed in 12 patients (32%). The median overall survival (OS) was 12.1 months, and the 1-year OS rate was 52%. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 7.9 months, and the 6-month PFS rate was 67%. The main grade 3/4 toxicity was neutropenia in 18% of cycles followed by thrombocytopenia in 9% of cycles, nausea/vomiting in 5% of cycles, and febrile neutropenia, fatigue, anemia, and stomatitis in 2% of cycles.

CONCLUSIONS

The current results demonstrated that PEFG was an active regimen with a manageable toxicity profile for patients with advanced BTA.

Recent developments in palliative chemotherapy for locally advanced and metastatic pancreas cancer

In spite of advances made in the management of the other more common cancers of the gastrointestinal tract, significant progress in the treatment of pancreatic cancer remains elusive. Nearly as many deaths occur from pancreatic cancer as are diagnosed each year reflecting the poor prognosis typically associated with this disease. Until recently, the only treatment with an impact on survival was surgery. In the palliative setting, gemcitabine (Gem) has been a standard treatment for advanced pancreatic cancer since it was shown a decade ago to result in a superior clinical benefit response and survival compared with bolus 5-fluorouracil. Since then, clinical trials have explored the pharmacokinetic modulation of Gem by fixed dose administration and the combination of Gem with other cytotoxic or the biologically "targeted" agents. However, promising trial results in small phase II trials have not translated into survival improvements in larger phase III randomized trials in the advanced disease setting. Two trials have recently reported modest survival improvements with the use of combination treatment with Gem and capecitabine (United Kingdom National Cancer Research GEMCAP trial) or erlotinib (National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group PA.3 trial). This review will focus on the use of systemic therapy for advanced and metastatic pancreatic cancer, summarizing the results of several recent clinical trials and discuss their implications for clinical practice. We will also discuss briefly the second-line chemotherapy options for advanced pancreatic cancer.

Outcome of upfront combination chemotherapy followed by chemoradiation for locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma

PURPOSE

The role and timing of chemotherapy and radiation for treating stage III pancreatic adenocarcinoma remains controversial.

METHODS

Treatment-naive patients with stage III non-resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma were treated with PEFG/PEXG (cisplatin, epirubicin, 5-fluorouracil (F)/capecitabine (X), gemcitabine) or PDXG (docetaxel substituting epirubicin) regimen for 6 months followed by radiotherapy (50-60 Gy) with concurrent F or X or G.

RESULTS

Ninety-one patients were registered between April 1997 and December 2007. Forty-three patients (47%) had a partial remission and 38 (42%) had a stable disease. Thirteen patients (14%) were radically resected yielding one pathologic complete remission. Median survival (OS) was 16.2 months. Median progression-free survival was 9.9 months. Pattern of failure consisted of isolated local failure (N = 26, 35%); both local and systemic failure (N = 14, 19%); isolated systemic failure (N = 35, 47%).

CONCLUSION

Combination chemotherapy with four-drug regimens followed by chemoradiation was a feasible strategy showing relevant results in stage III pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

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.

Cytotoxic Therapy for Advanced Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma

Pancreatic adenocarcinoma is a highly lethal disease with anecdotal long-term survivorship when the disease is inoperable at presentation. A new era in the treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer commenced a decade ago with the advent of gemcitabine as a standard of care. While many large phase III trials have been conducted in the last 10 years, it has proved a difficult challenge to advance beyond the modest bar set by gemcitabine. For the most part, gemcitabine-combination cytotoxic studies have been negative where the principal end point has been overall survival with only a few noted exceptions; however, for vigorous individuals with bulky or symptomatic disease, a gemcitabine-based fluoropyrimidine or platinum combination is considered a standard of care and these data are reviewed in detail. In this new era of targeted therapy, the addition of erlotinib to gemcitabine has provided an alternate standard option to single-agent gemcitabine or gemcitabine-based cytotoxic combinations, a topic which will be discussed in a separate chapter. Other phase III studies of gemcitabine and bevacizumab and gemcitabine and cetuximab, respectively, which were both preliminarily reported as negative, have provided an indirect endorsement for the relative value of cytotoxic therapy in advanced pancreatic cancer. This underscores the major therapeutic hurdles that we have to surmount in this most challenging of human malignancies.

PEFG (cisplatin, epirubicin, 5-fluorouracil, gemcitabine) for patients with advanced pancreatic cancer: the ghost regimen

The consensus report of the International Society of Gastrointestinal Oncology on the therapeutic management of advanced pancreatic cancer is commented. In the context of the available literature, a critical and methodological analysis supporting the role of cisplatin, epirubicin, 5- fluorouracil, gemcitabine (PEFG) regimen in the treatment of unresectable and metastatic pancreatic cancer is provided. In particular, the clinical relevance of the outcome observed in the phase III trial comparing PEFG regimen to standard gemcitabine is highlighted. Results of other recent trials comparing gemcitabine-erlotinib, gemcitabine-capecitabine and gemcitabine-oxaliplatin combinations to single agent gemcitabine are briefly commented from a clinical perspective.